24 Amendments of Michèle RIVASI related to 2014/2228(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission is currently negotiating on behalf of the European Union a wide-ranging trade and investment partnership agreement with the United States (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – TTIP); President Juncker had invited each Member of the incoming Commission to ‘make public all the contacts and meetings we hold with professional organisations or self- employed individuals on any matter relating to EU policy-making and implementation’ regarding a wide-ranging trade and investment partnership agreement with the United States (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – TTIP) that the Commission is currently negotiating on behalf of the European Union; whereas the only effective way to avoid public confusion and misunderstanding is more transparency and a greater effort proactively to inform public debate;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the stated objective of the TTIP is to increase trade and investment between the European Union and the United States;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the negotiations have attracted unprecedented public interest, given the potential economic, social and political impact of the TTIPinterest of the public, given: - the potential economic, social and political impact of the TTIP on future rules and standards that impact on EU citizens in a manner analogous to legislation, in areas such as food safety, cars, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, energy, the environment and the workplace; - the lack of transparency during the ongoing negotiations and the fact that no public interest as regards international relations exists in complying with unreasoned or unreasonable requests not to disclose documents. To consider otherwise would imply that the international partner would have an unfettered veto over the disclosure of any such document in the possession of the EU institutions; - the overwhelming number of responses to the Ombudsman’s public consultation that raised concerns about the perceived corporate dominance of meetings and contacts with the Commission in relation to TTIP and the need for greater transparency in this regard;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Committee on Petitions has received a number of petitions raising concerns about the EU-US trade agreement (TTIP); whereas the petitioners’ main concerns are related to risks regarding the safety and quality of food imports, information allegedly collected by the US regarding natural and legal persons (the right of EU citizens to ‘digital self- determination’), transparency, economic impact, and protection of investors via the Investor- State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS);
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas on 10 September 2014 the Commission refused to register the ECI ‘Stop TTIP’, taking the view that it fell outside the framework of the Commission's powers to submit a proposal for a legal act of the Union for the purpose of implementing the Treaties; whereas a ‘Stop TTIP’ initiative has since been launched outside the procedure laid down in Regulation 211/2011 and has already collected more than one million signatures; whereas the Committee on Petitions has received a number of petitions raising concerns about the EU-US trade agreement (TTIP); whereas the petitioners’ main concerns are related to risks regarding the quality of food imports, information allegedly collected by the US regarding natural and legal persons (the right of EU citizens to ‘digital self- determination’), transparency, economic impact, and protection of investors via the Investor- State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS);
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the right of EU citizens to have public access to documents held by EU institutions is a fundamental right aimed at ensuring that they can participate in EU decision-making and hold the EU and its institutions to account, enhancing the democratic nature of the Union;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas all the petitions received by EU citizens, gathering tens of thousands of signatures of EU citizens, have a clearly critical position towards the TTIP negotiation and warn about the threat that such an agreement would pose to the European way of life, namely on the social, economic, environmental and democratic fields;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas Parliament and Council are not third parties to these negotiations, and therefore cannot be equated to a group of ‘privileged stakeholders’;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas on the social field the diverse petitions express deep concerns on the potential negative impact of the agreement on the public health, the UE sanitary systems and public services in general, as well as pension schemes; whereas fears emerge on worsening of working conditions given the lack of regulation of labour relations and the absence of a culture of collective agreements in the US;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas on the economic field some petitions challenge the core argument that millions of new jobs will be created as a result of the agreement; whereas from the consumer protection and rights perspective many concerns are expressed on the impact of the agreement on product quality in terms of a foreseen harmonisation towards lower standards; with a particular focus on foodstuffs; whereas petitioners remind of the potential conflict emerging from the fact that in US customers are to prove themselves adverse effects of products on the market, while the EU legislation requires a proof of harmlessness prior to the entry of new products on the market.
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. whereas on the environmental field some petitions refer to the threat that the agreement would pose to the precautionary principle enshrined in the EU treaties; whereas different petitions refer to the negative impact TTIP would cause in the climate protection and in terms of air, earth and water pollution, particularly related to fracking activities and overall in terms of fuel quality standards, as well as to the animal welfare; whereas several petitions express concerns of the impact it would have on the proliferation of GMO products on the EU market, with the still uncertain health effects;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Recital D e (new)
Recital D e (new)
De. whereas on the democratic field, the deepest concern of the petitioners is the threat to popular sovereignty and rule of law that a mechanism such as the ISDS would introduce, making those subject to private corporate interests; whereas many of the petitions criticise the overall lack of transparency of the negotiations; whereas beyond the eventual publication of the negotiating mandate after the EU Ombudsman’s request, there are still many elements that show lack of transparency, such as the existence of the restrictive reading room for only a few Members of the European Parliament; whereas in a petition an EU-wide referendum is requested before the conclusion of the agreement;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Recital D f (new)
Recital D f (new)
Df. whereas most of the received petitions explicitly call for either a halt of the negotiations by the European Commission or the ultimate rejection of the agreement by the European Parliament;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the importance of developing the trade relationship and bilateral investment between the European Union and the United States of America in order to help growth and employment and generate new economic opportunitiesengaging in political dialogue on the TTIP with EU citizens, in particular by treating the Stop TTIP initiative as an official ECI, i.e. by receiving the organisers at an appropriate level, publishing its political and legal conclusions on the subject and working with the European Parliament to ensure that a public hearing is arranged;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that regulatory compatibility is to be without prejudice to the overarching sovereign right to regulate in accordance with the level of health, safety, consumer, labour and environmental protection and cultural diversity that each side considers appropriate;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomReminds that the Commission should bear in mind that it is always legally obliged to comply with the rules on public access to documents set out in Regulation 1049/2001 and therefore recognises the fact that the Commission hasfinally started to madke realsome efforts to make the TTIP negotiating process more transparent, especially in the light of the publication of the European directives for the negotiation on the TTIP (1103/13 CL 1) ;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Suggests that a moreCalls on the Commission to: - adopt a proactive approach to transparency on the part of the Commission that could make the negotiating process more legitimate in the eyes of citizens, and encourages the Commission to publish documents and make meeting information available; ensure that the negotiations and eventual possible agreement enjoy legitimacy and public trust; - inform the US of the importance of making, in particular, common negotiating texts available to the EU public before the TTIP agreement is finalised. The Commission should also inform the US of the need to justify any request by them not to disclose a given document. The Commission needs to be convinced, based on the content of a requested document, that its disclosure would undermine the public interest as regards international relations; the mere fact of US displeasure that a document would be released is not sufficient to activate the exception in relation to undermining the public interest as regards international relations; - carry out an assessment as regards whether a TTIP document can be made public as soon as the document in question has been finalised internally and at regular and pre-determined intervals thereafter (including, but not limited to, when the document is tabled in the negotiations). If no exception applies, the document in question should be published proactively by the Commission. If a document cannot be made public proactively, the document reference (and, if possible, its title) should be made public, along with an explanation it is necessary to show, based on the content of a requested document, that its disclosure would undermine the public interest as regards international relations as to why the document cannot be made available; - publish on its website the many TTIP documents it has already released in response to access to documents requests; - take into account the relevant suggestions outlined in the ‘Public participation’ section of the Ombudsman’s public consultation report; - extend the transparency obligations in relation to meetings with professional organisations or self-employed individuals, in the context of TTIP, to the levels of Director, Head of Unit and negotiator. This should include the names of all those involved in such meetings; - proactively publish meeting agendas and records of meetings it holds on TTIP with business organisations, lobby groups or NGOs; - examine how to extend, to levels below the level of Commissioner, the obligations (including in relation to the Transparency Register) aimed at ensuring an appropriate balance and representativeness in its meetings with professional organisations or self- employed individuals on TTIP. These obligations might, for example, be extended to the levels of Director, Head of Unit and negotiator; - confirm that all submissions from stakeholders made to it in the context of TTIP will be published unless the sender gives good reasons for confidentiality and provides a non-confidential summary for publication; - ensure that documents that are released to certain third party stakeholders are released to everyone, thereby ensuring that all citizens are treated equally.
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Criticises the fact that the TTIP negotiations were resumed without a proper clarification of the mass surveillance practices by the EU government towards EU citizens and governments; considers this offensive towards EU citizens and demands a credible and committed action from the Commission on that field before any further step in the negotiations; considers that the agreement cannot concluded if the lack of trust created by this case persists unresolved;
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Asks the Commission to ensure that the list of TTIP documents available on its dedicated trade policy website is comprehensive and to inform the European Parliament immediately and fully of all steps in the procedure, in accordance with CJEU judgment in Case C-358/11; asks it, moreover, to ensure all MEPs have access to all restricted documents and include the consolidated texts in the list of documents consultable by MEPs;
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that in the TTIP must not undermine the right of EU citizens to digital self-determination or compliance with European legislation on data protectionpublic interest, data protection should not be used as an automatic obstacle to public scrutiny of lobbying activities in the context of TTIP and that it is possible to deal with data protection concerns by informing participants when they are invited to meetings of the intention to disclose their names;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the sensitivity of certain areas of negotiation, such as the agricultural sector, where perceptions of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), cloning and consumer health are divergent between the European Union and the United State and therefore calls on the Commission to exclude any terms in all the horizontal chapters and all of the sectoral annexes of the TTIP that would: – involve regulation of chemicals and pesticides, ˗ affect the EU’s integrated approach to food safety, including EU legislation on GMOs, ˗ encourage or facilitate the extraction, transportation or use of fossil fuels, in particular unconventional ones, or hinder the achievement of EU or US climate and energy targets;
Amendment 113 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that consumer protection and compliance with higher European quality and safety standards for foods and products should be at the centre of the negotiations on the TTIP., notably resulting in: - full transparency and public accessibility of the clinical data from clinical trials for pharmaceuticals; - full transparency and public accessibility of the clinical data from clinical investigations for medical devices; - protection of human, animal or plant life or health through respect and uphold of the sensitivities and fundamental values of either side, such as the EU’s precautionary principle;
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Calls on the Commission to indicate how and when it will implement each measure that has been suggested and how it will follow-up on the mentioned petitions. As the negotiations are ongoing, it would be helpful if the Commission could follow-up within two months, by 31 May 2015.