2650 Amendments of Philippe JUVIN
Amendment 9 #
2018/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas it is also in the interests of the Member States that traditionally have close historical, political and economic ties with Andorra, Monaco and San Marino to facilitate an upgrade of the relations of these states with the European Union at large; whereas is therefore essential that the special bilateral relationship that these Member States already enjoy with Andorra, Monaco and San Marino is taken into account, in particular for the purposes of legal certainty;
Amendment 18 #
2018/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 21 #
2018/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas at its meeting of 4 December 2018, the Council decided to remove Andorra and San Marino from Annex II to the Council conclusions of 5 December 2017, thus confirming that they have complied with all remaining commitments related to transparency, fair taxation and anti-BEPS (base erosion and profit shifting) measures; whereas the Council noted as far back as 5 December 2017 that Monaco had complied with these commitments;
Amendment 28 #
2018/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) seize the opportunity presented by the negotiations on the Association Agreement to demonstrate the value of closer relations and integration with the EU – looking at public opinion both in Andorra, Monaco and San Marino and in the EU – and to further reaffirm the value of EU membership for such countries in the longer term;
Amendment 33 #
2018/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) prevent the risk of rejection of the Association Agreement once negotiations have been finalised, through renewed efforts to reachinform members of the public in Andorra, Monaco and San Marino who feel more vulnerable and to explain to them, in cooperation with the authorities of the three states, the scope and merits of the Association Agreement, with a view to political unity and the broadest possible public support in each of the three states;
Amendment 55 #
2018/2246(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point j
Paragraph 1 – point j
(j) conclude before the end of the current mandate a joint political agreementdeclaration with Andorra, Monaco and San Marino in order to take stock of and preserve the agreement reached in the negotiations thus far, so that the new European Commission and the European External Action Service can take stock of and build on this common understanding and advance negotiations further;
Amendment 179 #
2018/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission and the Member States, taking all of the above into account and in accordance with the Negotiating Framework, to formally suspend the accession negotiations with Turkey; remains, however, committed to democratic dialogue with Turkey; asks the Commission to use, during the formal suspension of negotiations, all funds available under IPA II and the future IPA III to support, through a dedicated envelope directly managed by the EU, Turkey’s civil society, and to increase opportunities for people-to-people contacts, academic dialogue, access for Turkish students to European universities and media platforms for journalists;
Amendment 186 #
2018/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that while the EU accession process was at its start a strong motivation for reforms in Turkey, there has been a stark regression in the areas of the rule of law and human rights during the last few years; recalls that Parliament repeatedly called for the opening of Chapter 23 on Judiciary and Fundamental Rights and Chapter 24 on Justice, Freedom and Security at a time when the Turkish government had pledged to conduct serious reforms; regrets deeply that the accession instruments could not be used to the fullest extent owing to a continued blockage by the Council;
Amendment 204 #
2018/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that a door should be left open for the modernisation and upgrading of the 1995 Customs Union between the EU and Turkey, to include relevant areas such as agriculture, services and public procurement, which currently are not covered; recalls that two thirds of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Turkey comes from EU Member States and that Turkey is an important growth market for the EU; believes that the upgrade would provide a valuable opportunity for democratic conditionality, positive leverage and the possibility of a roadmap where upgrading the Customs Union would go hand in hand with concrete commitments by Turkey on democratic reforms; believes further that the upgrading of the Customs Union would provide an important opportunity for policy dialogue on climate change as well as on labour rights in Turkey; calls on the Commission to start preparatory work for the upgrading of the Customs Union as soon as the Turkish Government indicates its readiness for serious reformshas secured tangible results from reforms to strengthen the rule of law;
Amendment 241 #
2018/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that visa liberalisation is of great importance for Turkish citizens, particularly for students, academics, business representatives and people with family ties in EU Member States; encourages the Turkish Government to fully comply with the 72 criteria identified in the visa liberalisation roadmap; stresses that the revision of Turkey’s anti-terrorism legislation is a key condition for ensuring fundamental rights and freedoms, and that visa liberalisation will be possible once all the criteria have been met;
Amendment 3 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the Single Market is one of Europe´s greatest achievement, which has allowed persons, goods, services and capital to move more freely in the Union, has boosted the EU Gross Domestic Product by 1,7% and created 3,6 million of additional jobs since 1990 and considers therefore that the completion of the Single Market shouldmust remain one of the priorities in the 2019 Budget as it is crucial to make the Union a more competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy, to the benefit of both its citizens and its businesses;
Amendment 6 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that a healthy consumer environment is a key factor for the completion of the Single Market and for economic growth throughout Europe and highlights that Union legislation on consumer protection has given predictability and confidencelegal certainty necessary to citizens and businesses in many areas such as passenger rights, consumer rights and the fight against unfair commercial practices and unfair contract terms;
Amendment 12 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the increased level of commitment appropriations for the modernisation of the customs union in support of the implementation of the Union Customs Code (Code) and of the development of the electronic customs systems, since the full and uniform implementation of the Code is essential to better protect the citizens and the financial interests of the Union and e-customs constitutes one of the priority areas forthe major challenge over the coming years in ensuring a better functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 16 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that challenges in the consumer protection of Union citizens still remain, in particular as regards the digital economy and the development of cross- border retail trade in the Union and consequently regrets that the appropriations for the Consumer Programme in the draft budget 2019 are not sufficient; calls, therefore, for an adequate funding to the consumers programme in order to ensure a high level of protection for consumers, in particular vulnerable consumers and finalise the implementation of a genuine European digital single market;
Amendment 17 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses the importance of internal market governance tools in ensuring not only proper application of EU rules but also better information and assistance for consumers and businesses; Calls, therefore, to increase the relevant budget line 02 03 04 in order to ensure better functioning of the Single Market and specifically information and assistance services;
Amendment 68 #
2018/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
e) to call for a comprehensive reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on the basis of a broad consensuto improve its representativeness; to promote the revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly and improved coordination and coherence of the actions of all UN institutions;
Amendment 77 #
2018/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
f) to redouble efforts to reform the UNSC in particular, notably though a limitation of the use of the right to veto and a change by regulating the use of the right to veto, in particular in cases where mass crimes have been carried out, and by changing the composition of its membership to better reflect today’s world, inter alia through a permanent seat for the European Union; without affecting the Member States’ permanent member status;
Amendment 318 #
2018/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point ab
Paragraph 1 – point ab
Amendment 4 #
2018/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Action Plan on Alternative Fuels Infrastructure and the Commission's willingness to take an integrated approach in this area; stresses also the benefits of low-carbon innovations to the EU’s global competitive position and calls for the EU to become a global leader on decarbonisation of the transport sector; urges the Member States and industry, furthermore, to demonstrate an enhanced level of ambition and to speed up its implementation, including by developing efficient, complete and coherent national policy frameworks;
Amendment 6 #
2018/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Finds it regrettable that certain Member States are not more ambitious and that their national policy frameworks are weak; calls on those Member States which are lagging furthest behind to accelerate the transition to a system of clean, low-emissions mobility and to step up the deployment of the interoperable recharging and refuelling infrastructure on which use of the new fuels depends;
Amendment 26 #
2018/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission and the, Member States and the private sector to step up financial support for the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure; notes the relevance of priority-setting in the next MFF; calls on the Member States to acknowledge the positive effects of fiscal incentives.
Amendment 27 #
2018/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on Member States to invest more in the installation of publicly accessible recharging points for electric vehicles.
Amendment 28 #
2018/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Asks all the Member States to cooperate more closely, particularly within the Sustainable Transport Forum, with a view to establishing and implementing ambitious national action plans and ensuring cross-border continuity.
Amendment 31 #
2018/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Asks European vehicle manufacturers to bring more electric vehicles onto the market in order to raise their profile in the medium-to-long term, thus encouraging public and private investment in them.
Amendment 114 #
2018/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Points outRegrets that national competent authorities can only select samples and perform tests only on the territory of their Member State; stresses the importance, therefore, of enhanced, effective and transparent cooperation between national consumer protection and food authorities and the Commission; welcomes the adoption of the revised Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation11 in this regard; _________________ 11 Regulation (EU) 2017/2394; OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1.
Amendment 140 #
2018/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Invites consumer organisations to play an active role in the public debate and , in informing consumers and in raising awareness among manufacturers;
Amendment 174 #
2018/2008(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 102 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Hosting service providers active on the internet play an essential role in the digital economy by connecting business and citizens and by facilitating public debate and the distribution and receipt of information, opinions and ideas, contributing significantly to innovation, economic growth and job creation in the Union. However, their services are in certain cases abused by third parties to carry out illegal activities online. Of particularA matter of extreme concern is the misuse of hosting service providers by terrorist groups and their supporters to disseminate terrorist content online in order to spread their message, to radicalise and recruit and to facilitate and direct terrorist activity.
Amendment 110 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Efforts at Union level to counter terrorist content online commenced in 2015 through a framework of voluntary cooperation between Member States and hosting service providers need to be complemented by a clear legislative framework in order to further reduce accessibility to terrorist content online and adequately address a rapidly evolving problem. This legislative framework seeks to build on voluntary efforts, which were reinforced by the Commission Recommendation (EU) 2018/3347, and responds to calls made by the European Parliament to strengthen measures to tackle illegal and harmful content and by the European Council to improve the automatic detection and to allow the immediate removal of content that incites to terrorist acts. _________________ 7 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2018/334 of 1 March 2018 on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (OJ L 63, 6.3.2018, p. 50).
Amendment 128 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to provide clarity about the actions that both hosting service providers and competent authorities should take to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content online, this Regulation should establish a definition of terrorist content for preventative purposes drawing on the definition of terrorist offences under Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council9. Given the need to address the most harmful terrorist propaganda online, the definition should capture material and information that incites, encourages or advocates the commission of or contribution to terrorist offences, provides instructions for the commission of such offences, glorify or contribute to the justification of terrorism, or promotes the participation in the activities of a terrorist group. Such information includes in particular text, images, sound recordings and videos. When assessing whether content constitutes terrorist content within the meaning of this Regulation, competent authorities as well as hosting service providers should take into account factors such as the nature and wording of the statements, the context in which the statements were made and their potential to lead to harmful consequences, thereby affecting the security and safety of persons. The fact that the material was produced by, is attributable to or disseminated on behalf of an EU-listed terrorist organisation or person constitutes an important factor in the assessment. Content disseminated for educational, journalistic or research purposes should be adequately protected. Furthermore, the expression of radical, polemic or controversial views in the public debate on sensitive political questions should not be considered terrorist content. _________________ 9 Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
Amendment 187 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point a
Article premier – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) rules on duties of care to be applied by hosting service providers in order to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content through their services and ensure, where necessary, its swiftimmediate removal;
Amendment 251 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority shall have the power to issue a decision requiring the hosting service provider immediately to remove terrorist content or disable access to it.
Amendment 351 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Competent authorities in Member States shall inform, coordinate and cooperate with each other and, where appropriate, with relevant Union bodies such as Europol with regard to removal orders and referrals to avoid duplication, enhance coordination and avoid interference with investigations in different Member States.
Amendment 352 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States and hosting service providers may choose to make use of dedicated tools, including, where appropriate, those established by relevant Union bodies such as Europol, to facilitate in particular:
Amendment 357 #
2018/0331(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
4. Where hosting service providers become aware of any evidence of terrorist offences, they shall promptly inform the authorities competentresponsible for the investigation and prosecution inof criminal offences in the concerned Member State concerned or the point of contact in the Member State pursuant to Article 14(2), in the Member State where they have their main establishment or a legal representative. Hosting service providers may, in case of doubt,shall transmit this information to Europol for appropriate follow -up.
Amendment 158 #
2018/0254(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. For the award of funding for research and development actions, the Commission shall act by means of implementing acts adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 28 paragraph 2.
Amendment 176 #
2018/0254(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. This Regulation shall not affect the discretion of Member States as regard policy on export of defence-related product.
Amendment 180 #
2018/0254(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. During the elaboration of the work programmes, and before the award of funding, the Commission shall ensure, through appropriate consultations with the Committee, that the proposed research or development actions avoid duplication with existing capabilities or already funded research or development projects within the EU. In case a duplication is identified, the Commission shall carry out further consultations
Amendment 181 #
2018/0254(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. The work programmes shall set out the categories of projects to be funded under the Fund. Those categories shall be in line with the defence priorities referred to in Article 3.
Amendment 78 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The regulatory measures proposed can be effective, in reducing fatalities, decreasing the number of road accidents and mitigating injuries and damage, only if they gain the acceptance of users. Therefore, vehicle manufacturers should do their utmost to ensure that the systems and features provided for in this Regulation are developed in such a way so as to support the driver, ensure the user acceptance and their likeliness of being used. To this end, the functioning of those systems and features and their limitations should also be explained in a clear and consumer-friendly manner in the motor vehicle’s user instructions.
Amendment 118 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Regulation specifies and complements Regulation (EU) 2018/858 as regards the general safety of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, and as regards the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users.
Amendment 160 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
(d) on board instruments, electrical system, vehicle lighting and protection against unauthorized use including cyberattacks;
Amendment 161 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d a (new)
(da) protection of the vehicle against cyberattacks during its lifetime;
Amendment 171 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the type-approval of tyres, including tyres in worn condition in respect of their wet grip performance, and including technical requirements concerning their installation.
Amendment 174 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
(ba) the introduction of a European Union type-approval test for the wet grip performance of tyres in worn condition mounted on M1 and N1 vehicles.
Amendment 281 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The detailed rules with regard to the requirements laid down in paragraphs 2 to 4 of this Article shall be laid down and published at least 12 months before the relevant dates specified in Annex II. The detailed rules with regard to the requirements laid down in paragraph 5 of this Article shall be laid down and published at least 36 months before the relevant dates specified in Annex II.
Amendment 293 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. However, the requirements relating to the systems and other items listed in points (a) to (e) of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not apply to fully autonomous vehicles.
Amendment 299 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16a Review and Reporting 1. By ... [four years after the date of application of this Regulation] and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit an evaluation report to the European Parliament and to the Council, on the achievements of safety measures and systems, including their penetration rates. The Commission shall evaluate whether these measures and systems operate in accordance with this Regulation. Where appropriate, that report shall be accompanied by recommendations, including a legislative proposal to amend the requirements as regards general safety and the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users.
Amendment 337 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 4
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 4
Driver availability B5B B5 B5 B5 B5 B5 monitoring
Amendment 341 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 5
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 5
Event (accident) data B B5 B B5 B B5 B B5 B recorder
Amendment 342 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 6
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 6
Amendment 343 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 7
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 7
Systems to provide the vehicle with information B5 B5 B B B B5 B5 B5 B B5 on state of vehicle and surrounding area
Amendment 344 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 8
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 8
Amendment 350 #
2018/0145(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Notes to the table – point E (new)
Annex II – Notes to the table – point E (new)
E: Date for refusal to grant EU type approval and date for the prohibition of registration to be decided in the delegated act, but not earlier than the date of application of this Regulation.
Amendment 69 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Operating system providers play also a crucial role as an intermediary between content providers and consumers. The main purpose of an operating system is to control the basic functions of a device and enable the user to make use of such a device and run application software on it. However, operating systems are usually proposed with a set of accessory by-default application software in order to offer the consumer a turnkey device. This can shape deeply the choice of applications used by consumers later on. Moreover, operating systems also handle the way those applications can be run on the device and act as a key platform between application developers and consumers. As operating system providers are often vertically integrated with application developers, issues can arise notably regarding the possibility of a differentiated treatment between native and third-party applications; Increasing transparency would help prevent unfair commercial behaviours.
Amendment 78 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Online intermediation services, operating systems and online search engines, as well as the commercial transactions facilitated by those services, have an intrinsic cross- border potential and are of particular importance for the proper functioning of the Union’s internal market in today’s economy. The potentially unfair and harmful trading practices of certain providers of those services in respect of business users and corporate website users hamper the full realisation of that potential and negatively affect the proper functioning of the internal market. In addition, the full realisation of that potential is hampered, and the proper functioning of the internal market is negatively affected, by diverging laws of certain Member States which, with a varying degree of effectiveness, regulate those services, while other Member States are considering adopting such laws.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Online intermediation services and online search engines, as well as the commercial transactions facilitated by those services, have an intrinsic cross- border potential and are of particular importance for the proper functioning of the Union’s internal market in today’s economy. The potentially unfair and harmful trading practices of certain providers of those services in respect of business users and corporate website users hamper the full realisation of that potential and negatively affect the proper functioning of the internal market. In addition, the full realisation of that potential is hampered, and the proper functioning of the internal market is negatively affected, by diverging laws of certain Member States which, with a varying degree of effectiveness, regulate those services, while other Member States are considering adopting such laws.
Amendment 90 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Since online intermediation services, operating systems and online search engines typically have a global dimension, this Regulation should apply to providers of those services regardless of whether they are established in a Member State or outside the Union, provided that two cumulative conditions are met. Firstly, the business users or corporate website users should be established in the Union. Secondly, the business users or corporate website users should, through the provision of those services, offer their goods or services to consumers located in the Union at least for part of the transaction. Such consumers should be located in the Union, but do not need to have their place of residence in the Union nor have the nationality of any Member State. Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply where the business users or corporate websites users are not established in the Union or where they are established in the Union but where they use online intermediation services or online search engines to offer goods or services exclusively to consumers located outside the Union or to persons who are not consumers.
Amendment 98 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) A wide variety of business-to- consumer commercial relations are intermediated online by providers operating multi-sided services that are essentially based on the same ecosystem- building business model. In order to capture the relevant services, online intermediation services should be defined in a precise and technologically- neutral manner. In particular, the services should consist of information society services, which are characterised by the fact that they aim to facilitate the initiating of direct transactions between business users and consumers, irrespective of whether the transactions are ultimately concluded either online, on the online portal of the provider of the online intermediation services in question or that of the business user, or offline. In addition, the services should be provided on the basis of contractual relationships both between the providers and business users and between the providers and the consumers. Such a contractual relationship should be deemed to exist where both parties concerned express their intention to be bound in an unequivocal and verifiable manner, without an express written agreement necessarily being required.
Amendment 111 #
2018/0112(COD)
(9) Examples of online intermediation services covered by this Regulation should consequently include online e-commerce market places, including collaborative ones on which business users are active, online software applications services and, online social media services and voice assistance services. However, this Regulation should not apply to online advertising serving tools or online advertising exchanges which are not provided with the aim of facilitating the initiation of direct transactions and which do not involve a contractual relationship with consumers. This Regulation should also not apply to online payment services, since they do not themselves meet the applicable requirements but are rather inherently auxiliary to the transaction for the supply of goods and services to the consumers concerned.
Amendment 113 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Examples of online intermediation services covered by this Regulation should consequently include online e-commerce market places, including collaborative ones on which business users are active, online software applications services such as application stores, and online social media services. However, this Regulation should not apply to online advertising serving tools or online advertising exchanges which are not provided with the aim of facilitating the initiation of direct transactions and which do not involve a contractual relationship with consumers. This Regulation should also not apply to online payment services, since they do not themselves meet the applicable requirements but are rather inherently auxiliary to the transaction for the supply of goods and services to the consumers concerned.
Amendment 122 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
Amendment 136 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Ensuring transparency in the general terms and conditions can be essential to promoting sustainable business relationships and to preventing unfair behaviour to the detriment of business users. Providers of online intermediation services should therefore also ensure that the terms and conditions are easily available at all stages of the contractual relationship, including to prospective business users at the pre-contractual phase, and that any modifications to those terms are notified to business users within a set notice period which is reasonable and proportionate in light of the specific circumstances and which is at least 15 days. That notice period should not apply where, and to the extent that, it is waived in an unambiguous manner by the business user concerned or where, and to the extent that, the need to implement the modification without respecting the notice period stems from a legal obligation incumbent on the service provider under Union or national law. Business users should be entitled to terminate their agreement without payment of any fee within 30 days from the receipt of a notice of a modification which they consider being detrimental to them.
Amendment 143 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to protect business users and to provide for legal certainty for both sides, it should be possible for a competent court to establish that non-compliant terms and conditions are not binding on the business user concerneull and void, with effects ex nunc. Any such finding by a court should however only concern the specific provisions of the terms and conditions which are not compliant. The remaining provisions should remain valid and enforceable, in as far as they can be severed from the non- compliant provisions. Sudden modifications to existing terms and conditions may significantly disrupt business users’ operations. In order to limit such negative effects on business users, and to discourage such behaviour, modifications made in contravention of the obligation to provide a set notice period, should therefore be null and void, that is, deemed to have never existed with effects erga omnes and ex tunc.
Amendment 149 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) A provider of online intermediation services or online search engines can have legitimate reasons to apply restrictions or sanctions to business users, and to decide to suspend or terminate the provision of its services, in whole or in part, to a given business user, including by delisting individual goods or services of a given business user or effectively removing search results. However, given that such decisions can significantly affect the interests of the business user concerned, they should be properly informed of the reasons thereof. The statement of reasons should allow business users to ascertain whether there is scope to challenge the decision, thereby improving the possibilities for business users to seek effective redress where necessary. In addition, requiring a statement of reasons should help to prevent or remedy any unintended removal of online content provided by business users which the provider incorrectly considers to be illegal content, in line with Commission Recommendation (EU) No 2018/33422. The statement of reasons should identify the objective ground or grounds for the decision, based on the grounds that the provider had set out in advance in its terms and conditions, and refer in a proportionate manner to the relevant specific circumstances that led to that decision. _________________ 22 Commission Recommendation (EU) No 2018/334 of 1 March 2018 on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (OJ L 63, 6.3.2018, p. 50).
Amendment 160 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The ranking of goods and services by the providers of online intermediation services has an important impact on consumer choice and, consequently, on the commercial success of the business users offering those goods and services to consumers. Providers of online intermediation services should therefore outline the main parameters determining ranking beforehand, in order to improve predictability for business users, to allow them to better understand the functioning of the ranking mechanism and to enable them to compare the ranking practices of various providers. The notion of main parameter should be understood to refer to any general criteria, processes, specific signals incorporated into algorithms or other adjustment or demotion mechanisms used in connection with the ranking. The description of the main parameters determining ranking should also include an explanation of any possibility for business users to actively influence ranking against remuneration, as well as of the relative effects thereof. This description should provide business users with an adequate understanding of how the ranking mechanism takes account of the characteristics of the actual goods or services offered by the business user, and their relevance to the consumers of the specific online intermediation services.
Amendment 167 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Similarly, the ranking of websites by the providers of online search engines, notably of those websites through which undertakings offer goods and services to consumers, has an important impact on consumer choice and the commercial success of corporate website users. Providers of online search engines should therefore provide a description of the main parameters determining the ranking of all indexed websites, including those of corporate website users as well as other websites. In addition to the characteristics of the goods and services and their relevance for consumers, this description should in the case of online search engines also allow corporate website users to obtain an adequate understanding of whether, and if so how and to what extent, certain design characteristics of the website used, such as their optimisation for display on mobile telecommunications devices, is taken into account. In the absence of a contractual relationship between providers of online search engines and corporate website users, that description should be available to the public in an obvious and easily accessible location on the relevant online search engine. To ensure predictability for corporate website users, the description should also be kept up to date, including the possibility that any changes to the main parameters should be made easily identifiable. Whilst the providers are under no circumstances required to disclose any trade secrets as defined in Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 when complying with this requirement to disclose the main ranking parameters, the description given should at least be based on actual data on the relevance of the ranking parameters used. _________________ 23 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 172 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
Amendment 175 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Where a provider of online intermediation services itself offers certain goods or services to consumers through its own online intermediation services, or does so through a business user which it controls, that provider may compete directly with other business users of its online intermediation services which are not controlled by the provider. Such a provider may have an economic incentive and the ability to use its control over the online intermediation service to provide technical or economic advantages to its own offerings, or those offered through a business user which it controls, that it could deny to competing business users. If a provider of online intermediation services exercises this ability, its conduct may deprive such competing business users of equality of opportunity and can lead to consumer harm by reducing their choices, or withholding critical information from them. In such situations, in particular, it is important that the provider of online intermediation services acts in a transparent manner and provides a description of any differentiated treatment, whether through legal, commercial or technical means, that it might give in respect of goods or services it offers itself compared to those offered by business users. For purposes of this Regulation, a provider’s service competes with those of its other business users if it is regarded as interchangeable or substitutable by consumers of the online intermediation service, including by reason of the characteristics, prices, or intended uses of the services. To ensure proportionality, this obligation should apply at the level of the overall online intermediation services, rather than at the level of individual goods or services offered through those services.
Amendment 183 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
Amendment 186 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 b (new)
Recital 19 b (new)
Amendment 198 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) It is important that service providers of online intermediation services, search engines and operating systems, do not engage in unfair commercial practices (including commercial behaviour or the inclusion of unfair contractual terms) which have a detrimental impact on competition or on choice for consumers.
Amendment 201 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21b) Certain practices, such as the ones mentioned in the Annex, can be conclusively treated as unfair in all circumstances. The Platform Observatory should continuously review this list of practices and recommend updates to the Commission. As the market for online intermediation services evolves, the Commission should issue non-binding guidance on practices that may comprise unfair commercial practices.
Amendment 223 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) A close monitoring of the compliant application of this regulation is necessary. Member States shall designate national authorities to require the relevant information from providers of online intermediation services, online search engines and operating systems providers. The information gathered by those authorities should be provided to the Commission and to the Observatory on the Online Platform Economy upon request.
Amendment 226 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down rules to ensure that business users of online intermediation services, device operating systems and corporate website users in relation to online search engines are granted appropriate transparency and effective redress possibilities.
Amendment 235 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to online intermediation services, device operating systems and online search engines provided, or offered to be provided, to business users and corporate website users, respectively, that have their place of establishment or residence in the Union and that, through online intermediation services or online search engines, offer goods or services to consumers located in the Union, irrespective of the place of establishment or residence of the providers of those services.
Amendment 238 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation shall be without prejudice to national rules which, in conformity with Union law, prohibit or sanction unilateral conduct or unfair commercial practices.
Amendment 242 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘business user’ means any natural or legal person which through online intermediation services offers or seeks to offer goods or services to consumers for purposes relating to its trade, business, craft or profession;
Amendment 245 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
(2) ‘online intermediation services’ means services, even partially off-line, which meet all of the following requirements:
Amendment 260 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) ‘device operating system’ means system software products that control the basic functions of a device and enable the user to make use of such a device and run application software on it.
Amendment 261 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
(3b) ‘operating systems providers’ means any natural or legal person which provides, or which offers to provide, device operating systems.
Amendment 268 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘online search engine’ means a digital service that allows users to perform searches of, in principle, all websites or websites in a particular language on the basis of a query on any subject in the form of a keyword, vocal request, phrase or other input, and returns linksresults in any format in which information related to the requested content can be found;
Amendment 282 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms, conditions, clauses and other information, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of online intermediation services and their business users and are unilaterally determined by the provider of online intermediation services.
Amendment 285 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of online intermediation services and providers of operating systems shall ensure that their terms and conditions:
Amendment 297 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) are easily available for business users at all stages of their commercial relationship with the provider of online intermediation services or the providers of operating systems, including in the pre- contractual stage;
Amendment 308 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) set out the objective grounds for decisions to suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, the provision of their online intermediation services to business useror of providers of operating systems to business users, or any other restrictions.
Amendment 314 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Terms and conditions, or specific provisions thereof, which do not comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 shall not be binding on the business user concernebe null and void where such non- compliance is established by a competent court.
Amendment 321 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shalland providers of operating system shall actively notify to the business users concerned any envisaged modification of their terms and conditions.
Amendment 326 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The envisaged modifications shall not be implemented before the expiry of a notice period which is reasonable and proportionate to the nature and extent of the envisaged modifications and to their consequences for the business user concerned. That notice period shall be at least 1530 days from the date on which the provider of online intermediation services notifies the business users concerned about the envisaged modifications. The business user shall be allowed to terminate their agreement free of any charges within 30 days from the receipt of the notice, where such modifications are detrimental to the business user.
Amendment 339 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Modifications to terms and conditions implemented by a provider of online intermediation services or by providers of operating systems contrary to the provisions of paragraph 3 shall be null and void.
Amendment 345 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. Paragraph 3 shall not apply where a provider of online intermediation services or a provider of operating systems is subject to a legal obligation which requires it to modify its terms and conditions in a manner which does not allow it to respect the notice period referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 3.
Amendment 350 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
5a. Without prejudice to EU and national rules concerning illegal content, if the terms and conditions have been modified in order to protect the legitimate interest of the consumers or of the provider of online intermediation services, in response to practices that can cause immediate harm to consumers, intermediary service providers or providers of operating systems shall apply a 15 days’ notice period for application of the new terms and conditions.
Amendment 352 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The online intermediation service provider has to ensure that the brand attributed to the business user and its goods or services is readily recognizable throughout the entire intermediation process.
Amendment 353 #
Amendment 354 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Where a provider of online intermediation services and of online search engines decides to sanction suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, the provision of its online intermediation services to a given business user, it shall provideinform the business user concerned at least 15 days before implementing that decision, and provide the business user, without undue delay, with a statement of reasons for that decision.
Amendment 377 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In making such decisions, online intermediation service providers must take into account the fundamental rights of the business user and comply with the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 379 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4a Article 4.1 shall not apply where a provider of online intermediation services is subject to a legal obligation to sanction, suspend, or terminate, in whole or in part, the provision of its online intermediation services to a given business, or does so in order to fight against illicit content. In such cases, the business user shall be notified without undue delay.
Amendment 389 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall set out clearly in their terms and conditions all the main parameters determining ranking, the weighting of those parameters in dictating order of presentation and the reasons for the relative importance of those main parameters as opposed to other parameters.
Amendment 396 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where those main parameters include the possibility to influence ranking against any direct or indirect remuneration paid by business users to the provider of online intermediation services concerned, that provider of online intermediation services shall also include in its terms and conditions a description of those possibilities and of the effects of such remuneration on ranking.
Amendment 403 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of online search engines shall set out for corporate website users the main parameters determining ranking in the general search results pages, the weighting of those parameters in dictating order of presentation, and the reasons for their relative importance vis-à-vis other parameters, by providing an easily and publicly available description, drafted in clear and unambiguous, plain and intelligible language on the online search engines of those providers. They shall keep that description up to date.
Amendment 423 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. (a) Providers of online search engines shall notify to corporate website users, in a reasonable notice period, any changes to ranking mechanism referred to in article 5.2. (b) Providers of online search engines shall set out for corporate website users a description of any differentiated treatment which they give, or may give, in relation to, on the one hand, good and services offered to consumers through those online search engines services by either that provider itself or any business users which that provider controls and, on the other hand, other websites users. It shall be clearly indicated, with a specific symbol or any other tool, where provider of online search engines itself, or any business users, which that provider controls partially or entirely, offer goods and services to consumers through online search engines services. (c) Providers of online search engines shall set out for corporate website users an easily accessible internal system allowing websites users to enter into contact with them.
Amendment 441 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Providers of online search engines shall apply fair treatment and ranking criteria on a non-discriminatory basis to all corporate website users, including to corporate website users that a provider controls directly or indirectly. In particular, the same underlying processes and methods for the positioning and display in the general search results pages shall be applied. Those include all elements that have an impact on the visibility, triggering, ranking or graphical format of a search result in the providers’ general search results pages.
Amendment 445 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of online intermediation services and providers of operating systems shall include in their terms and conditions a description of any differentiated treatment which they give, or may give, in relation to, on the one hand, goods or services offered to consumers through those online intermediation services or operating systems by either that provider itself or any business users which that provider controls and, on the other hand, other business users.
Amendment 457 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The description referred to in paragraph 1 shall cover at least, where applicable, any differentiated treatment through specific measures taken by, or the behaviour of, the provider of the online intermediation services or of the operating system relating to any of the following:
Amendment 459 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) access that the provider, or that the business users which that provider controls, may have to any personal data or other data, or both, which business users or consumers provide for the use of the online intermediation services or of the operating system concerned or which are generated through the provision of those services;
Amendment 464 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) any direct or indirect remuneration charged for the use of the online intermediation services concernedor the use of the operating systems concerned, at an ancillary services, and any technical or economic benefit it does not extend to all business users;
Amendment 473 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
3. To the extent a provider of online intermediation services, or of operating systems or any business user which that provider controls, offers goods or services that compete with those offered by other business users, the provider shall apply fair treatment to those other business users in such a way that it does not materially impair those business users’ ability to do business.
Amendment 475 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 481 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of online intermediation services and providers of online search engines shall include in their terms and conditions a description of the technical and contractual access, or absence thereof, of business users or corporate website users to any personal data or other data, or both, which business users or corporate website users or consumers provide for the use of the online intermediation services or online search engines concerned or which are generated through the provision of those services.
Amendment 494 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Through the description referred to in paragraph 1, providers of online intermediation services or online search engines shall adequately inform business users at least of the following:
Amendment 497 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) whether the provider of online intermediation services and the provider of online search engines has access to personal data or other data, or both, which business users or corporate website users or consumers provide for the use of those services or which are generated through the provision of those services, and if so, to which categories of such data and under what conditions;
Amendment 503 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) whether a business user has access to personal data or other data, or both, provided by that business user in connection to his or her use of the online intermediation services or online search engines concerned or generated through the provision of those services to that business user and the consumers of his or her goods or services, and if so, to which categories of such data and under what conditions;
Amendment 511 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) whether, in addition to point (b), a business user has access to personal data or other data, or both, including in aggregated form, provided by or generated through the provision of the online intermediation services or online search engines to all of the business users and consumers thereof, and if so, to which categories of such data and under what conditions.
Amendment 519 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Providers of online intermediation services shall grant business users access to anonymized consumer data which are directly generated through the facilitation of the transaction between the consumer and the business user concerned. This obligation is without prejudice to the obligations with which online intermediation services must comply under the applicable data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 536 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Where, in the provision of their services, providers of online intermediation services or providers of operating systems restrict the ability of business users to offer the same goods and services to consumers under different conditions through other means than through those services, they shall include grounds for that restriction in their terms and conditions and make those grounds easily available to the public. Those grounds shall include the main economic, commercial or legal considerations for those restrictions.
Amendment 548 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall provide for anproviders of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall provide for a transparent and non- discriminatory internal system for handling the complaints of business users.
Amendment 562 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. As part of their internal complaint- handling system, providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall:
Amendment 573 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall include in their terms and conditions all relevant information relating to the access to and functioning of their internal complaint-handling system.
Amendment 581 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall annually establish and make easily available to the public information on the functioning and effectiveness of their internal complaint-handling system.
Amendment 591 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. The provisions of this Article shall not apply to providers of online intermediation services that are small enterprises within th, providers of online mseaning of Article 2 (2) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC29 . _________________ 29 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5/2003, p. 36)rch engines, and providers of operating systems that reach less than 5 million unique visitors a month.
Amendment 594 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. The provisions of this Article shall not apply to providers of online intermediation services that are small enterprises within thand to providers of online mseaning of Article 2 (2) of the Anrch enginex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC29 . _________________ 29 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5/2003, p. 36)hat reach less than five millions unique visitors a month.
Amendment 595 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Any attempt to reach an agreement through the internal complaint-handling system in accordance with this article shall not affect the rights of the providers of the online intermediation services and of the business users concerned to initiate judicial proceedings at any time during or after the process.
Amendment 606 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall identify in their terms and conditions one or more mediators with which they are willing to engage to attempt to reach an agreement with business users on the settlement, out of court, of any disputes between the provider and the business user arising in relation to the provision of the online intermediation services concerned, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 9.
Amendment 611 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems may only identify mediators providing their mediation services from a location outside the Union where it is ensured that the business users concerned are not effectively deprived of the benefit of any legal safeguards laid down in Union law or the law of the Member States as a consequence of the mediators providing those services from outside the Union.
Amendment 614 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) their mediation services are affordable for an average business user of the online intermediation services, the online search engines, and the operating systems concerned;
Amendment 615 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) they are capable of providing their mediation services in the language of the terms and conditions which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of online intermediation services, the provider of online search engines, or the provider of operating systems and the business user concerned;
Amendment 617 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall engage in good faith in any attempt to reach an agreement through the mediation of any of the mediators which they identified in accordance with paragraph 1, with a view to reaching an agreement on the settlement of the dispute.
Amendment 633 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of online intermediation services , providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of mediation in each individual case. A reasonable proportion of those total costs shall be determined, on the basis of a suggestion by the mediator, by taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand, in particular the relative merits of the claims of the parties to the dispute, the conduct of the parties, as well as the size and financial strength of the parties relative to one another. However, providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall in any case bear at least half of the total cost.
Amendment 637 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Should the mediator find that the business user is acting in bad faith or is seeking to abuse the mediation process, it can decide to make the business user bear more than half of the total cost.
Amendment 640 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. Any attempt to reach an agreement through mediation on the settlement of a dispute in accordance with this Article shall not affect the rights of the providers of the online intermediation services, online search engine, or operating systems and of the business users concerned to initiate judicial proceedings at any time during or after the mediation process.
Amendment 644 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)
6. Providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems shall annually establish a report with information on the functioning and effectiveness of mediation; it should at least include information on the number of mediation cases, the subject matter of the complaints, the time period needed to proceed those complaints and the decision taken.
Amendment 651 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall encourage providers of online intermediation services, providers of online search engines, and providers of operating systems as well as organisations and associations representing them to individually or jointly set up one or more organisations providing mediation services which meet the requirements specified in Article 10(2), for the specific purpose of facilitating the out-of-court settlement of disputes with business users arising in relation to the provision of those services, taking particular account of the cross- border nature of online intermediation services, online search engines, and operating systems.
Amendment 657 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Organisations and associations that have a legitimate interest in representing business users or in representing corporate website users, as well as public bodies set up in Member States, shall have the right to take action before national courts in the Union, in accordance with the rules of the law of the Member State where the action is brought, to stop or prohibit any non- compliance by providers of online intermediation services or by providers of online search engines or by providers of operating systems with the relevant requirements laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 693 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to the rights of business users and corporate website users to individually take action before competent national courts, in accordance with the rules of the law of the Member State where the action is brought, to address any non-compliance by providers of online intermediation services by providers of online search engines, or by providers of operating systems with the relevant requirements laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 701 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of online intermediation services and by organisations and associations representing them, together with business users and their representative organisations, intended to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking account of the specific features of the various sectors in which online intermediation services are provided, as well as of the specific characteristics of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
Amendment 703 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The Commission shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of operating systems and by organisations and associations representing them, intended to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation.
Amendment 706 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a Remedies 1. Member States shall designate a body or bodies responsible for adequate and effective enforcement of this regulation. 2. Member States shall determine the sanctions applicable to infringements of the provisions contained in this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are enforced. These sanctions shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. 3. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall be communicated to the Commission and made publicly available on the Commission’s website.
Amendment 710 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13b Monitoring Member States shall closely monitor the application of this regulation. To that end, Member states shall designate national authorities to require providers of online intermediation services, online search engines and operating systems providers to submit relevant information. The information gathered by those authorities shall be provided to the Commission and to the Observatory on the Online Platform Economy upon request.
Amendment 711 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 c (new)
Article 13 c (new)
Article 13c Applicable law Business users shall not lose the protection granted by this regulation by virtue of choice of law of a non-member country as the law applicable to the contract of the latter has a close connection with the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 713 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. By [date: threewo years after the date of entry into force], and subsequently every three years, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
Amendment 729 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – Title (new)
Annex – Title (new)
Annex Commercial practices to be regarded as unfair in all circumstances
Amendment 730 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point a (new)
Annex – point a (new)
(a) Requiring the business user to use the online intermediation service provider's ancillary services, including payment services, without the option to use any alternative methods;
Amendment 731 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point b (new)
Annex – point b (new)
(b) Burdening the business user with a unilateral liability clause which causes an unfair transfer of risk;
Amendment 732 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point c (new)
Annex – point c (new)
(c) Proposing retroactive contract clauses;
Amendment 733 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point d (new)
Annex – point d (new)
(d) Impeding consumers access to, or discovery of, products, services, or applications offered by other business users on the online service for reasons that are not objectively justifiable;
Amendment 734 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point e (new)
Annex – point e (new)
(e) Modifying terms and conditions without informing business users concerned;
Amendment 735 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point f (new)
Annex – point f (new)
(f) Maintaining the legal right to use the business user's confidential information after the contract between the online intermediary service provider and the business user has expired;
Amendment 736 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point g (new)
Annex – point g (new)
(g) Any clause or practices which make it unduly difficult for a business user to terminate its relationship with an online intermediation service provider and/or use another online intermediation service.;
Amendment 737 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point h (new)
Annex – point h (new)
(h) Impeding that consumers who access services through the online intermediation service have the right and ability to select and use the services of their choice, without facing any undue burdens;
Amendment 738 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point i (new)
Annex – point i (new)
(i) Not providing all information necessary to enable business users to achieve a comparable level and quality of interoperability with services or functionality accessed through the service as are available to services offered by the provider itself, where a provider of online intermediation services itself offers goods or services to consumers through its own online intermediation services, or does so through a business user which it controls;
Amendment 739 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point j (new)
Annex – point j (new)
(j) Providing any technical or economic advantage to its own services, or to services that it controls, and denying it to competing business users, where a provider of online intermediation services itself offers goods or services to consumers through its own online intermediation services, or does so through a business user which it controls;
Amendment 740 #
2018/0112(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – point k (new)
Annex – point k (new)
(k) Interfering in the commercial relationship between competing business users and consumers of their services.
Amendment 103 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Specific transparency requirements for online marketplaces should therefore be provided in Directive 2011/83/EU to inform consumers using online marketplaces about the main parameters determining ranking of offers and their relative importance, whether they enter into a contract with a trader or a non-trader (such as another consumer), whether consumer protection law applies and which trader is responsible for the performance of the contract and for ensuring consumer rights when these rights apply. This information should be provided in a clear and comprehensible manner and not only through a reference in the standard Terms and Conditions or similar contractual document. The information requirements for online marketplaces should be proportionate and need to strike a balance between a high level of consumer protection and the competitiveness of online marketplaces. Online marketplaces should not be required to list specific consumer rights when informing consumers about their applicability or non- applicability. The information to be provided about the responsibility for ensuring consumer rights depends on the contractual arrangements between the online marketplace and the relevant third party traders. Online marketplace may refer to the third party trader as being solely responsible for ensuring consumer rights or describe its specific responsibilities where it assumes the responsibility for certain aspects of the contract, for example, delivery or the exercise of the right of withdrawal. The obligation to provide information about the main parameters determining ranking of search results and their relative importance is without prejudice to any trade secrets regarding the underlying algorithms. This information should explain the main default parameters used by the marketplace but does not have to be presented in a customized manner for each individual search query.
Amendment 109 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
Amendment 196 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m (new)
(-1) In Article 2, paragraph 1, the following point is added: “(m) ‘online platform’ means an online service which provides services, including: (i) enabling consumers to conclude contracts for the supply of goods, services or digital content with suppliers within an electronic environment controlled by the platform operator; (ii) enabling suppliers to place advertisements within an electronic environment controlled by the platform operator which can be browsed by customers in order to contact suppliers and to conclude a contract outside the platform; (iii) offering comparison or other services to customers that identify relevant suppliers of goods, services or digital content and direct customers to those suppliers’ web sites or contact details; (iv) enabling platform users to rate or review suppliers, customers or other users, or goods, services or digital content offered by suppliers.”
Amendment 218 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point f (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point f (new)
(3a) In Article 7(4), the following point is added: "(f) for products or services offered through online platforms, the main parameters of ranking of offers presented to the consumer as result of a search query, and their relative importance;”
Amendment 222 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
(3b) In Article 7(4), the following point is added: “(g) for products or services offered by the third party through an online platform, information whether this third party is a trader or not;”
Amendment 225 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 c (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – points h (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – points h (new)
(3c) In Article 7(4), the following point is added: “(h) for products or services offered on the online platforms, information whether the consumer rights stemming from Union consumer legislation apply or not and if yes, which trader is responsible for ensuring their application in relation to the contract;”
Amendment 228 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 d (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – points i (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – points i (new)
(3d) In Article 7(4), the following point is added: “(i) for products or services offered on online platforms, information whether and how algorithms or automated decision making were used, to present offers or determine prices, including personalised pricing techniques.”
Amendment 229 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 e (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 e (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point j (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point j (new)
(3e) In Article 7(4), the following point is added: “(j) for customer reviews displayed on platforms with commercial purposes, the control of the reviews’ reliability, and its main characteristics, if such a control exists.”
Amendment 271 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -6 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -6 (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 6 a (new)
Annex I – point 6 a (new)
(-6) The following point 6a is added to Annex I: Show a price reduction without indicating the reference price on which the announcement of the price reduction is based and without being able to show it to have been the price in the 30 days prior to the announcement.
Amendment 308 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19
(19) ‘online marketplace’ means a service provider which allows consumers to conclude onlineplatform’ means an online public communication service based on: – the classification or listing, by means of computer algorithms, of content, goods or services offered or placed online by third parties; – and/or bringing multiple parties into contracts with traders and consumers on the online marketplace’s online interfaa view to selling goods, providing services or exchanging or sharing content, goods or services;
Amendment 310 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20
(20) ‘online interface’ means online interface as defined in point (16) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2018/302platform operator’ means any natural or legal person offering, in a professional capacity, whether or not in exchange for remuneration, a public communication service via an online platform’.
Amendment 311 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20 a (new)
(20a) ‘online opinion’ means any expression of a consumer’s opinion regarding their consumer experience by means of any assessment element, whether qualitative or quantitative, placed on an online platform.
Amendment 325 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
(3a) In Article 6(1), the following point is inserted: “(sa) where applicable, the existence of a control of the customer reviews’ reliability, and its main characteristics;”
Amendment 328 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – Title
Article 6 a – Title
Additional information requirements for contracts concluded on online marketplaceplatforms
Amendment 329 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – Title
Article 6 a – Title
Additional information requirements for contracts concluded on online marketplaceonline platforms
Amendment 330 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Before a consumer is bound by a distance contract, or any corresponding offer, on an online marketplaceplatform, the online marketplaceplatform operator shall in addition provide the following information in a fair, clear and transparent manner:
Amendment 332 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Before a consumer is bound by a distance contract, or any corresponding offer, on an online marketplaceplatforms, the online marketplaceplatforms shall in addition provide the following information:
Amendment 333 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the main parameters determinethods for referencing, ranking and dereferencing the content of offers presented to the consumer as a result of his search query on the online marketplaceplatform, indicating the default ranking criteria, their main parameters and their relative weighting;
Amendment 339 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the main parameters determining ranking of offers and their relative importance presented to the consumer as result of his search query on the online marketplaceplatforms;
Amendment 347 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) whether the third party offering the goods, services or digital content is a trader or not,consumer reviews related to the offered product or service have been subject to a control onf the basis of the declaration of that third party to the online marketplaceir reliability, and if so, a description of the main characteristics of such control;
Amendment 349 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) whether the third party offering the goods, services or digital content is a trader or not, on the basis of the declaration of that third party to the online marketplaceplatforms;
Amendment 351 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) whether consumer rights stemming from Union consumer legislation apply or not to the contract concluded; and
Amendment 352 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) where the contract is concluded with a trader, which trader is responsible for ensuring the application of consumer rights stemming from Union consumer legislation in relation to the contract. This requirement is without prejudice to the responsibility that the online marketplace may have or may assume with regard to specific elements of the contract.; and
Amendment 353 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) whether and how algorithms or automated decision making were used, to present offers or determine prices, including personalised pricing techniques. Member States may maintain or introduce in their national law additional information requirements.
Amendment 363 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
After the consumer is bound by a distance or off-premises contract, or any corresponding offer, on an online marketplace, and where the offer for the good or service that has been sold was notified to and removed by the online marketplace on grounds that it is illegal, the online marketplace shall promptly provide the following information to the consumer in a clear and comprehensible manner: (a) that the product or service sold or the offer thereof is illegal or apparently illegal and was removed; (b) the identity of the trader that placed the offer, which was removed; (c) the reason why the offer was removed.
Amendment 373 #
2018/0090(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Directive 2011/83/EU
Article 6 b (new)
Article 6 b (new)
Amendment 76 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The Coordination Group shall act by consensus, or, where necessary, vote by simplea two-thirds majority. There shall be one vote per Member State.
Amendment 113 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 117 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) applytake into account joint clinical assessment reports, in their health technology assessments at Member State level.
Amendment 129 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall develop, by means of implementing acts, procedural rules forordination Group shall develop:
Amendment 133 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 156 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts concerningordination Group shall adopt:
Amendment 162 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Amendment 180 #
2018/0018(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may carry out a clinical assessment using means other than the rules provided for in Chapter III of this Regulation, namely on grounds related to the need to protect public health in the Member State concerned and provided the measure is justified, necessary and proportionate as regards achieving that aim.
Amendment 11 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas public procurement is worth EUR 2 000 billion per year and enables many European businesses to take part in tendering procedures throughout the EU;
Amendment 15 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the new rules introduced by the 2014 directives, by facilitating public procurement and imposing more controls, should contribute to the implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy for a sustainable, more social, innovative and inclusive economy;
Amendment 21 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WIs concerned that certain persistent problems are hindering the smooth functioning of the public procurement system in the EU and welcomes, almost four years after the extensive revision of the Union public procurement legislative framework was concluded, the set of non-legislative measures proposed by the Commission and hopes that this will create impetus for better implementation;
Amendment 43 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that the current Union legislation, more than ever, allows for public procurement to be used as a strategic instrument to promote policy goalspowerful economic policy instrument, and encourages the Member States to get the most that they can out of it and to achieve the best possible level of cost effectiveness for the public money spent;
Amendment 50 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States to use public procurement strategically in order to promote a sustainable, circular, environmentally friendly and socially responsible economy, as well as innovation, SME growth and competition; underlines that this requires Member States to signal such policies at the highest level and support, to this end, procurers and practitioners in the public administration;
Amendment 56 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the example of adopting National Public Procurement Strategies and encourages more Member States to follow this example as a means of modernising their public procurement systems and making them more efficient;
Amendment 72 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Member States to use innovation partnerships more often;
Amendment 101 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Considers thatWelcomes the new partnership procedure will contribute to, which will help fostering innovation, and encourages contracting authorities to cooperate with the market in order to establish regular dialogue with all market stakeholders and to develop innovative methodologies, products, works or services which do not yet exist;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Regrets the slow uptake of digital technologies in public procurement in the Union, and calls on the Member States to strive for a rapid digital transformation of the procedures and for the introduction of e-processes for all major stages, namely from notification, access to tenders and submission to evaluation, contract award, ordering, invoicing and payment in order to simplify and speed up public procurement procedures;
Amendment 107 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. CIs concerned that the October 2018 deadline for the introduction of fully electronic public procurement tender submissions will not be met and calls on the Commission and the Member States to do their utmost to put in place the eForms by the end of 2018 at the latestmeet that deadline;
Amendment 116 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. NPoints out that competitive bidding is vital in public procurement, and notes with regret a decrease in the intensity of competition in public procurement in the Union in recent years, and urges the Member States recording a high percentage of notices with only one bidder to address the problem;
Amendment 126 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the Member States to support SMEs’ participation in tenders, for example by mandatory division into lots or by placing a limit on the turnover required for participation in tendering procedures;
Amendment 134 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. NRegrets the lack of clear and consolidated public procurement data in the EU and notes that reliable data on access to public procurement are necessary to verify the accountability of public authorities, and are a means of combating fraud and corruption;
Amendment 135 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Regrets that the Defence Procurement Directive has not yet delivered the desired results, in particular with regard to trans-national infrastructure projects, and urges the Commission and the Member States to intensify their efforts to better implement the currently applicable rules;
Amendment 136 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls for Union acon the Commission to take action, in particular during free trade agreement negotiations, to improve the access of EU suppliers to third-country public procurement markets, as the Union’s public procurement market is one of the most open in the world, and calls on the Council to adopt the international procurement instrument as soon as possible;
Amendment 137 #
2017/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Regrets the low level of professionalisation among those responsible for public purchasing and calls on the Member States to improve the skills of everyone involved in all stages of the public procurement process;
Amendment 103 #
2017/2274(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Points to the need to obtain the guarantees necessary for mutual protection of the products referred to in the EU-China agreement on geographical indications; maintains that the distinctive nature of the European GI logo must be preserved in order to rule out all possibility of confusion when consumers are buying the products concerned;
Amendment 70 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned about the diverging views on addressing global issues and regional conflicts that have appeared since the election of President Trump; seeks clarity as to whether the transatlantic relationship, which was defined over decades, still has the same relevance todaywith the United States and calls for the continuation of sustained cooperation and dialogue; stresses that the values-based overarching framework of our partnership is essential to securing the architecture of the global economy and security;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Regrets the US decision to increase tariffs on steel and aluminium; calls on the United States to honour its commitments to the WTO and calls for a swift and diplomatic resolution of this dispute in order to avoid an escalation in the adoption of countermeasures such as punitive tariffs and safeguard measures; insists that such a resolution would benefit both European and American businesses; welcomes pending Canadian and European decisions to bring the case before the WTO;
Amendment 109 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls on the EU to adopt proportionate and effective measures as soon as possible to respond to the US decision to increase tariffs on steel and aluminium;
Amendment 128 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the ongoing and uninterrupted work of the TLD in fostering EU-US relations through parliamentary dialogue and coordination on issues of specific common interest, such as trade, security, economic and cultural issues; calls furthermore for a continued intensification of the dialogue and a strengthening of the transatlantic cooperation;
Amendment 133 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls that both in the EU and the US, our societies are strong because they are built on a plurality of actors, including among others our governments, parliaments, various political institutions, civil society organisations, media and religious groups; highlights that we should foster links across the Atlantic to promote the merits of our transatlantic partnership, including by allocating appropriate funding, at different levels and not only focusing on the East and West Coasts;
Amendment 145 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recalls that multilateralism is a guarantor of international stability and a vehicle for the values of the rule of law;
Amendment 170 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes note that other major world powers, such as Russia and China, have robust political and economic strategies, many of which may go against our values, and it is therefore essential to foster the EU-US partnership, to continue to promote our common values, including compliance with international law, and to set up a joint sanctions policpolicy of sanctions against actions jeopardising international security;
Amendment 218 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Reiterates the need for the EU and the US to enhance their cooperation in the field of cybersecurity and defence as well as ICT-security and strengthening of safety efforts to protect critical infrastructure including advancing common standards and stimulating compatibility and interoperability;
Amendment 229 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines the need for a common approach to regulating digital platforms and to increasing their accountability as well as their adherence to copyright and the rights of the rightholders;
Amendment 234 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses the need for proper negotiations regarding standardisation especially in the context of the increasingly rapid developments of technology, especially in the IT area;
Amendment 235 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Emphasises that an important part of strengthening EU-US counter-terrorism efforts includes the protection of critical infrastructure as well as a comprehensive approach to fighting terrorism, also via coordination in global forumregional, multilateral, and global forums as well as to promote the exchange of data relating to terrorist activities;
Amendment 244 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls for the stipulation of a political and societal dialogue balancing anonymity and responsibility in social media in the context of hate speech and fake news phenomena, cybercrime, extremist propaganda, and the infringement of the electoral process in social media;
Amendment 298 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls that the EU is determined to preserve the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran as a key pillar of the international non-proliferation architecture, with relevance also for the North Korean question, and as a crucial element for the security and stability of the region; reiterates the need to address more critically Iranian activities related to ballistic missiles and regional stability that are separate from the JCPOA, in the relevant formats and forums; stresses that transatlantic cooperation in addressing this issue is key; criticises strongly President Trump's decision to leave the JCPOA unilaterally and to putis alarmed by the decision to apply extraterritorial measures ton EU companies which are active in Iran;
Amendment 310 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Regrets the denunciation by the United States of the Iran Agreement and calls on the other States Parties to make every effort to maintain this agreement despite the US withdrawal in order to ensure peace and stability in the region;
Amendment 311 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Calls on the EU to take proportionate but timely and meaningful measures to respond to the US decision to apply extraterritorial measures to EU companies operating in Iran;
Amendment 320 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the opening of new high-level dialogues with North Korea (DPRK) and recalls that these talks should aim at a peaceful resolution of the tensions and thus at promoting regional and global peace, security and stability; underlines that, at the same time, we must maintain pressure on DPRK until it gives up its nuclear ambitions;
Amendment 384 #
2017/2271(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Regrets the US’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement but praises the continued efforts of individuals, companies, cities and states within the US; and calls on the United States to do its duty with regard to the environment by participating in international cooperation to combat global warming;
Amendment 243 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n
Paragraph 1 – point n
(n) welcomes the proposal for a regulation on the import of cultural goods; calls on the Commission to bring in a traceability certificate for artworks and antiques entering the EU market and originating in territories or places controlled by jihadists; calls on the Member States to establish police units that are specialised in dealing with the trafficking of cultural goods, and to ensure coordination of those units across the Member States; calls on the Member States to make it mandatory for companies involved in art dealing to declare all suspicious transactions, imposing penalties – including criminal penalties, where necessary – for the financing of terrorism through negligence on the owners of companies dealing in art and antiques who become involved in the trafficking of such goods;
Amendment 250 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o
Paragraph 1 – point o
(o) calls on the Commission to look into the possibility of reforming the relevant regulations and directives with the aim of ensuring that financial institutions are required to ask for information on the reason why suspicious large-scale transactions are being made, with a view to monitoring the payment of ransoms to, and any other forms of financing of, terrorist organisations;
Amendment 252 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point o a (new)
(oa) calls on Member States to take preventive measures targeting economic operators in areas at risk, with the aim of assisting them in their activities, and to introduce penalties for the payment of ransoms to, or any other forms of financing of, terrorist organisations;
Amendment 256 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point o b (new)
(ob) calls on Member States to combat tax evasion, which is a causal factor in corruption and money laundering, creating potential risks of terrorist financing;
Amendment 272 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point r a (new)
Amendment 276 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point r b (new)
(rb) welcomes the Commission proposal on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders;
Amendment 277 #
2017/2203(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point r c (new)
(rc) emphasises the need for Member States and the Commission to ensure that the applicable data protection rules and the fundamental rights of individuals are respected;
Amendment 2 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas services account for 71% of the GDP and 68% of total employment, the full potential of the Single Market in services still remains unfulfilled;
Amendment 8 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas smart regulation can have positive effects on the European market and deregulation should therefore not be the overall aim;
Amendment 9 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas in many cases, regulation of professional services can be justified, for example when it aims at protecting a number of general interest objectives, it nevertheless needs to be adjusted regularly to take into consideration technological, societal or market developments;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas Directive 2005/36/EC was amended in 2013, with the objective to achieve a proportionate regulatory framework, justified by general interests objectives, introducing in Article 59 a transparency and mutual evaluation exercise for all regulated professions in the Member States, whether they are regulated on the basis of national rules or on the basis of rules harmonised at EU level;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2073(INI)
Da. whereas Member States were required to submit national action plans (NAPs) to the Commission by 18 January 2016 with information on decisions on maintaining or amending professional regulations; whereas there are still 6 Member States that have not submitted their NAPs;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission initiative providing guidance for Member States in the context of the mutual evaluation exercise, including the organisation of in-depth discussions with national authorities;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that it will help Member States to exchange on best practices and better understand their regulatory choices taking into consideration the fact that some Member States foresee a higher level of state intervention in regulated professions than others;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that Member States have faced significant challenges in notifying information about the professions they regulate and the requirements for accessing those professions; calls on Member States and the Commission to significantly improve notification procedures;
Amendment 45 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that not all Member States have submitted a National Action Plan (NAP) as required by Directive 2005/36/EC and that the levels of depth and detail of the NAPs submitted differ; calls on those Member States that have not submitted their NAP yet to proceed without any due delay, as only with complete information from all Member States, the Commission can present a full picture on regulated professions at the EU level;
Amendment 63 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Believes that making regulation on professional services more proportionate and adapted to market reality may result in improved market dynamics, lower prices to consumers and improved performance of sector efficiency;
Amendment 74 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recognises the role of professional regulation in achieving a high level of protection of public interest objectives, such as the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers, the safeguarding of the proper administration of justice, the protection of the environment, and the preservation of national historic and artistic heritage and social, health and cultural policy objectives; acknowledges the margin of appreciation of Member States in determining the ways to achieve this;
Amendment 88 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. States that reform recommendations cannot replace enforcement action by the Commission and calls on the Commission to make use of instruments such as infringement procedures for enforcement;
Amendment 100 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Notes that the restrictiveness indicator only takes into account quantitative data and not qualitative data; states that the restrictiveness indicator can therefore only be seen as an indicative tool and does not permit to draw conclusions on the overall regulatory intensity in the Member States;
Amendment 103 #
2017/2073(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls that the overall analysis of the impact of the regulations in Member States should be subject not only to a quantitative but also to a qualitative assessment encompassing the general interest objectives and the quality of the service provided;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. DStresses the need to develop in parallel a common policy on the security of C-ITS communications in order to protect the transport system against hacking and cyber-attacks; deems it necessary to ensure that consumers’ rights to privacy and to the protection of their personal data be fully upheld; urges the Commission to ensure the correct implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation; calls on car manufacturers to inform consumers adequately about their rightregularly secure the informed consent of consumers by offering them clear, transparent and precise conditions and never to usell in-car data without explicit prior consent;
Amendment 15 #
2017/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that consumers are not compelled to systematically consent to the use of their data when buying a vehicle;
Amendment 23 #
2017/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to deploy C-ITS in a coherent way, striking a balance between installations already in place and infrastructure to be developed;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2067(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that technical interoperability standards do not serve to close off the market but on the contrary enable all operators to deploy C-ITS;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Consumer Financial Services Action Plan and its focus on many of the key issues and initiatives raised in Parliament’s report on the Green Paper on Retail Financial Services and the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), in particular those on cross-border transaction fees, pricing for car rentals, motor insurance and eIDAS, and those aiming to increase transparency in general;
Amendment 14 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that retail financial services have faced substantial legislative inflation in the past five years and that several directives have recently been, or are currently being, transposed or implemented;recalls the importance to focus on the implementation and enforcement of those texts first;
Amendment 20 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that consumers need to be able to choose the best rates and be aware of fees and other associated costs when making transactions or payments abroad, including when using dynamic currency conversion (DCC); asks the Commission to require that the value of a transaction be displayed both in local currency and in the consumer’s home currency at the time of the transaction, and that rates offered by different financial service providers be displayed in a transparent manner, and calls for a neutral reference rate provided by a non- business actoin a transparent manner;
Amendment 30 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the review and cutback of national trade barriers but cautions that this should not result in lower consumer protection standards with further consideration for the level playing field to ensure that consumers are not put at risk and that financial stability is maintained, irrespective of the service provider;
Amendment 38 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its view that online comparison tools can substantially improve comparability between various financial products and help consumers to make an informed decision; asks the Commission taking into consideration that comparison tools must be accurate and of relevance to consumers and must focus not only on the prices of products but also on their quality, bearing in mind that only similar products/services can be compared; asks the Commission to work first with stakeholders to enhance the quality and reliability of financial services comparison websites existing nationally before considering to monitor the rollout and uptake of the stakeholders’' initiative ‘'Key principles for comparison tools’', including voluntary certification schemes, and to evaluate the need for compulsory certification;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5a (new)
Paragraph 5a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission to consider the motion for a European Parliament resolution on FinTech: the influence of technology on the future of the financial sector (2016/2243(INI));and promote consumer protection, security, innovation, fair competition and ensure the principle of "same services, same risks, same rules, same supervision" apply to all companies regardless of their sector or location; stress that FinTech should be understood as finance enabled by or provided via new technologies, affecting the whole financial sector in all its components, from banking to insurance, pension funds, investment advice, payment services and market infrastructures;
Amendment 45 #
2017/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the potential of e-signature and e-identification for easier transactions; underlines the importance of system security to combat potential identity theft and the need for financial non-discriminto take into consideration of persons unable or unwilling to use e- signature. Promotes interoperability of cross-border e-identification in the financial services sector and ensure a level playing field across Member States (and possibly beyond in EEA countries and Switzerland); Stresses that any initiative taken should be technology- neutral;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that measures envisaged for the Digital Single Market strategy, such as improvements to the legal regime for e- commerce and associated consumer protections, tackling geo-blocking and improving cyber security, the fight against illegal material and content on the Internet, the fight against counterfeiting and the protection of intellectual property, are relevant for both the EU’s external trade policy and the single market;
Amendment 15 #
2017/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the efforts made by the WTO to advance its work programme on e- commerce; regrets that positive progress has been slow in this regard; calls on the Commission to be ambitious in framing issues to be addressed in the programme; considers that particular consideration should be given to the increasing number of consumers caught up in customs procedures and possible violations in relation to goods purchased over the internet; believes that a higher de minimis rate should be pursued into defend the principle of neutrality of the cointext of trade negotiationsrnet;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 33 #
2017/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that the exchange of open data must respect the principles of intellectual property protection;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to earmark the budget needed to establish the digital single market and all the measures this will entail;
Amendment 7 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the need to support EU customs policy and underlines that the simplification of customs procedures and effective enforcement of customs systems are essential to combat fraud and transnational crime and drive competition; stresses that an adequate budgetary envelope is necessary with regard to the Union Customs Code (UCC) implementation and the development of interoperable IT systemto guarantee swift implementation of the Union Customs Code (UCC) and ensure that all the interoperable IT systems required are set up in the Member States;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises the role of SMEs and microenterprises in the EU economy and underlines the need to help them embracesupport them with the digital transformation; stresses the need for an appropriate budget allocation for COSME and the Enterprise Europe Network;
Amendment 14 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for the reinforcement of Single Market tools that improve the application of, and increase awareness of, internal market rules; underlines and improve cooperation between the competent national authorities; underlines, in particular, the need for the continuation of financial allocations for SOLVIT, the European Consumer Centres Network and Fin-Net;
Amendment 16 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that Single Market policy shouldmust be a priority as part of the push for better budget spending, and that equivalent savings should be found in other areas to meet spending commitments.
Amendment 30 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the industrial landscape of defence in Europe is characterised by overcapacities, duplications and fragmentation, which consequently encourages expansive export policiesacts as a brake on the competitiveness of the defence industry;
Amendment 31 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the defence industry is of considerable economic importance in Europe, with an overall turnover of EUR 100 billion per annum, and provides employment, directly and indirectly, for 1.4 million workers in Europe;
Amendment 32 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 50 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses, however, that military technology is being exported to non- eligible destinations and end users; is is alarmed at arms races and at the fact that military approaches to solve political conflict and turmoil are increasingly prioritised over diplomatic and other non- violent approaches, such as conflict prevention;
Amendment 82 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that according to the Annual Reports, criterion 4 was invoked 57 times for denials in 2014 and 85 times in 2015; deplores the fact that military technology exported by the Member States is being used in the conflict in Yemen; urges the Member States to comply with the Common Position in a consistent manner on the basis of a thorough long- term risk assessment;
Amendment 88 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that according to the Annual Reports, criterion 7 was invoked 117 times for denials in 2014 and 149 times in 2015; expresses its concern, inter alia, over the alleged diversions of exports of SALW from European countries to Syria, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere; points to the urgent need to base assessments of the risk of diversion on more than just an acceptance of commitments made by a recipient state in an end-user certificate; highlights the need for effective mechanisms of post- shipment controls to ensure that arms are not being re-exported to unauthorised end users; highlights the potential role that the EEAS could play in supporting Member States’ efforts in this area;
Amendment 122 #
2017/2029(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that according to Article 8(2) of the Common Position, all Member States are obliged to report on their arms exports, and calls on all Member States to comply with their obligations; regrets that the number of Member States making full submissions to the EU Annual Report via disaggregated data on licences and actual exports was 21 for the 17th Annual Report and only 20 for the 18th; regrets the fact that the three main arms-exporting Member States, France, Germany and the UK, have not made full submissions;
Amendment 248 #
2017/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Condemns the brutal crackdown by government security forces in Venezuela on peaceful demonstrations by the opposition;
Amendment 255 #
2017/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the signing on December 2016 of the Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and Cuba; stresses the importance of speeding up its implementation, which can have a positive impact on the overall EU- CELAC partnership, and insists on the need for tangible results in the human rights dialogue in particular through the recognition of rights for the opposition, the ratification of the Rome Statute and the end of the domination of political power over the judiciary;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the collaborative economy has experienced rapid growth in recent years, in term of users, transactions and revenues, reshaping how products and services are provided and challenging incumbent firms in many economicwell- established business models in many areas;
Amendment 14 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas these radical changes have a considerable impact on the legal landscape, by blurring established lineborders between consumer and provider, employee and self-employed, and the professional and non-professional provision of services, thus challenging many critical sectors of EU law;
Amendment 37 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that, ifwhen developed in a responsible manner, the collaborative economy may createoffers significant opportunities for citizens and consumers, who benefit from enhanced competition, varied and tailored services and lower prices;
Amendment 49 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Agrees that the collaborative economy could also generates new entrepreneurial opportunities, jobs and growth, and could plays an important role in making the economic system not only more efficient, but also socially and environmentally sustainable;
Amendment 59 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges, at the same time, that the collaborative economy is having a profound impact on long-established business models; underlines the risk of having different legal standards for similar economic actors; is concerned about the risk of reducingstresses the importance of ensuring a high level of consumer protection, of fully upholding workers’ rights and tax complianceof enforcing tax obligations; acknowledges the effects that collaborative businesses are having on the urban environment;
Amendment 74 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the risks of increasing regulatory grey areas, the consequent disregard of existing regulations and the fragmentation of the Single Market; is aware that, if not properly governed, these changes could result in legal uncertainty about applicable rules and constraints in exercising individual rights and protecting consumers;
Amendment 82 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers the development of a dynamic and clear legal environment to be of paramount importance for the collaborative economy to develop and flourish in the EU, while ensuring a level playing field and a high level of consumer protection;
Amendment 88 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises the need to consider the collaborative economy not only as a business model but also as a new form of integration between the economy and society which is able to embed economic relations within social ones and to create new forms of communityallow the development of a new kind of relationship between players;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines the importance of preventing any form of discrimination, so as to grant effective and equal access to collaborative services, especially for disadvantaged people and communities;
Amendment 121 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to encourage non-profit, user-governed, collaborative practices aimed at building sharing, solidarity and cooperation, and a common needs- oriented approach to the collaborative economy, so as to foster the scalability of a social economy and access to open knowledge;
Amendment 128 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned that, whileabout the risk of fragmentation of the single market, and notes that even though a large part of the nascent collaborative economy remains unregulated, significant differences are emerging among Member States due to national, regional and local regulations, as well as case-law, posing a risk of fragmentation of the Single Market;
Amendment 199 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to clarify the collaborative platforms liability regime, which could enhance responsible behaviour and as quickly as possible, in order to promote responsible behaviour, further increase legal security and thereby increase user confidence;
Amendment 211 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to further scrutinise EU legislation in order to reduce uncertainties concerning the rules applicable to collaborative business models, to guarantee greater legal security for all participants in the collaborative economy and to assess whether new or amended rules are desirablenecessary;
Amendment 218 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that any new regulation should leverage platforms’ self-governing capacities; is convinced that collaborative platforms themselves could take an active role in such a new regulatory environment by correcting many asymmetric information and other market failures which have been traditionally addressed through regulation, especially by digital trust-buildmonitoring mechanisms to increase user trust;
Amendment 243 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Points out the crucial importance of clarifying methods by which decisions based on algorithms are taken and of guaranteeing algorithm fairness and transparency; emphasises the need to verify the potential harm to privacy caused by big data, to assess the impact of data on different segments of society and to prevent discrimination; calls on the Commission to lay down effective criteria for developing algorithm accountability principles for information-based collaborative platforms;
Amendment 261 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Encourages the Commission to foster a level playing field for competition among collaborative platforms and traditional enterprises; stresses the importance of identifying and addressing barriers to the emergence and scaling-up of collaborative businesses, especially start- ups; underlines in this context the need for free flow of data, data portability and interoperability, which facilitate switching between platforms and prevent lock-in and consumer entrapment strategies, and which are key factors for open and fair competition and empowering users of collaborative platforms;
Amendment 288 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Agrees that functionally similar tax obligations should be applied to businesses providing comparable services, and is convinced that taxes should be paid where profits are generated;, particularly as concerns the activities of digital platforms.
Amendment 297 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Emphasises that the digital revolution is having a profoundn impact on the labour market and that emerging trends in the collaborative economy are part of a broader tendency;
Amendment 332 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Observes that local governmentauthorities are already active in regulating and promoting the collaborative economy, focusing on collaborative practices both as the subject of their policies and as an organising principle of new forms of collaborative governance;
Amendment 336 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. BelievNotes that there is ample room for manoeuvre for national, regional and local authorities to adopt context-specific regulations in order to address clearly identified public interest objectives with proportionate measures fully in line with EU legislation; calls on the Commission therefore to support the Member States in their policy-making and in adopting rules consistent; calls on the Commission therefore to make sure that these regulations are proportionate and compatible with EU law;
Amendment 355 #
2017/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Points out the importance of adequate competences and skills, in order to enable as many individuals as possible to play an active role in the collaborative economy; is of the opinion that the potential of the collaborative economy will be fully unleashed only through effective policies of social inclusiontraining policies at EU level, starting with confident and critical use of ICT as a key competence for lifelong learning strategies;
Amendment 2 #
2017/2002(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission proposals for actions as regards skills to reduce disparity in education and disadvantages throughout the lifetime of a person, thereby enabling European citizens to develop the high-level skills essential to fight effectively against unemployment and ensure competitiveness and innovation in Europe, but draws attention to a number of administrative ‘bottlenecks’ which are slowing progress in attaining those objectives in relation to mobility, recognition of qualifications and the social dimension;
Amendment 10 #
2017/2002(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that the objective of this strategy is to ensure that everyone can acquire skills adapted to the labour market;
Amendment 13 #
2017/2002(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses the need to improve skill levels and better anticipate the needs of the labour market because it is essential, in order to meet the challenge of skills, that all citizens acquire, at an early age, a wide range of skills adapted to the needs of the labour market in order to promote growth and social cohesion;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2002(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that, with regard to the digital transformation of all sectors of activity, it is essential to invest more in digital skills in order to ensure that the workforce in Europe has the appropriate digital skills;
Amendment 35 #
2017/2002(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to provide significant support for the development of digital abilities in all age groups, irrespective of employment status, as a first step towards the better alignment of labour market shortages and demand; to that end, encourages the Commission to increase the funding under Horizon 2020, fostering inclusive, innovative and reflective European societies to get the elderly, the unemployed and poorly educated, migrants, people in need of care, people living in remote or poorer areas, persons with disabilities, and the homeless to fully participate in society and the labour market;
Amendment 66 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The producer, or the producer's authorised representative, should be responsible for filling in the information in the mutual recognition declaration as the producer knows the goods best. However, the information that the goods are being made available to end users in the relevant Member State may be in the possession of an importer or a distributor, rather than the actual producer. It should therefore be permissible for another economic operator to fill in this information in place of the producer.
Amendment 90 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 establishes a system of accreditation which ensures the mutual acceptance of the level of competence of conformity assessment bodies. The competent authorities of Member States should therefore not refuse test reports and certificates issued by an accredited conformity assessment body on grounds related to the competence of that body. Furthermore, in order to avoid as far as possible the duplication of tests and procedures which have been already carried out in another Member State, Member States should also accepttake due account of test reports and certificates issued by other conformity assessment bodies in accordance with Union law. Competent authorities should be required to take due account of the content of the test reports or certificates presented. _________________ 23 Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).
Amendment 122 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title
Article 4 – title
Amendment 129 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Alternatively, the producer may mandate his authorised representative to draw up the declaration on his behalf provided that the mandate explicitly mentions it.
Amendment 132 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Within the mutual recognition declaration, the specific information related to the marketing of the goods or type of goods may, however, be filled in by any economic operatorthe authorised representative who will bear the responsibility for these information.
Amendment 173 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 9
Article 4 – paragraph 9
9. Where the goods for which the lawful marketing declaration regarding mutual recognition declaration is being supplied are also subject to a Union act requiring an EU declaration of conformity, the mutual recognition declaration may be included as part ofattached to thate EU declaration of conformity.
Amendment 176 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Where a competent authority of a Member State has doubts as regards goods which the economic operator claims are lawfully marketed in another Member State, the competent authority shall contact the relevant economic operator without delay and shall carry out an assessment the goods. This assessment shall establish whether the goods are lawfully marketed in another Member State and if so whether those goods ensure at least equivalent level of protection of the public interests protected by the national law of the member state of destination.
Amendment 190 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) the legitimate public interest ground on which the decision is justifiednational rule is based on;
Amendment 193 #
2017/0354(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point e
(e) the evidence demonstrating that the decision is appropriate for the purpose of achieving the objective pursued and that it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective, or if appropriate, the reminder of the demonstration of the proportionality of the national rule on which the administrative decision is based.
Amendment 205 #
2017/0354(COD)
(a) under normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, the goods pose a sare or could be dangerious risk, including onerisks where the effects are not immediate, which requires rapid intervention by the competent authority;
Amendment 173 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation has the objective to improve the functioning of the single market of goods by strengthening market surveillance of goods covered by legislative acts of the Union harmonising the conditions of their marketing, in order to ensure that they meet the requirements guaranteeing a high level protection of public interests. To that end, this Regulation lays down rules and procedures for the provision of compliance information about certain products that are the subject of Union acts harmonising the conditions for the marketing of those products. It establishes a framework for cooperation with economic operators in relation to such products.
Amendment 204 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) a natural or legal person established in the Union who has a written mandate from the manufacturer designating him as a person responsible for performing the tasks listed in paragraph 3 and requiring him to perform those tasks on the manufacturer's behalfthe product and considered as jointly responsible with the manufacturer of the non-compliant products;
Amendment 209 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 211 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 221 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Manufacturers, or if not the importer, shall make the identity and contacts details of the person responsible for compliance information with respect to the product publicly available either on their website or, in the absence of a website, by any other means that allows the information to be readily accessed by the general public in the Union free of charge.
Amendment 235 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5
Article 5
Amendment 251 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 296 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the taking by them of appropriate and proportionate temporary measures and the taking by economic operators of appropriate and proportionate corrective action in relation to compliance with that legislation and this Regulation.
Amendment 308 #
2017/0353(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the economic operator's past record of non-compliance, including the risk profiling and the status of an authorised economic operator;
Amendment 52 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The increasing popularity of cycling across the Union has implications for overall mobility and tourism. An increase in the use of both railways and cycling in the modal split reduces the environmental impact of transport. Therefore, railway undertakings should facilitate the combination of cycling and train journeys as much as possible, in particular by allowing the carriage of bicycles on board trainsall types of train, provided that those bicycles are placed in the designated area.
Amendment 60 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Railway undertakings should facilitate the transfer of rail passengers from one operator to another by the provision of through-tickets, whenever possible.
Amendment 62 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In the light of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and in order to give persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility opportunities for rail travel comparable to those of other citizens, rules for non-discrimination and assistance during their journey should be established. Persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility, whether caused by disability, age or any other factor, have the same right as all other citizens to free movement and to non-discrimination. Inter alia, special attention should be given to the provision of information to persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility concerning the accessibility of rail services, access conditions of rolling stock and the facilities on board. In order to provide passengers with sensory impairment with the best information on delays, visual and audible systems should be used, as appropriate. Persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility should be enabled to buy tickets on board a train without extra charges when there is no other way to purchase tickets in advance. Staff should be adequately trained to respond to the needs of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility, notably when providing assistance. To ensure equal travel conditions, such persons should be provided with free assistance at stations and on board at all times when trains operate and not only at certain times of the day.
Amendment 76 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) However, a railway undertaking should not be obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the delay wais caused by severe weather conditions or major natural disasters endangering the safe operation of the service. Any such event should have the character of an exceptional natural catastrophe, as distinct from normal seasonal weather conditions, such as autumnal storms or regularly occurring urban flooding caused by tidmeasures imposed by the public authorities to suspend or restrict traffic for reasons of public safety, or by criminal or accidental acts by third parties, or snowmeltby severe weather conditions. Railway undertakings should prove that they could neither foresee nor prevent the delay even if all reasonable measures had been taken.
Amendment 144 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Passengers shall be entitled to take bicycles on board the train, where appropriate for a reasonable fee or as registered luggage. They shall keep their non-disassembled bicycles under supervision during the journey and ensure that no inconvenience or damage is caused to other passengers, mobility equipment, luggage or rail operations. The carriage of bicycles may be refused or restricted for safety or operational reasons, provided that railway undertakings, ticket vendors, tour operators and, where appropriate, station managers inform passengers of the conditions for such a refusal or restriction in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 454/2011. As from 2024, all railway rolling stock shall have designated spaces for storing bicycles.
Amendment 160 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Railway undertakings and, where possible, ticket vendors shall provide the passenger during the journey, including at connecting stations, with at least the information set out in Annex II, Part II.
Amendment 163 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided by railway undertakings to passengers and ticket vendors in the most appropriate format including by using up-to-date communication technologies . Particular attention shall be paid to ensuring that this information is accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with the accessibility requirements laid down in Directive XXX and Regulation 454/2011 .
Amendment 194 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. Where there is no ticket office or accessible ticketing machine in the station of departure, or any other means of buying tickets in advance, persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility shall be permitted to buy tickets on board the train at no extra cost.
Amendment 247 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 8
Article 17 – paragraph 8
8. A railway undertaking shall not be obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the delay was caused by severe weather conditions or major natural disasters endangering the safe operation of the service and could not have been foreseen or prevented even if all reasonable measures had been taken: – interruptions or traffic restrictions imposed by the emergency services or public authorities for public security reasons, including the fight against terrorism; – accidents or criminal acts committed by a third party; – severe weather conditions.
Amendment 274 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Railway undertakings and station managers shall, with the active involvement of representative organisations of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility, establish, or shall have in place, non- discriminatory access rules for the transport of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility including their personal assistants. The rules shall allow the passenger to be accompanied by an assistance dog free of charge, in accordance with any relevant national rules.
Amendment 288 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. AWhere possible, assistance shall be available in stations during all times when rail services operate.
Amendment 290 #
2017/0237(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. AWhere possible, assistance shall be available oin board traistations during all times when rail services operate.
Amendment 76 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Member States may neither restrict nor prohibit the free movement of personal data within the Union for reasons connected with the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data. This Regulation establishes the same principle of free movement within the Union for non-personal data except when a restriction or a prohibition would be justified for security reasons. relates to the public archives, or if they would be justified for reasons of public security or public health. Where personal and non-personal data are inextricably linked, Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 applies.
Amendment 87 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Data localisation requirements represent a clear barrier to the free provision of data storage or other processing services across the Union and to the internal market. As such, they should be banned unless they relate to the public archives or are justified based on the grounds of public security, public order or public health, as defined by Union law, in particular Article 52 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and satisfy the principle of proportionality enshrined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In order to give effect to the principle of free flow of non-personal data across borders, to ensure the swift removal of existing data localisation requirements and to enable for operational reasons storage or other processing of data in multiple locations across the EU, and since this Regulation provides for measures to ensure data availability for regulatory control purposes, Member States shouldall not be able to invoke justifications other than public securityarchives, public security, public order or public health, in which case they can require that data be kept within their territory so that they can guarantee the provision of essential public services.
Amendment 106 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Data localisation requirements are frequently underpinned by a lack of trust in cross-border data storage or other processing, deriving from the fear of different security levels in each Member State and the presumed unavailability of data for the purposes of the competent authorities of the Member States, such as for inspection and audit for regulatory or supervisory control. Therefore, this Regulatione security of data hosting systems should be stepped up in all Member States, and it should be clearly established that ithis Regulation does not affect the powers of competent authorities to request and receive access to data in accordance with Union or national law, and that access to data by competent authorities may not be refused on the basis that the data is stored or otherwise processed in another Member State.
Amendment 111 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) This regulation should not make it possible for users to evade national laws. The Member States should be free to impose proportionate, effective and deterrent penalties against users who prevent the national authorities from accessing data stored in another Member State. If a physical or moral person does not comply with the obligation to provide these data, the relevant national authorities can require that the data be returned to their national territory.
Amendment 164 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Location of data for storage or other processing within the Union shall not be restricted to the territory of a specific Member State, and storage or other processing in any other Member State shall not be prohibited or restricted, unless it relates to the public archives or is justified on grounds of public security, public order or public health.
Amendment 182 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Member States should be free to impose proportionate, effective and deterrent penalties against users who prevent the national authorities from accessing data stored in another Member State.
Amendment 183 #
2017/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. If a physical or moral person does not comply with the obligation to provide these data, the relevant national authorities can require that the data be returned to their national territory.
Amendment 54 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The use of network and information systems by citizens, businesses and governments across the Union is now pervasive. Digitisation and connectivity are becoming core features in an ever growing number of products and services and with the advent of the Internet of Things (IoT) millions, if not billions, of connected digital devices are expected to be deployed across the EU during the next decade. While an increasing number of devices are connected to the Internet, security and resilience are not sufficiently built in by design, leading to insufficient cybersecurity. In this context, the limited use of certification leads to insufficient information for organisational and individual users about the cybersecurity features of ICT products and services, undermining the trust in digital solutions that is essential for establishment of the digital single market.
Amendment 57 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Increased digitisation and connectivity lead to considerably increased cybersecurity risks, thus making society at large more vulnerable to cyber threats and exacerbating dangers faced by individuals, including vulnerable persons such as children. In order to mitigate this risk to society, all necessary actions need to be taken to improve cybersecurity in the EU to better protect network and information systems, telecommunication networks, digital products, services and devices used by citizens, governments and business – from SMEs to operators of critical infrastructures – from cyber threats.
Amendment 61 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In light of the increased cybersecurity challenges faced by the Union, there is a need for a comprehensive set of measures that would build on previous Union action and foster mutually reinforcing objectives. These include the need to further increase capabilities and preparedness of Member States and businesses, as well as to improve cooperation and coordination across Member States and EU institutions, agencies and bodies. Furthermore, given the borderless nature of cyber threats, there is a need to increase capabilities at Union level that could complement the action of Member States, in particular in the case of large scale cross-border cyber incidents and crises. Additional efforts are also needed to increase awareness of citizens and businesses on cybersecurity issues. Moreover, the trust in the digital single market should be further improved by offering transparent information on the level of security of ICT products and services. This can be facilitated by standardised EU- wide certification providing common cybersecurity requirements and evaluation criteria across national markets and sectors.
Amendment 64 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Given the increasing cybersecurity threats and challenges the Union is facing, the financial and human resources allocated to the Agency should be increased to reflect its enhanced role and tasks, and its critical position in the ecosystem of organisations defending the European digital ecosystem.
Amendment 86 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) CEuropean cybersecurity certification plays an importantessential role in increasing trust and security in ICT products and services. The digital single market, and particularly the data economy and the Internet of Things, can only thrive if there is general public trust that such products and services provide a certainhigh level of cybersecurity assurance. Connected and automated cars, electronic medical devices, industrial automation control systems or smart grids are only some examples of sectors in which certification is already widely used or is likely to be used in the near future. The sectors regulated by the NIS Directive are also sectors in which cybersecurity certification is critical.
Amendment 92 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) In view of the above, it is necessary to adopt a common approach and establish a European cybersecurity certification framework laying down the main horizontal requirements for European cybersecurity certification schemes to be developed and allowing certificates for ICT products and services to be recognised and used in all Member States. The European framework should have a twofold purpose: on the one hand, it should help increase trust in ICT products and services that have been certified according to such schemes. On the other hand, it should avoid the multiplication of conflicting or overlapping national cybersecurity certifications and thus reduce costs for undertakings operating in the digital single market. The schemes should be non-discriminatory and based on international and / or Union standards, unless those standards are ineffective or inappropriate to fulfil the EU’s legitimate objectives in that regard.
Amendment 93 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52 a (new)
Recital 52 a (new)
(52a) The European cybersecurity certification framework should be established in a uniform manner in all Member States in order to prevent ‘certification shopping’ based on differences in costs or levels of stringency between Member States.
Amendment 106 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) The Commission should be empowered to request ENISA to prepare candidate schemes for specific ICT products or services. The Commission, based on the candidate scheme proposed by ENISA, should then be empowered to adopt the European cybersecurity certification scheme by means of implementing acts. Taking account of the general purpose and security objectives identified in this Regulation, European cybersecurity certification schemes adopted by the Commission should specify a minimum set of elements concerning the subject-matter, the scope and functioning of the individual scheme. These should include among others the scope and object of the cybersecurity certification, including the categories of ICT products and services covered, the detailed specification of the cybersecurity requirements, for example by reference to standards or technical specifications, the specific evaluation criteria and evaluation methods, as well as the intended level of assurance: basic, substantial and/or high. The security requirements should depend on the risk resulting from the ICT product or service.
Amendment 116 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Recourse to European cybersecurity certification should remain voluntary, except for ICT products and services with high security requirements and unless otherwise provided in Union or national legislation. However, with a view to achieving the objectives of this Regulation and avoiding the fragmentation of the internal market, national cybersecurity certification schemes or procedures for the ICT products and services covered by a European cybersecurity certification scheme should cease to produce effects from the date established by the Commission by means of the implementing act. Moreover, Member States should not introduce new national certification schemes providing cybersecurity certification schemes for ICT products and services already covered by an existing European cybersecurity certification scheme.
Amendment 121 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Once a European cybersecurity certification scheme is adopted, manufacturers of ICT products or providers of ICT services should be able to submit an application for certification of their products or services to a conformity assessment body of their choice. Products and services with high security requirements shall be subject to mandatory third-party certification. For all other ICT products and services, third- party certification shall be voluntary, unless otherwise specified in Union law. Conformity assessment bodies should be accredited by an accreditation body if they comply with certain specified requirements set out in this Regulation. Accreditation should be issued for a maximum of five years and may be renewed on the same conditions provided that the conformity assessment body meets the requirements. Accreditation bodies should revoke an accreditation of a conformity assessment body where the conditions for the accreditation are not, or are no longer, met or where actions taken by a conformity assessment body infringe this Regulation.
Amendment 155 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7
Article 4 – paragraph 7
7. The Agency shall promote a high level of information for, and awareness of, citizens and businesses on issues related to the cybersecurity.
Amendment 222 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
A European cybersecurity certification scheme shall be established in order to boost the level of security within the digital single market and adopt a harmonised approach, at EU level, to European certification, with a view to ensuring that ICT products, services and systems are resistant to cyber-attacks. It shall attest that the ICT products and services that have been certified in accordance with such scheme comply with specified common requirements as regards their ability to resist at a given level of assurance, actions that aim to compromise the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of stored or transmitted or processed data or the functions or services offered by, or accessible via, those products, processes, services and systems.
Amendment 240 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
2. When preparing candidate schemes referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, ENISA shall take into account already existing national and international standards. ENISA shall consult all relevant stakeholders and closely cooperate with the Group. The Group shall provide ENISA with the assistance and expert advice required by ENISA in relation to the preparation of the candidate scheme, including by providing opinions where necessary.
Amendment 256 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. ENISA requires a branch office in Brussels, to monitor the work on EU certification closely and to work in close contact with Commission and Parliament to establish European common standards on cybersecurity.
Amendment 261 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A European cybersecurity certification scheme shall be so designed to take into account, as applicable, the following security objectives:
Amendment 277 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – title
Article 46 – title
Amendment 281 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. A European cybersecurity certification scheme may specify one or more of the following assurance levelsecurity requirements: basic, substantial and/or high, for ICT products and services issued under that scheme. The security requirements shall be defined following a risk-based approach and taking into account the intended use of the ICT product or service.
Amendment 292 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The assurance levelsecurity requirements basic, substantial and high shall meet the following criteria respectively:
Amendment 298 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) assurance levelsecurity requirement basic shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a limited degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease the risk of cybersecurity incidents;
Amendment 303 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) assurance levelsecurity requirement substantial shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a substantial degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease substantially the risk of cybersecurity incidents;
Amendment 308 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) assurance levelsecurity requirement high shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a higher degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service than certificates with the assurance levelsecurity requirement substantial, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to prevent cybersecurity incidents. This shall especially apply to critical infrastructure products and services.
Amendment 312 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. As regards assurance levels substantial and high, the ethical hacking method may be used by national conformity control bodies.
Amendment 328 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) where applicable, one or more assurance levelsecurity requirements;
Amendment 338 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) conditions for granting, maintaining, continuing, renewing, extending and reducing the scope of certification;
Amendment 352 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) identification of national or international cybersecurity certification schemes covering the same type or categories of ICT products and services;
Amendment 357 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) the maximum period of validity of certificates.
Amendment 370 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The certification shall be mandatory for those products and services that fall under a high security requirement. For all other ICT products and services, certification shall be voluntary, unless otherwise specified in Union law.
Amendment 379 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 48 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. By the way of derogation from paragraph 3, in duly justified cases a particular European cybersecurity certification scheme may provide that a European cybersecurity certificate resulting from that scheme can only be issued by a public body. Such public body shall be one of the following:
Amendment 385 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Article 48 – paragraph 6
6. Certificates shall be issued for a maximum period of three yearsime as defined by the European cybersecurity certification scheme and may be renewed, under the same conditions, provided that the relevant requirements continue to be met.
Amendment 388 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Amendment 389 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 7 b (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. That expert group shall have at least the following powers: - to ask for any information from national conformity assessment bodies and holders of European cybersecurity certificates; - to check compliance with the requirements laid down in Title III of this Regulation; - to take appropriate measures to ensure that national conformity assessment bodies and holders of European cybersecurity certificates comply with the European cybersecurity certification system; - to access the premises of national conformity assessment bodies and holders of European certificates in accordance with the Member States’ law and EU law; - to revoke certificates that do not comply with this Regulation or a European cybersecurity certification scheme; - to revoke the accreditation of national conformity assessment bodies which do not comply with this Regulation.
Amendment 419 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 7 – point c a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 7 – point c a (new)
(ca) - to revoke the accreditation of the national conformity assessment bodies referred to in Article 51 which do not comply with this Regulation;
Amendment 421 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 7 – point f a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 7 – point f a (new)
(fa) to suggest experts who could be part of the independent expert group referred to in Article 48(8).
Amendment 431 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. For each European cybersecurity certification scheme adopted pursuant Article 44, national certification supervisory authorities shall notify the Commission of the accredited conformity assessment bodies accredited to issue certificates at specified assurance levelsecurity requirements as referred to in Article 46 and, without undue delay, of any subsequent changes thereto.
Amendment 438 #
2017/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
(fa) to decide on the composition of the independent-expert group referred to in Article 48(8) of this Regulation.
Amendment 53 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In order to contribute to the enhancement of the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union's defence industry and to consolidate the Union’s strategic autonomy and technological non-dependence in matters of defence, a European Defence Industrial Development Programme (hereinafter referred to as the Programme) should be established. The Programme should aim at enhancing the competitiveness and performance of the Union's defence industry inter alia cyber defence by supporting the cooperation between undertakings in the development phase of defence products and technologies. The development phase, which follows the research and technology phase, entails significant risks and costs that hamper the further exploitation of the results of research and adversely impact the competitiveness of the Union's defence industry. By supporting the development phase, the Programme would contribute to a better exploitation of the results of defence research and it would help to cover the gap between research and production as well as to promote all forms of innovation. The Programme should complement activities carried out in accordance with Article 182 TFEU and it does not cover the production of defence products and technologies.
Amendment 82 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) As the objective of the Programme is to support the competitiveness of the Union defence industry by de-risking the development phase of cooperative projects, actions related to the development of a defence product or technology, namely definition of common technical specifications, design, prototyping, testing, qualification, certification as well feasibility studies and other supporting measures, should be eligible to benefit from it. This will also apply to the upgrade of existing defence products and technologies developed in the Union and held by Member States as well as more generally technologies recognised as strategic by the European Defence Agency.
Amendment 100 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) As the Programme aims at enhancing the competitiveness of the Union's defence industry and consolidating the Union’s strategic defence autonomy quite independently of third countries, only entities established in the Union and effectively controlled by Member States or their nationals should be eligible for support. Additionally, in order to ensure the protection of essential defence and security interests of the Union and its Member States, the infrastructure, facilities, assets and resource and assets used by the beneficiaries and subcontractors in actions funded under the Programme, shall not be located on the territory of non-Member States.
Amendment 133 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The Commission should establish a multiannual work programme in line with the objectives of the Programme. The Commission should be assisted in the establishment of the work programme by a committee of Member States (hereinafter referred to as Programme Committee). In light of the Union policy on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) as key to ensuring economic growth, innovation, job creation, and social integration in the Union and the fact that the supported actions will typically require trans-national collaboration, it is of importance that the work programme will reflect and enable such cross-border participation of SMEs and that therefore a proportiont least 10% of the overall budget will benefit such action.
Amendment 148 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to foster the competitiveness and innovation capacity of the Union defence industry by supporting actionsand to consolidate the Union’s strategic autonomy in matters of defence and security by supporting actions carried out on the territory of the Union in their development phase, as defined in Article 6;
Amendment 173 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Union's financial assistance shall be implemented by the Commission as provided for by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 directly or indirectly by entrusting budget implementation tasks to the entities listed in, Article 58(1) (ca) and (b) of that Regulation.
Amendment 175 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. In case a project manager is appointed by Member States, the Commission shallMember States shall appoint a project manager. The Commission shall consult the project manager on the progress achieved in connection with the project and shall sign it off before executeing the payment to the eligible beneficiaries after informing the project manager.
Amendment 178 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Programme shall provide support for actions by beneficiaries in the development phase covering both new and the upgrade of existing products and technologies, which must themselves meet the same independence criteria as those laid down in Article 7 of this Regulation, as well as those listed in its recital 13, in relation to:
Amendment 194 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The action shall be undertaken in a cooperation of at least three undertakings which are established in at least two different Member States. The undertakings which are beneficiaries shall not effectively be controlled, directly or indirectly, by the same entity or shall not control each other.
Amendment 195 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. For the purposes of paragraph 2, 'effective control' means a relationship constituted by rights, contracts or any other means which, either separately or jointly and having regard to the considerations of fact or law involved, confer the possibility of directly or indirectly exercising a decisive influence on an undertaking, in particular by:
Amendment 210 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Beneficiaries and their subcontractors shall be undertakings established in the Union, in which Member States and/or nationals of Member States own more than 50% of the undertaking and effectively control it within the meaning of Article 6(3), whether directly or indirectly through one or more intermediate undertakings. In addition, all infrastructure, facilities, assets and resource and assets used by the participants, including subcontractors and other third parties, in actions funded under the Programme shall not be located on the territory of non-Member Statesthe Union during the entire duration of the action.
Amendment 225 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) excellence and industrial performance;
Amendment 244 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall not own the products or technologies resulting from the action nor shall it have any IPR claim pertaining to the action. Technological products developed or manufactured with the help of this European fund may not be the subject of a transfer of technology or any intellectual property right for the benefit of a third State outside the European Union, or for the benefit of any economic actor that is not controlled by a Member State.
Amendment 245 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
The CommissUnion shall not own the products or technologies resulting from the action nor shall it have any IPR claim pertaining to the actionfunding under the European defence fund nor shall it have any IPR claim, including licensing or patenting rights, pertaining to the action. These products and technologies shall not be subject to any control or restriction by a third country.
Amendment 82 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Where detailed, comparable, up-to- date, and often confidential market information could only be obtained from market players in a timely manner, it appears therefore appropriate, as a last resort, to empower the Commission, within the limits and under the conditions laid down in this Regulation, to request undertakings and associations of undertakings to directly provide it, in a timely manner, with comprehensive, accurate and reliable quantitative and qualitative market information where other sources of information have proven unavailable, insufficient or inadequate. To this effect, the Commission should first adopt a decision stating why other means to obtain the necessary information have proven ineffective. It is understood that the notion of undertaking has the same meaning as in other areas of EU law, in particular competition law. It includes all undertakings regardless of the source of their financing, whether they are governed by public law or private law, and whether or not they are active as a matter of course on the market.
Amendment 93 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) For this investigative tool to be effective, the information sought should relate to the application of relevant Union law. This may consist, for example, of factual market data, including cost structure, pricing policy, products or services characteristics or geographical distribution of customers and suppliers. It may also consist of undertakings’ or associations of undertakings’ fact-based analysis of the functioning of the internal market, such as in relation to perceived regulatory and entry barriers or to costs of cross-border operations. In order to minimise costs of replying to requests for information, such requests should only cover information that is likely to be at the disposal of the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned, but that does not concern business secrets.
Amendment 105 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) When issuing requests for information to undertakings and associations of undertakings, the Commission is required to undertake a careful selection of addressees of the requests, so that requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing sufficiently relevant information, notably larger undertakings in the relevant Member States. These requests for information are aimed at solving a presumed, i.e. based on the available information, serious problem with the application of Union law in the areas of the internal market, agriculture and fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resources), transport, environment and energy. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. Accordingly, sanctions provided for in the instrument are designed to address exclusively two instances. They only cover an intentional or through gross negligence lack of a response to a request for information and an intentionally or through gross negligence incorrect, incomplete, or misleading reply. The collected information, if relevant, could also be used to provide insight into situations where undertakings find it very difficult to comply with the legislation, with a view to improving the proper application of the internal market rules. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro-undertakings, which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requests for information to this category of undertakings. When issuing requests for information to small and medium-sized undertakings, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality. While SMEs are unlikely to operate at a larger scale enabling them to significantly affect market outcomes, the information gathered from SMEs could prove valuable in informing the Commission on serious difficulties in establishment and functioning of the internal market. Information readily available to SMEs might be of an anecdotal nature but it could still alert the Commission about serious single market difficulties SMEs might suffer from. SMEs would normally not and should not incur any significant additional costs of data gathering in response to this tool. Given their relatively weaker bargaining position in value chains, SMEs might be more forthcoming with information when granted a procedure duly respecting confidentiality and anonymity. Resolving a serious difficulty in the single market establishment and functioning could in particular benefit SMEs as it is often the small innovative firms which face the greatest barriers when trying to start up and scale up across the single market. For reasons of consistency and legal certainty, the definitions of ‘micro-undertaking’, ‘small undertaking’ and, ‘medium-sized undertaking’, ‘large undertaking’ and ‘large group’ of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29 should apply. __________________ 29 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p.19).
Amendment 124 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The Court of Justice should, in accordance with Article 261 TFEU, have unlimited jurisdiction in respect of decisions by which the Commission imposes fines or periodic penalty payments under this Regulation, which means that it may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed by the Commission.
Amendment 125 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) IConversely, and in the interests of transparency and legal certainty, i, the European Commission is under an obligation to justify its request not to apply the provisions of this Regulation when its attention has been drawn to serious or repeated facts which jeopardise the proper functioning of the internal market. It is appropriate to give public information on Commission decisions. The Commission, when publishing and handling such information, should respect the rules on professional secrecy, including the protection of all confidential information, in accordance with Article 339 TFEU.
Amendment 131 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The disclosure of information about an undertaking’s business activity could result in a serious harm to the same undertaking. Therefore, the Commission should take due account of the legitimate interests of undertakings, in particular the protection of their business secrets. To ensure that business secrets and other confidential information provided to the Commission are treated in compliance with Article 339 TFEU, any undertaking or association of undertakings submitting information should clearly identify which information it considers to be confidential and why it is confidential. The Commission should not be able to disclose confidential information provided by such respondents to the Member State concerned by the request unless it has previously obtained their agreement to disclose that information to that effect. The respondent concerned should be required to provide the Commission with a separate non-confidential version of the information that could be disclosed to the relevant Member State. In cases where information marked as confidential does not seem to be covered by obligations of professional secrecy, it is appropriate to have a mechanism in place according to which the Commission can decide the extent to which such information can be disclosed. Any such decision to reject a claim that a piece of information is confidential should indicate a period at the end of which it may be disclosed, so that the respondent can make use of any judicial protection available to it, including any interim measure. The rights of the respondent should be safeguarded by giving it the opportunity to make known its views before any decision to reject the confidentiality claim is taken. As regards the protection of business secrets, undertakings and associations of undertakings may refuse to provide the Commission with strictly confidential information in order to protect their legitimate interests. In such cases, the burden of proof rests with the Commission, which must show that the information requested does not relate to business secrets.
Amendment 149 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This Regulation shall be applied in such a way as to maintain the proportionality of the administrative and financial burdens imposed on undertakings or associations of undertakings.
Amendment 175 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) ‘large undertaking’ means an undertaking as defined in Article 3(4) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 176 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
(3b) ‘large group’ means a group as defined in Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 189 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Where a serious difficulty with the application of Union law risks undermining the attainment of an important Union policy objectiveproper functioning of the internal market as referred to in Article 26(2) TFEU, the Commission may request information from undertakings or associations of undertakings, as provided for in Chapter II, for the purpose of addressing the above-mentioned serious difficulty.
Amendment 192 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Where contracting authorities as defined in Directive 2014/24/EU or Members of a national Parliamentary Assembly or the European Parliament draw the Commission’s attention to facts which seriously or repeatedly jeopardise the proper functioning of the internal market as referred to in Article 26(2) TFEU, it may request information in relation to the internal market and related fields.
Amendment 193 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall only use the power to request information from undertakings and associations of undertakings provided for in Article 4 where theas a measure of last resort, after having consulted the channels to which it already has access to obtain information, available to the Commissionnd after having established that the information at its disposal, required for the purpose referred to in Article 4, is not sufficient or adequate and cannot be obtained in a timely manner due to the following reasons:
Amendment 208 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) a summaryprecise description of the alleged serious difficulty of a cross-border dimension with the application of Union law and why such serious difficulty risks undermining the attainment of an important Union policy objectivefunctioning of the internal market as referred to in Article 26(2) TFEU;
Amendment 209 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b
(b) a summaryprecise description of the information to be requested;
Amendment 210 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) a duly justified and reasoned explanation of why such information is necessary for the purposes referred to in Article 4;
Amendment 211 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point d
(d) a duly justified and reasoned explanation of why other means to obtain such information have proven insufficient or inadequate or cannot be obtained in a timely manner to date. The explanation shall contain a list of institutions, organisations, instruments and sources of information consulted to which the Commission already has access;
Amendment 219 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The undertakings or association of undertakings concerned by the request as referred to in Article 4 are obliged to provide only information that is at their disposal, with the exception of information containing business secrets.
Amendment 241 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
The Commission shall not issue requests for information in accordance with this Regulation to micro-undertakings, unless they are part of aonly to large groups of undertakings which qualifies at least as small group as defined in Article 6(53(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 248 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The simple request referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis and its purpose, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. On no account may the time limit be less than 3 months, unless there is a compelling and duly substantiated need. It shall also refer to the fineperiodic penalty payments provided for in Article 9(12) for deliberately supplying incorrectmplete or misleading information.
Amendment 266 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis, the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. It shall also indicate the fines provided for in Article 9(1) andOn no account may the time limit be less than 3 months, unless there is a compelling and duly substantiated need. It shall also indicate the periodic penalties payments provided for in Article 9(2), as appropriate.
Amendment 281 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6a The request for information from undertakings and associations of undertakings must not generate a disproportionate administrative or financial burden.
Amendment 310 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Amendment 321 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Amendment 325 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Amendment 326 #
Amendment 331 #
Amendment 332 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Amendment 339 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 342 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The periodic penalty payments shall not exceed 53 % of the average daily turnover of the undertaking or association concerned in the preceding business year for each working day of delay, calculated from the date established in the decision, until it supplies or completes the information requested or required by the Commission.
Amendment 346 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Where the undertaking or association of undertakings provides no or incomplete information, the Commission shall prior the imposition of a fine or penalty, set a final deadline of two weeks to receive the missing information.
Amendment 348 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall take into account the absolute necessity leading to the imposition of the periodic penalty payment, and the nature, gravity and duration of the breach of Article 6(1), as well as the principle of proportionality in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings when fixing the amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment.
Amendment 355 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6
Article 9 – paragraph 6
6. Before adopting any decision in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, the Commission shall give the concerned undertakings or associations of undertakings the opportunity of making known their views.
Amendment 359 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
Limitation period for the imposition of fines and periodic penalty payments
Amendment 362 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Any action taken by the Commission for the purpose of investigating or pursuing a possible breach of Article 6(1) shall interrupt the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments, with effect from the date on which the action is notified to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned.
Amendment 364 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. After each interruption, the limitation period shall start running afresh. However, the limitation period shall expire at the latest on the day on which a period of six years has elapsed without the Commission having imposed a fine or a periodic penalty payment. That period shall be extended by the time during which the limitation period is suspended in accordance with paragraph 5.
Amendment 365 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall be suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 369 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Limitation period for the enforcement of fines and periodic penalty payments
Amendment 371 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) by notification of a decision modifying the original amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment or refusing an application for modification;
Amendment 372 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) by any action of a Member State, acting at the request of the Commission, or of the Commission, intended to enforce payment of the fine or periodic penalty payment.
Amendment 378 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
The decisions taken pursuant to Article 9(1) and (2) shall be addressed to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. The Commission shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay.
Amendment 383 #
2017/0087(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 261 TFEU to review fines or periodic penalty payments imposed by the Commission. It may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed.
Amendment 145 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) This Regulation should build on the eIDAS Regulation26, which lays down conditions under which Member States recognise certain means of electronic identification for natural and legal persons falling under a notified electronic identification scheme of another Member State. From the date of application of that rRegulation it should be possible for users to use their electronic identification and authentication means in order to operate on a cross-border basis and interact electronically with competent authorities. This Regulation should guarantee technological neutrality as regards electronic identification and authentication systems. _________________ 26 Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC (OJ L 257, 28.8.2014, p. 73–114).
Amendment 150 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In some instances, the user may be required to submit evidence to prove facts that cannot be established by online means, such as medical certificates and proof of the roadworthiness of motor vehicles. As long as the evidence to prove such facts can be submitted in electronic format, this should not constitute an exception to the principle that a procedure should be offered fully online. In other instances, given the current state of technical development, it may still be necessary for users of an online procedure to appear in person before a competent authority as part of the online procedure, in particularsuch as in the case of requesting or renewing passports or identity cards containing biometric data. Any such exception should not be discriminatory and should be limited to situations where no digital technology exists to achieve the purpose of completing the procedure. online and where it is absolutely necessary for the Member States to implement strict, indispensable, objectively justified and proportionate measures. This may, for example, be in the interest of public policy, general security, public health and the fight against fraud. In such exceptional cases, Member States should limit the physical presence of the user to what is strictly necessary. Any such exceptions should be notified to the Commission and should be discussed regularly and carefully reviewed for an improvement in the situation in the gateway coordination group together with good national practices and technical developments that would facilitate the further digitalisation of procedures.
Amendment 157 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Furthermore, the Member States and the Commission may decide to add other national assistance or problem solving services, provided by competent authorities or by private andor semi-private entities or public bodies, such as chambers of commerce, including bilateral chambers of commerce, or non- governmental assistance services for citizens, under the conditions set out in this Regulation. In principle, competent authorities should be responsible for assisting citizens and businesses with any queries they have in relation to applicable rules and procedures that cannot be fully addressed by online services. However, in very specialised areas and where the service provided by private or semi-private bodies meets the users’ needs, Member States can propose to the Commission to include such services in the gateway, provided that they meet all conditions set out in the Regulation and do not duplicate the assistance or problem solving services already included.
Amendment 182 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
Recital 40 a (new)
(40a) The system set up should secure user data against hacking and cyber- attacks.
Amendment 184 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and should be implemented in accordance with those rights and principles, including where data protection and the protection of privacy are concerned.
Amendment 209 #
2017/0086(COD)
1. Member States shall ensure that where a procedure, referred to in Article 2(2)(a) and (b), established at national level, can be accessed and completed online by users of that Member State, it can be also accessed and completed by users of other Member States in a non- discriminatory way.
Amendment 218 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Where, in exceptional cases such as in the interest of public policy, general security, public health and the fight against fraud, the objective pursued by a given procedure, referred to in paragraph 2, cannot be fully achieved withoutonline, Member States may requiringe the user to appear in person before the competent authority at some stage of the procedurefor a procedural step. In these exceptional cases, Member States shall limit such physical presence to what is strictly necessary and objectively justified and shall ensure that other steps of the procedure can be completed fully online. In implementing these requirements which require physical presence, Member States should ensure, that they are non- discriminatory. They shall notify such exceptions forthwith to the Commission and the single digital gateway coordination group and duly justify them.
Amendment 242 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) any exception with regard to the duty of Member States to make the procedures under Article 5 fully available online, with each exception having to be supplemented by a reasonable explanation of how those restrictions meet the criteria of absolute necessity and objective justification.
Amendment 263 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) users are able to access and receive instructions for completing the procedure in at least onell official languages of the Union other than the national language or, where applicable, the national languages;
Amendment 264 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) users are able to access and receive instructions for completing the procedure in at least onfive official languages of the Union other than the national language or, where applicable, the national languages;
Amendment 265 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) users are able to access and receive instructions for completing the procedure in at least one officialworking language of the Union other than the national language or, where applicable, the national languagesCommission;
Amendment 289 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. The evidence made available by a competent authority shall be strictly limited to what has been requested and shall only be used by the receiving authority for the purpose of the procedure for which the evidence was exchanged. The competent authorities concerned should process all personal data of users in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 339 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
(la) work towards a merger of existing information portals.
Amendment 385 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I –Areas of information related to businesses – table – area 1: Starting, running and closing a business – indent 8 a (new)
Annex I –Areas of information related to businesses – table – area 1: Starting, running and closing a business – indent 8 a (new)
• relocating a business from one Member State to another Member State
Amendment 393 #
2017/0086(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
ANNEX II – table
ANNEX II – table
Amendment 477 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) present the identity of a line on which they can be contacted; orand
Amendment 496 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The independent supervisory authority or authorities responsiblEach Member State shall provide that one for monitoring the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall also bre independent public authorities are responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation. Chapter VI and VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply mutatis mutandis. The tasks and powers of the supervisory authorities shall be exercised with regard to end-users.
Amendment 499 #
2017/0003(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. Each supervisory authority shall contribute to the consistent implementation of this Regulation throughout the Union. The supervisory authority or authorities referred to in paragraph 1 shall cooperate whenever appropriate with national regulatory authorities established pursuant to the [Directive Establishing the European Electronic Communications Code] and the national authorities responsible for monitoring the implementation of consumer protection legislation (CPC Regulation).
Amendment 7 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the Commission, through the structural and investment funds and by other financial and non-financial means, - and with a view to promoting competition and innovation in the European space sector - to give generous and forward- looking support and encouragement not just to space research activities in the field of industrial and applied science but also to fundamental research in this field, because fundamental space research not only has a direct impact on applied technology but also provides the sector with highly- qualified staff, who are the most important innovation factor of all;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2325(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that the EU needs to ensure it enjoys strategic autonomy and freedom of action in space-related fields;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas BiH has demonstrated commitment and readiness to embark on further socio-economic reforms which are necessary in order to reduce youth unemployment, which is still at far too high a rate;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas certain ethnic and religious divisions persist and are damaging national unity;
Amendment 164 #
2016/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes some progress in fighting organised crime; is concerned, however, about the absence of a consistent approach in tackling organised crime owing to the numerous action plans by the various law enforcement agencies at different levels; highlights the need to strengthen the framework for inter-agency cooperation; welcomes joint investigations but calls for more coordinated operations and better exchange of information; calls for enhancing capacities of law enforcement bodies including on counter-terrorism; calls on the authorities, with this in mind, to take measures to combat the financing of terrorism and money laundering; urges that a legal framework be adopted rapidly to enable the assets of terrorist groups to be frozen; welcomes the signing of the operational and strategic cooperation agreement with Europol aimed at combating cross-border criminality;
Amendment 228 #
2016/2313(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Deplores the fact that BiH is still in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights for not implementing the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the Sejdić-Finci, Zornić and Pilav cases; considers this breach, and therefore the continuing ethnic and religious discrimination with regard to eligibility to stand for election, to be incompatible with the values of the Union; strongly calls for progress to be made in this regard in order to advance the country’s EU perspective;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes Albania’s continuous progress on EU-related reforms, in particular the adoption of constitutional amendments paving the way for a comprehensive judicial reform, which has been reflected in the ousting of elected representatives with criminal records; stresses that not only consistent adoption but also full and timely implementation of reforms and sustained political commitment are essential in order to further advance the EU accession process;
Amendment 53 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates that a constructive dialogue, sustainable political cooperation based on mutual confidence, and a willingness to compromise is crucial for the success of the reforms and for the entire EU accession process;
Amendment 74 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the new justice reform strategy 2017-2020 and its action plan, as well as the increased budgetary means for implementation; calls for any shortcomings in the functioning of the judicial system to be further addressed, including lack of independence from other branches of power, selective justice, limited accountability, ineffective oversight mechanisms, corruption, clientelism, the overall length of judicial proceedings and enforcements;
Amendment 75 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Expresses its concern about the excessively large prison population and the inadequacy of medical care in places of detention, as well as the maltreatment of suspects at police stations;
Amendment 100 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls that it is important for Albania to continue to develop a competent, transparent, high-quality civil service in order to improve the quality of public services for the population and to continue efforts to conduct the accession negotiations effectively;
Amendment 113 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the continued implementation of the strategy and action plan on the fight against organised crime and intensified international police cooperation; welcomes recent operations against drug plantations; calls also for organised crime networks to be dismantled and for the number of final convictions in organised crime cases to be increased, by enhancing cooperation between police and prosecution services and by strengthening institutional and operational capacities; underlines the need to step up efforts to prevent human trafficking, in particular as regards unaccompanied children and child victims of trafficking; calls for greater efforts to be made with regard to the uncontrolled proliferation of arms and to arms trafficking, many of those arms being illegally held in EU countries; expresses its concern about the very high rate of murder using firearms in Albania (5.86 fatalities per 100 000 of the population);
Amendment 144 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Urges the competent authorities to continue improving the climate of inclusion and tolerance for all minorities in the country, including by enhancing the role of the State Committee on Minorities; as regards Roma and Egyptians, calls for continued efforts in improving their access to employment, education, health, social housing and legal aid; is concerned that, despite improvements, the inclusion of Roma children in the education system remains the lowest in the region, whereas schools ought to become vehicles of integration;
Amendment 161 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Commends religious tolerance and good cooperation among religious communities; encourages the competent authorities and religious communities to cooperate in preserving and fostering religious harmony; considers it essential tothat preventing Islamic radicalisationm is a priority, including through disengagement and reintegration of returning foreign fighters, to counter violent extremism in cooperation with CSOs and religious communities, and to intensify regional and international cooperation in this area;
Amendment 209 #
2016/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that the number of unfounded asylum applications lodged by Albanians in EU Member States has increased again; urges the government to intensify awareness-raising and prevention efforts in this regard and to continue efforts to reintegrate those who have been rejected;
Amendment 43 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a serious commitment by all political forces is required for the country to return to its EU integration path; whereas a new government needs to adopt and implement robust reforms and bring stability to the country;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas bilateral disputes should be du, in particular deadlock within the Council as regards the country's name, should be duly and promptly addressed in compliance with EU and UN standards and should not represent an obstacle to the opening of accession negotiations;
Amendment 83 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the respect for fundamental freedoms shown at the elections of 11 December 2016; urges all political parties to accept its results in the interest of domestic stability and underlines their responsibility to ensure that there is no backsliding into political crisis; calls for a swift formation of a new government in order to make use of the mandate to carry on with necessary reforms; considers cross- party cooperation, especially with parties representing the Albanian minority, to be essential for addressing pressing domestic and EU-related challenges;
Amendment 194 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the adoption of the national strategy for equality and non- discrimination 2016-2020; is concerned about impartiality and the independence of the Commission for Protection from Discrimination; reiterates its condemnation of hate speech against discriminated groups; is concerned that intolerance against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people persists; reiterates its call for the Anti- Discrimination Law to be aligned with the acquis as regards discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation; underlines again the need to combat discrimination against the Roma, more than 10 000 of whom applied for asylum in EU Member States in 2016, and to facilitate their integration and their access to the education system and the labour market; is concerned about the inhumane physical conditions in prisons, despite a significant increase in the prison budget;
Amendment 227 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is concerned over freedom of expression and the media, media surveillance, the use of hate speech, political interference and pressure, including through government advertising; calls on the government to ensure that intimidation or violence against journalists is investigated and that those responsible be brought to justice; underlines the need for the sustainability and autonomy of the public service broadcast;
Amendment 239 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the maintenance of macro-economic stability but is concerned that unemployment remains high with very low labour market participation, especially among youth and women; further urges competent authorities to tackle long-term and structural unemployment, to promote economic policy cooperation, to better align education with labour market demands and to develop a targeted strategy on how to better integrate young people and women into the labour market; is concerned about the outflow of highly educated young professionals; strongly calls on the government to dedicate particular attention to improving the perspectives of youth in order to avert the country's twenty-thousand-strong annual exodus;
Amendment 253 #
2016/2310(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is concerned about the significant shortcomings in the field of the environment, in particular in the area of air and water pollution, especially in Skopje, which is regarded as Europe's most polluted city; calls for a comprehensive policy and strategy on climate action to be developed that is in line with the EU 2030 framework;
Amendment 72 #
2016/2309(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Continues to be deeply concerned about the polarised domestic climate and the boycott of parliamentary activities by members of the opposition; urges again all political forces to re-engage in constructive cooperation within the Montenegrin parliament; calls for further reinforcement of the parliament’s scrutiny of the accession process and capacity for budget oversight; insists repeatedly on the need for a due follow-up on the ‘audio-recording affair’; expresses concern at the use of force during opposition demonstrations against the policies pursued by the regime in power;
Amendment 104 #
2016/2309(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Expresses concern at the continuing high volume of cigarette smuggling through Montenegro; calls on the Montenegrin authorities to make the fight against that smuggling a top priority, because the proceeds are funding organised crime groups and terrorist networks; expresses alarm at the newspaper investigations which have confirmed that between 2013 and 2015 3.5 million kilogrammes of cigarettes were smuggled between the Montenegrin port of Bar and ports in Libya under the control of Daesh or al-Qaeda forces;
Amendment 152 #
2016/2309(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. While noting favourable economic developments, urges the new government to launch further structural reforms with a view to improving the business and investment climate, including measures aimed at reducing the informal sector, and to pursue efforts to diminish state involvement in the economy; calls for the rationalisation and restructuring of public spending, as well aexpresses concern at the substantial government deficit and the very large trade deficit, and calls for intensified efforts to strengthen the rule of law and contract enforcement;
Amendment 110 #
2016/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to suspend the accession talks with Turkey if the constitutional package is implemented unchanged;
Amendment 126 #
2016/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to put in place a strategic, economic and trade partnership with Turkey, including, in particular, cooperation in the fields of counter- terrorism and combating immigration;
Amendment 146 #
2016/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes with concern that measures undertaken following the declaration of the state of emergency have targeted alleged members/supporters of the Gülen movement, dissent in general and political parties of the opposition in particular; strongly condemns the imprisonment of 13 MPs belonging to the People’s Democratic Party (HDP), including its co-chairs, and of 90 Kurdish municipal mayors; urges the Turkish Government to lift the state of emergency immediately; underlines that the reintroduction of the death penalty would violate Turkey’s international commitments and lead to an immediate end to the EU accession talks;
Amendment 166 #
2016/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Condemns strongly the violations of freedom of expression and the serious infringements of media freedom, including the disproportionate bannings of media sites and social media; notes with concerncondemns the closure of around 170 media outlets -– including almost all Kurdish-language outlets -– and the jailing of more than 150 journalists; recalls that a free and pluralistic press is an essential component of any democracy and urges the Turkish government to release all journalists immediately;
Amendment 199 #
2016/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on Turkey to protect the rights of the most vulnerable groups and of persons belonging to minorities; emphasises the importance of the principle of religious freedom and of respect for religious minorities; regrets that the LGBTI marches in Ankara and Istanbul were banned for the second consecutive year; is seriously concerned about gender-based violence, discrimination, hate speech against minorities, hate crime and violations of the human rights of LGBTI persons; calls on Turkey to harmonise its domestic legislation with the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention, which it ratified in 2014; welcomes the government’s national strategy and action plan for Roma and encourages the authorities to address key obstacles to the social inclusion of Roma;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that a strong European gigabit society and the timely deployment of 5G technologies is the most incluseffective path towards the realisation of the digital single market, since high-speed broadband can promote universal growth, particularly in rural areas, by providing them with the tools to participate in the age of the Internet of Things (IoT) at the same pace as urban areas, while they enjoy the competitive advantage of lower housing, food and education costs;
Amendment 6 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Reminds that the digital divide represented by the connectivity gap between rural and metropolitan areas needs to be closed since the EU cannot afford to miss opportunities to connect rural areas, that are largely behind in the light of the results of the EC's Digital Economy & Society Index (DESI) - broadband is available to 71% of European homes but only to 28% in rural areas, mobile broadband (4G and others) is available to 86% of European homes but only to 36% in rural areas;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the need for all the main socio-economic drivers (schools, universities, public administrations, etc.) to have super-high speed gigabit connections and for all European households, whether rural or urban, to have access to a connection offering a download speed of at least 100 Mbps;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Welcomes EC's intention to work with the MS's and industry towards the voluntary establishment of a common timetable for the launch of early 5G networks by the end of 2018, followed by the launch of fully commercial 5G services in Europe by the end of 2020;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Member States to establish uninterrupted 5G coverage as soon as possible in all urban areas, as well as on the principal road and rail routes;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the utmost importance of responding effectively in the early stages of 5G in order to place the EU ahead of the game, since the benefits of being the world leader in setting the stage for this technology are potentially very high, and for this to happen policies and rules need to be future-oriented, pro-investment in a modernised European infrastructure and pro- innovation, with a market-based and light- touch approach that fosters competition, coupled with wise tax policies, acknowledging that investment is necessary to create competition that will in turn induce innovation, new services and ultimately more investment that benefits the consumer;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Welcomes the Connecting Europe Broadband Fund, a fund for broadband infrastructure open to participation of National Promotional Banks and Institutions and of private investors, which will be a step further to bring infrastructure investments to underserved less populated and rural and remote areas;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Calls on the Commission to assess the National Broadband Plans to identify gaps, and to formulate country-specific recommendations for further action;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Calls on the European Commission to ensure, maintain and develop financing for the 5G Action Plan at the proper level within the horizon of the next Multiannual Financial Framework 2020-2027;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Underlines the still unimaginable opportunities of cloud technologies, big data and the Internet of Things offer for being a driver of growth and jobs and to improving the lives of every citizen – provided that reliable connectivity reaches everyplace;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Recalls that 5G will enable new high-quality services, connect new industries and ultimately improve the customer experience for increasingly sophisticated and demanding digital users;
Amendment 57 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Insists not only in the urgency of accelerating investments on research and innovation on 5G technology but also on the development of more efficient ways to bring swiftly the results of research and innovation to the marketplace;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reaffirms its belief in the urgent need for European standardisation to prevent fragmentation in 5G technologies so as not to hamper interoperability, and recalls that in order to take the lead in drafting global standards international cooperation is of paramount importance, and also reaffirms the need to ensure the availability of the initial global 5G standards by the end of 2019 thereby enabling a timely commercial launch of 5G;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Believes that a bottom-up system should be promoted and each sector should work out its own roadmap for standardisation, relying on industry-led processes, with a strong will to reach common standards which could have the capacity to become worldwide standards;
Amendment 66 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Recalls the need to raise further public awareness of the benefits of the use of Internet for citizens and for businesses since it enhances economic and social opportunities and is a tool that may foster inclusion and create increased opportunities for less developed areas of the Union;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Looks forward to a truly converging network environment, where wired and wireless communications use a common infrastructure, driving the society forward to an enhanced network society, such as in the case of driverless cars, e-commerce, e-working, e- Agriculture and Farming - the motto for technological agriculture in the 21st century being "produce more with less";
Amendment 74 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Advocates to go beyond the use of mere economic indicators to measure the impact of the technology and to complete the image with socioeconomic indicators;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Recommends that the Commission should establish an annual progress review and recommendations reporting on the 5G Action Plan, and inform Parliament of the results;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission communication of 10 January 2017 on Building a European Data Economy (COM(2017)0009) and the accompanying Commission staff working document (SWD(2017)0002),
Amendment 2 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas online platforms (hereinafter ‘platforms’) cover a wide range of actors involved in numerous economic activities, such as e-commerce, media, search engines, collaborative economy, distribution of cultural content or social networks, and are therefore not subject to any clear and precise definition, the formulation of which would be the first step of a sectoral regulation process;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the intermediaries of yesterday have become today’s providers of content and play an essential role in terms of access to content including cultural and audiovisual content;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas the raison d'être of the digital single market is to avoid fragmentation between national legislations and to abolish technical, legal and tax barriers to allow businesses, citizens and consumers to fully benefit from digital tools and services;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas in order to put an end to the copyright related ambiguity between active user-uploaded content platforms and those having an activity of mere intermediaries, it is necessary to clarify that the limited liability provided by Article 14 of the E-Commerce Directive is only applicable to platforms having a passive intermediary role, that is to say without intervening in the organisation, optimisation or promotion of the content;
Amendment 25 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the evolving development and use of internet platforms for a wide set of activities, including commercial activities and sharing goods and services, have changed the ways in which consumers, companies and other users interact with content and goods providers;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas platforms can have double roles as intermediaries but also competitors which can potentially lead to abuse;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas a duty of care should be imposed under certain conditions to online service providers to detect and prevent illegal activities on platforms by any technically reliable means;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G c (new)
Recital G c (new)
Gc. whereas online counterfeiting is becoming increasingly sought after by criminal organizations as it is more profitable and has a smaller risk of incurring criminal penalties than racketeering or drug trafficking;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the urgent need for clarification of the status of platforms that play an active role in public communication and the reproduction of protected works;
Amendment 41 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas numerous online platforms not only provide access to goods and services, but also play a more activen important role in relation to consumers and other actors;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the Commission is carrying out a number of assessments of consumer protection rules and B2B practices engaged in by online platforms towards their business users;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for a regulatory framework that would guarantee loyalty and transparency towards business partners in relation to, inter alia, access to the service, appropriate and fair referencing, search results and the functioning of relevant application programming interfaces;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas numerous consultations with consumers and other stakeholders have proved that the terms of use and conditions provided by internet platforms in many cases are lacking clarity and user-friendly form;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
F b. whereas some online platforms serve as gateways, serious concerns arise when they become gatekeepers restricting access to consumers and to business opportunities, in particular where they also compete directly in downstream markets, for which they control access to ;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on platforms to take appropriate measures to ensure the proper functioning of contractual agreements concluded with right holders for the use of copyright protected works, such as the installation of effective content recognition technologies, where appropriate;
Amendment 70 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises the need to restore a balance in the sharing of value for intellectual property, in particular on platforms distributing protected audiovisual content;
Amendment 78 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that counterfeiting affects all sectors of the legal economy and that companies, the first targets of counterfeiters, are not the only ones affected by this scourge. Counterfeiting is a real issue for the health and safety of consumers who must be sensitized and made aware of the reality of trafficking in fake products;
Amendment 79 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to further promote the launched platform for settling disputes involving purchases made online amongst consumers, to improve its user-friendliness and to monitor whether traders comply with their obligation to put a link to the platform on their website, in order to further address the increasing number of complaints against several online platforms;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that, although many pieces of EU legislation apply to online platforms, it is frequently the case that they are not enforced properly or have not been adapted to the online world; believes, therefore, that a consideration should be given to the question of whether there is a need to complement the current legal framework in order to remedy this situation;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the Commission to consider establishing a harmonised approach to the right of rectification, the right to counterstatement and rights to forbearance for users of platforms;
Amendment 81 #
2016/2276(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Calls on the Commission to create a level playing field in view of claims for damages against platforms due to the circulation of disparaging facts, which create a persistent harm to the user;
Amendment 91 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NoteRegrets that there is currently no consensus on the definition of online platforms due to the multitude of different types of platforms, which may lead to uncertainty for businesses and to fragmentation of the EU’s internal market through a proliferation of regional or national rules; stresses the difficulties to regulate a concept which is not even defined at the European level;
Amendment 101 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’'s ongoing work on online platforms, including consultations of stakeholders and carrying out an impact assessment, and considers that Online Platforms shall be defined at the European level taking into account their characteristics and differences, such as their sector of activities and the level of interaction to avoid any fragmentation in the EU;
Amendment 114 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that certain features ofonline platforms are, to a greater or lesser extent, characterise online platforms, such asd by certain common features which include their operating in multi-sided markets, enabling parties belonging to two or more distinct user groups to enter into direct contact by electronic means, offering online services based on the classification or referencing of content, goods or services proposed or put on-line by third parties, the bringing together of several parties with a view to the sale of a good, the provision of a service or the exchange or sharing of content, goods or services;
Amendment 130 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that online platforms use the internet as a means of interaction and act as facilitators between the demand and supply sides providing therefore benefits to a wide range of economic operators, including SMEs, and consumers;
Amendment 138 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that online platforms take advantage of the enormous and ever- increasing number of mobileconnected devices;
Amendment 145 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that the increasingly widespread use of smart devices, including smartphones and tablets has further extended access to online platforms, thereby enhancing their role in the economy and society, particularly among young people, but more and more among all age groups;
Amendment 147 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that the increasingly widespread use of smartphones and tablet, tablets and internet of things has further extended access to online platforms, thereby enhancing their role in the economy and society, particularly among young people;
Amendment 149 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes the growing role of online platforms in sharing and providing access to news and other information valuable for citizens as well as for the functioning of democracy;
Amendment 158 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Urges the Commission to continue to promote the growth of European online platforms and strengthen their ability to compete globally; regrets the EU’s low share of online platform-firms in terms of market capitalisation on online platforms; stresses the importance of removing obstacles that hamper the smooth operation of online platforms across borders and disrupt the functioning of the European digital sinternalgle market;
Amendment 163 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recognises the benefits that online platforms offer for SMEs; notes that online platforms are often the easiest and most suitable first step for small businesses who want to go online and benefit from online distribution channels; notes that online platforms allow SMEs to access global markets without excessive investments in costly digital infrastructure;
Amendment 183 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that some online platforms realise the collaborative economy and contribute to the growth of collaborative economy in Europe; welcomes the Commission communication on the collaborative economy, which supports the development of new business models; stresses that these new business models offer new services and greater choice for consumers as well as provide flexibility for employees;
Amendment 186 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that some online platforms realisenable the collaborative economy; welcomes the Commission communication on the collaborative economy, which supports the development of new business models; stresses that these new business models offer new services and greater choice for consumers as well as provide flexibility for employees;
Amendment 207 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that a clear-cut and level playing field is needed in order to allow online platforms to comply with their responsibilities and the rules on liability and calls on the Commission to develop further steps to that effect;
Amendment 219 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that certain stakeholders are dissatisfied with the current rules on liability and find it insufficiently clear and welcomes the Commission’s undertaking to publish guidelinesance on intermediary liability; calls on the Commission to draw attention to the differences between the online and offline world and to create a level playing field for comparable services online and offline;
Amendment 229 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that the liability rules for online platforms should allow the tackling of issues related to illegal goods and illegal and harmful content in an efficient manner, for instance by respecting the duty of care, while maintaining a balanced and business- friendly approach;
Amendment 261 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that online platforms should develop more effective voluntary measures and technical means tof identifying and eliminatinge illegal and harmful content in particular in areas such as incitement to terrorism, hate speech and child sexual abuse;
Amendment 262 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that online platforms should develop and adopt more effective voluntary measures and technical means of identifying and eliminating harmfulillegal content; welcomes the industry Code of Conduct on countering illegal hate speech, supported by the Commissiont;
Amendment 273 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Invites the Commission to rapidly conclude its review of the need for formal notice-and-action procedures as a promising way to strengthen the liability regime in a harmonised way across the EU;
Amendment 275 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23 b. Believes that the compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation and Network and Information Security Directive is essential as regards data ownership, access and transferability, as well as liability;
Amendment 278 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Urges the Commission to ensure a level playing field for online platforms service providers and other services with which they compete; stresses that regulatory certainty is essential to creating a thriving digital economy; notes that competitive pressures vary between different sectors and therefore ‘one-size- fits-all’ solutions are rarely appropriate and tailor-made solutions are necessary to take into consideration due to the various characteristics of different kinds of online platforms;
Amendment 295 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Draws attention to the fact that the size of online platforms varies from global giants to micro-enterprises; stresses the importance of fair and effective competition between online platforms to avoid the creation of monopolies that distort the markets; stresses that facilitating the switching between online platforms or online services is an essential measure in preventing market failures and in avoiding lock-in situations;
Amendment 296 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Draws attention to the fact that the size of online platforms varies from global giants to micro-enterprises; stresses the importance of fair and effective competition between online platforms to avoid the creation of monopolies that distort the markets due to abuse of market power; stresses that facilitating the switching between online platforms or online services is an essential measure in preventing market failures;
Amendment 299 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines that possible reforms of the existing regulatory framework should concentrate on the harmonisation of rules and reducing regulatory fragmentation; emphasises the need to avoid over- regulation and to continue the REFIT process and the implementation of the better regulation principle; stresses the importance of technology neutrality and having the same rules apply online and offline; stresses that the regulatory certainty fosters competition, investments and innovations;
Amendment 306 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines that possible reforms of the existing regulatory framework should concentrate on the harmonisation of rules and reducing regulatory fragmentation; emphasises the need to avoid over- regulation; stresses the importance of technologyical neutrality and having the same rules apply online and offline;
Amendment 309 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Underlines the importance of investments in infrastructure; stresses that a level playing field and fair competition ensure investments in quality, high-speed broadband services; stresses that reliable high-speed networks are the precondition of offering and using online platform services; stresses the need for net neutrality and fair and non-discriminatory access to online platforms;
Amendment 320 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Underlines that the Internet of the future cannot succeed without users’ trust in online platforms, greater transparency, better control of ranking systems and advertising, and online platforms respecting all applicable legislation and the legitimate interests of users;
Amendment 332 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Stresses the importance of transparency in relation to data collection and considers that online platforms must respond to users’ concerns by informing them more effectively about what personal data is collected and how it is shared and used in line with the EU data protection framework;
Amendment 342 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Underlines that the cross-border nature of online platforms represents a huge advantage in developing the Digital Single Market, but also requires better cooperation between national public authorities; asks the Commission to make better use of existing consumer protection services, or to assess the need to set up an authority which could provide identical and efficient consumer protection in relation to online platforms activities;
Amendment 345 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Welcomes the Commission intention to further assess any additional need to update existing consumer protection rules in relation to platforms as part of the REFIT check of EU consumer and marketing law in 2017;
Amendment 347 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Encourages online platforms to provide clear, comprehensive and user- friendly ways of presenting their terms and conditions in order to enhance consumer protection and bolster trust; considers that online platforms should fully respect existing EU legislation and should avoid using complex terms and conditions that are hardly understandable for consumers;
Amendment 356 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Underlines that monopolies, concentration and in particular abuse of dominant position, must be avoided and stresses also that dominant online platforms should not impose disproportionate obligations on consumers or business users;
Amendment 357 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32 b. Stresses that transparency and impartiality are vital principles in this economy and that even complex algorithms have to respect them;
Amendment 358 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)
Paragraph 32 c (new)
32 c. Welcomes the Update of the Guidance of the UCPD which aims to make clearer how the Directive should be applied in the ecosystem of online platforms;
Amendment 359 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 d (new)
Paragraph 32 d (new)
32 d. Stresses the importance of greater transparency for users to understand how the information presented to them is filtered, shaped or personalised;
Amendment 360 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 e (new)
Paragraph 32 e (new)
32 e. Underlines that differences between sponsored and any other content must be clearly made, and that criteria used to rank offers of information, such as in search engines or comparison sites, must be known;
Amendment 361 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 f (new)
Paragraph 32 f (new)
32 f. Believes that online platform providers should inform consumers about the ranking systems and principles, including the sponsored search results and online rating and review systems in a clear and visible manner in order to enable an informed choice;
Amendment 365 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Calls on the Commission to evaluate platforms’ review systems and to put an end to certain practices, such as fake reviews and the deletion of negative reviews in order to make platforms comply with existing obligations; in this respect, as part of the REFIT check of EU consumer and marketing law in 2017, calls on the Commission to ensure that online platforms' review systems are covered by the requirements of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive relative to false or misleading information;
Amendment 368 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Calls on the Commission to evaluate platforms’for a new European authority to be set up in order to evaluate platforms' fairness by controlling review systems and to putting an end to certain practices, such as fake reviews and the deletiong of negative reviews in order to make platforms comply with; believes that this would create a true incentive for platforms to respect existing obligations in this field;
Amendment 370 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Welcomes the Guidance on the implementation/application of directive 2005/29/EC on Unfair Commercial Practices which recalls that platform should avoid creating the impression that reviews posted through it originate from real users, when it cannot adequately ensure this; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to encourage the voluntary adoption of certification schemes provided by independent accredited certifiers to guarantee that platforms' review systems are reliable;
Amendment 376 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Considers that, in order to ensure a balanced approach and avoid the over- regulation, criteria and a market power threshold should be defined to include those platforms that are gatekeepers and control access to the final consumers; considers that a focused legislative instrument, based on principles only applicable to these platforms, should prohibit a certain set of practices, in particular where they are detrimental to consumers and market competitiveness;
Amendment 380 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission to assess the current Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Enforcement Directive6 , in order to ascertain how to contribute more effectivelyoblige all intermediaries in the value chain, including internet service providers, to contribute to the fight against counterfeiting by adopttaking proactive, proportionate and effective measures to prevent the marketing, promotion and distribution of counterfeited goods; _________________ 6 OJ L 195, 2.6.2004, p. 16.
Amendment 404 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Notes that online payments offer ahigh level of transparency that helps to protect the rights of consumers and entrepreneurs and could be applied to the collection of data for taxation purposes, for example; notes that transparency facilitates the comparison of prices and transaction costs and increases the traceability of economic transactions and enables more efficient collection of taxes;
Amendment 422 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Is concerned about problematic B2Band increasing B2B unfair trading practices by online platforms, such as a lack of transparency (e.g. in search results) or pricing) promotion of advertising or sponsored results while diminishing the visibility of the non-paid results or and possible abuses of the dual role of platforms as intermediaries and competitors;
Amendment 427 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40 a. Calls on the Commission to propose a pro-growth, pro-consumer, targeted legislative framework for B2B relations based on principles to prevent abuse of market power and ensure that platforms that serve as a gateway to a downstream market do not become gatekeepers; resolves that such a framework should prevent detriment to consumer welfare, promote competition and innovation; further recommends that this framework be technology neutral and capable of addressing existing risks, for example in relations to market for mobile operating system but also future risks with new internet-driven technologies like IoT or artificial intelligence, which will place platforms even more squarely between online businesses and consumers;
Amendment 428 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40 a. Notes that where platforms play this dual role, they have economic incentives to discriminate in favour of their own products and services, to the detriment of consumers competition and innovation; notes that this conduct can take various forms, including restricting communication with consumers, imposing discriminatory pricing policies and other B2B terms that reduce the visibility and viability of competing services;
Amendment 431 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 b (new)
Paragraph 40 b (new)
40 b. Welcomes the targeted fact-finding exercise on B2B practices to be conducted by Commission by spring 2017 and urges to present effective steps to ensure fair competition;
Amendment 436 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. WHaving in mind the recent revelations involving big digital companies and their tax planning practices in the EU, welcomes the efforts made by the Commission to fight tax avoidance and harmful competition and calls on the Member States and the Commission to propose further reforms to prevent tax avoidance practices in the EU;
Amendment 440 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Points to the differences in the legal landscape in the 28 Member States and the specificities of the digital sector in which the physical presence of a company in the country of the market is often not needed and calls on the Member States to adjust the value-added tax (VAT) system according to the country-of-destination principle7 ; considers that this would be more adapted to the digital environment and would make easier for tax administrations to collect it; _________________ 7 European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting VAT fraud, P8_TA(2016)0453.
Amendment 450 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Regrets that the EU’s presence in the world market is barely felt, in particular due to the current fragmentation of the digital market, legal uncertainty and the lack of financing and capacity to market technological innovations, which make it difficult for European companies to become world leaders in this new globally competitive economy;
Amendment 451 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Regrets that the EU’s presence in the world market is barely feltregrettably low, in particular due to the current fragmentation of the digital market, legal uncertainty and the lack of financing and capacity to market technological innovations, which make it difficult for European companies to become world leaders in this new economy;
Amendment 460 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45 a. Considers that the EU must now establish a positive agenda to imagine the world of tomorrow and carve out a central role within it;
Amendment 461 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 b (new)
Paragraph 45 b (new)
45 b. Believes that Europe has the potential to become a major player in the digital world and considers that the EU should pave the way for an innovation- friendly climate in Europe by ensuring a watertight legal framework protecting all stakeholders;
Amendment 462 #
2016/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 c (new)
Paragraph 45 c (new)
45 c. Calls on the European Institutions to foster the development of European start-ups and help set up market-leading European online platforms, provide suitable financing arrangements, protect consumers (e.g. by establishing a European fairness rating agency with legal and technical expertise for instance), and adopt the necessary rules;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas there is a need to promote longer product lifespans, in particular by tackling programmed obsolescence ;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas repairs and spare parts must be made more readily accessible;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas there has been an increase in the number of national initiatives to remedy the problem of premature obsolescence of goods and software, and whereas there is a need to develop a common strategy for the single market;
Amendment 161 #
2016/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 2
Paragraph 14 – indent 2
- mandatory labellingtests carried out with voluntary agencies to indicate a product’s expected useful life, on the basis of standardised criteria set by selected stakeholders, which would make it possible to establish a standard format and methodology for all Member States,
Amendment 166 #
2016/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 4
Paragraph 14 – indent 4
Amendment 185 #
2016/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls for a definition to be drawn up of planned obsolescence at EU level, for hardware and software, so that products whose lifespan is deliberately shortened can be banned; calls, in that connection, for better legal protection for ‘whistle- blowers’;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2271(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that all sectors of the economy have been shaken up by digitalisation and that Europe has to seize this opportunity to boost its competitiveness at international level;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2271(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need for adequate investment in research and innovation, infrastructures, cybersecurity and digital skills; welcomes the Commission's proposals aimed at furthering investment in European public-private partnerships and making full use of the potential of the Juncker Plan and the European Structural and Investment Funds;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2271(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the EU has to define common standards and interoperable solutions in order to be ahead of standards imposed by major players outside the EU and prevent consumers being captive to a few specific suppliers;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2271(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that for the full potential of growth and innovation to be unlocked for EU industry as a result of digitalisation, citizens’ and businesses’ trust in the digital environment is necessary for unlocking the full potential of industry digitalisationand essential;
Amendment 66 #
2016/2271(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that the geographical digital divide has to be reduced: both landline and mobile very high speed network infrastructure has to be extended to all rural or locked-in areas, while in terms of digital skills, a skilled labour force has to be trained for work in the digital world.
Amendment 16 #
2016/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the Single Market pillar within the European Semester should serve to identify the key areas for the promotion and facilitation of growth and jobs; stresses, furthermore, that it should also serve as a benchmark for commitment to structural reform in Member States; highlights that the Single Market pillar within the European Semester would allow a regular evaluation of the governance of the Single Market throughout systematic compliance checks of national legislation and data analytics tools for detecting non-compliance, improving the monitoring of the single market legislation, enabling the institutions with the necessary information to redesign, implement, apply and enforce the Single Market regulatory framework, delivering concrete results to the citizens;
Amendment 25 #
2016/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to carry out systematic monitoring of implementation and enforcement of the single market rules through the country-specific recommendations (CSRs), in particular where those rules make a contribution to structural reforms; invites the Commission to report to the European Parliament on the progress made by Member States in the implementation of the CSRs related to the single market functioning and integration of products, goods and services markets, as part of the Annual Growth Survey package;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Invites the Competiveness Council to take an active role in the monitoring of the implementation of CSRs by Member States as well as in the process of formulation of those recommendations;
Amendment 38 #
2016/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises, in respect of the single market in services, that there is a clear need to improve the cross-border provision of services; welcomes the Commission’'s intention to present a proposal for a services card and for a harmonised notification form; welcomes, furthermore, the Commission’s intentionEuropean services card, to review market developments and, if necessary, take action in connection with insurance requirements for business and construction service providers; welcomes furthermore the Commission´s intention to present a legislative proposal to improve the services notification procedure, an ambitious review with the aim to create a strong preventive tool for future internal market breaches;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for enforcement of the framework for single market governance and strengthening of the monitoring and assessment of the correct, timely and effective implementation and application of single market rules; calls on Member States to increase their performance in the use of the Single Market governance tools and to better use the Single Market Scoreboard data available for each Member State as well as their evolution in terms of policy performance;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in its resolution of 11 December 2013, Parliament welcomed franchising as a business model which supports new business and small-business ownership, but noted the existence of unfair contract terms in certain cases and called for transparent and fair contracts; moreover, it drew the attention of the Commission and Member States, in particular, to problems faced by franchisees wishing to sell their business or change their business formula, whilst remaining active in the same sector and requested that the Commission examine the ban on price-fixing mechanisms in franchise systems and the effects of long- term competition clauses, purchase options and the prohibition of multi-franchising, and to reconsider in this respect the current exemption from competition rules for contracting parties having a market share of less than 30 %;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas franchising has the potential of being a business model that can help in completing the single market in the retail sector, but is disappointed that it is currently under- performing in the EU, representing only 1.89 % of GDP, as opposed to 5.95 % in the USA and 10.83 % in Australia, 83.5 % of franchising’s turnover being concentrated in only seven Member States;
Amendment 71 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to actively examine the functioning of franchising in the retail sector, and, in particular, the existence of unfair contract terms or other unfair trading practices, and to request Eurostat to devote special attention to this model when collecting statistical information on the sector;
Amendment 88 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. States that franchise agreements should fully respect the principles of balanced partnership, under which the franchisor and franchisee must be reasonable and fair towards each other and resolve complaints, grievances and disputes through frank, transparent, reasonable and direct communication;
Amendment 98 #
2016/2244(INI)
Amendment 105 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the need for specialised initial training and appropriate guidance and information by the franchisor for franchisees during the term of the agreement;
Amendment 114 #
2016/2244(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. AddNotes, however, that sometimes franchisors are said to be requireing franchisees to purchase products and services that are not related to the franchise formula; such a requirement should not be seen as part of the obligation of franchisees relating to the maintenance and common identity and reputation of the franchise network, but can easilyould constitute an unfair trading practice;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2243(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises the transformative natureNotes that Financial Technology (FinTech) has inis expanding rapidly, and recognises that it could transform the global financial sector; stresses that developments in FinTech have the potential to yield benefits for both consumers and businesses by means of efficiency gains, accessibility and cost reductions;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2243(INI)
2. Believes that innovation in the financial sector can create jobs and growth within the EU, and contribute towards a wider choice of services for consumers; calls on the Commission to identify the policy changes necessary to enablenvestigate how the EU tocould reap the benefits of FinTech to the fullest;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2243(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. UrgesCalls on the Commission to actively identify and remove existing barriers in the Single Market that currently prevent the advancement of digital services, including in the area of FinTech; calls on the Commission to be vigilant with a view to ensuring that inappropriate financial innovations do not damage consumers or financial stability.
Amendment 37 #
2016/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the EU and its Member States have common cultural roots and heritage, the product of a heritage deriving from Greece, Rome, Christianity and the Enlightenment, and are united therefore in their diversity;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas cultural relations are fundamental drivers of social cohesion and sustainable economic and human development, while playing a crucial role in strengthening civil society capacities, reinforcing democratisation processes and in conflict prevention, the prevention of radicalisation and resilience;
Amendment 213 #
2016/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for the setting-up of an emergency response mechanism to the destruction of cultural heritage, building on the experience of the UN’s Blue Helmets for Culture task force initiative, in close and structured cooperation with UNESCO and with the technological support of Copernicus – the European Earth Observation Programme; in that regard, welcomes the work done by the EU, under the aegis of Unesco, to finance the project for the emergency safeguarding of Syrian cultural heritage;
Amendment 221 #
2016/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the EU to establish a resource of experts making it possible to evaluate losses following situations in which cultural heritage has been destroyed;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to the Agreement adopted in Paris at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC of 12 December 2015 (the Paris Agreement), and to the vote in the European Parliament on the ratification of the Agreement on 4 October 2016,
Amendment 51 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas interest in the Arctic and its resources is increasing because of the changing environment of the area, and resource scarcity; whereas the Arctic is believed to hold 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil resources and 30% of its natural gas resources; whereas the region’s geopolitical importance is growing; whereas climate change effects and growing competition for access to the Arctic and natural resources, and increasing economic activities have brought (security) risks to the region, including challenges to human security, but also new opportunities; whereas as a result of climate change new navigation routes will open and new fishing grounds and natural resources will become available resulting in an increase in human activity in the region;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas a robust and healthy Arctic ecosystem inhabited by viable communities is strategically important for the political and economic stability of Europe; whereas the Arctic contains over half of the world’s wetlands and plays a key role in the purification of water; whereas it contributes to the achievement of the objective of good water status in the European Union under the Water Framework Directive; whereas the costs of inaction on preserving the Arctic ecosystem are increasing exponentially;
Amendment 69 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the Arctic sea ice has diminished significantly since 1981, the areas under permafrost are decreasing, causing the risk of incidental release of huge amounts of carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere, the snow cover continues to decrease and the melting glaciers are contributing to globally rising sea levels; whereas it has been noticed that the sea ice is disappearing at an even faster pace than the models predict, the volume of sea ice present during the summer having fallen by more than 40% in 35 years; whereas climate change is advancing at the fastest pace in the polar regions;
Amendment 78 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas three EU Member States (Denmark, Finland and Sweden) are full members of the eight-member AC, and seven others (France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom) are observers; whereas the EU is seeking to upgrade its status in the AC; whereas all G8 players are present, at various levels, within the AC, as well as the emerging Asian powers such as China, India and South Korea;
Amendment 88 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas some four million people live in the Arctic region, of which some ten percent are members of indigenous peoples; whereas the vulnerable Arctic environment, as well as the fundamental rights of indigenous people, require more stringent safeguards, especially when it comes to projects where intrusive extraction of natural resources takes place; whereas the increase in pollutants and heavy metals in the Arctic has negative repercussions in the food chain through their presence in fauna and flora, particularly fish, and constitutes an important health issue for local populations and for consumers of fishery products;
Amendment 95 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas the EU should play a leading role in discussions and negotiations in international fora, in order to ensure that all parties concerned accept their responsibilities in terms of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases or pollutants, and to face the growing challenges of sustainable resource management;
Amendment 135 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of UNCLOS in providing a complementary multilateral legal framework for settling intra-Arctic sovereignty issues; notes that only very few unresolved issues of jurisdiction exist in the Arctic; seeks the promote the use of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg for conflict resolution; considers respect for international law in the Arctic essential; advocates a strong role for the EU in promoting effective multilateral arrangements and a global rules-based order through the strengthening and consistent implementation of relevant international, regional and bilateral agreements, frameworks and arrangements; underlines that the EU should have a strong role in reaching an agreement to maintain the Arctic, which is not under any country’s jurisdiction, as an area of common heritage to be used exclusively for peaceful and scientific purposes; notes that this does not concern navigation and traditional livelihoods;
Amendment 177 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Calls on the Commission and the Member States affiliated to the work of the Arctic Council to support the development of an Arctic Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to preserve the vulnerable ecosystem of the Arctic; notes that this special EIA shcould eventually be made mandatory and take account of at least the followtake account of certaing aspects when evaluating projects taking place in the Arctic, such as:
Amendment 185 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – indent 1
Paragraph 6 – indent 1
– All pPotential environmental, socio- economic and cultural impacts both during and after the project, including cumulative effects of current and future projects,
Amendment 190 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – indent 2
Paragraph 6 – indent 2
– The preapplicautionary principle and of the polluter pays principle must be applied at allat the stages of project planning, assessment, implementation and reclamation,
Amendment 194 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – indent 3
Paragraph 6 – indent 3
– Reclamation and recoveryPlanning the reclamation of habitat and affected lands must be thoroughly planned and fully funded in advance,
Amendment 210 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Invites the Commission and the EU Member States to seupport the successful application of Arctic EIA as a prerequisite factoring in of the EIA before goods marketed in the EU deriving from the projects executed in the Arctic region are marketed in the EU;
Amendment 279 #
2016/2228(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that Arctic migration routes have formed which enter the European Union; emphasises that migration routes and increased transport should be considere, when an EU Arctic strategy is drafted, the need to consider migration routes and the importance of a low-emission mobility policy for the EU regions concerned, involving the development of cross-border transport links, such as the TEN-T trans-European transport network, and wthen drafting an EU Arctic strategy; promotion of a modal shift to low-emission means of transport, such as rail or electric vehicles;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas statelessness is a multifaceted problem, including but not limited to problems relating to birth certificates and other civil status documents, as well as other documents relating to property, educational achievement and business ownership, political representation and voting participation, access to social security and public services; whereas these problems are detrimental to the positive development of these population groups; whereas statelessness may contribute to human trafficking and child abuse;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas statelessness promotes population movements, emigration and human trafficking, destabilising whole sub-regions;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2220(INI)
L. whereas, according to the UN, the Rohingya are one of the world’s most persecuted minorities, constitute the largest stateless group in the world and have been officially stateless since the 1982 Burmese Citizenship Law; whereas the Rohingya are unwanted by the Myanmar authorities and by neighbouring countries, although some of the latter host large refugee populations; whereas ongoing clashes in Rakhine State are causing continued human trafficking; whereas the current government is doing little to resolve the situation;
Amendment 125 #
2016/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 9
Paragraph 4 – indent 9
– ensuring that participants in election observation missions are aware of statelessness issues where relevant;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
Citation 19
Amendment 35 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20
Citation 20
Amendment 37 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23 a (new)
Citation 23 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 4 February 2016 on the systematic mass murder of religious minorities by the self- styled ISIS/Daesh1a, __________________ 1aTexts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2016)0051
Amendment 61 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas, with few exceptions, the Member States have failed to put sufficient resources into defence so as to be capable of military intervention to help protect civilian populations;
Amendment 174 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses its serious concern that the promotion and protection of human rights and democratic values are under threat worldwide, and that the universality of human rights is increasingly, and seriously, being challenged by a number of authoritarian regimes and terrorist groups;
Amendment 183 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Expresses its serious concern at the numerous, ever-increasing attempts made to shrink the space of civil society and human rights defenders, and the growing number of repressive laws adopted throughout the worldoutside the EU, under the pretext of combating terrorism (for example, through the introduction of counter-terrorism laws in Turkey);
Amendment 313 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 b (new)
Paragraph 28 b (new)
28b. Calls on the Member States to significantly step up their defence efforts to ensure that European battlegroups can be deployed when the security of civilian populations, in Europe or elsewhere, is threatened;
Amendment 431 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 j (new)
Paragraph 36 j (new)
36j. Calls on the Commission to conclude further readmission agreements with safe countries to help speed up the processing of international protection applications by people at genuine risk in their country of origin and to better combat the problem of ‘economic migrants’;
Amendment 453 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 f (new)
Paragraph 39 f (new)
39f. In view of the extremely urgent need to develop and stabilise peripheral EU countries, calls as an interim measure for the intra-European development funds (ERDF, etc.) to be massively deployed in those countries;
Amendment 555 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Reiterates its request that the Commission propose a comprehensive Child Rights Strategy and Action Plan for the next five years, in order to prioritise children’s rights within EU external policies and to promote children’s rights, in particular by contributing to ensuring children’s access to water, sanitation, healthcare and education, including in conflict zones and refugee camps, and eliminating child labour, torture, trafficking, early and forced marriage, female genital mutilation and sexual exploitation, and combating the phenomenon of child soldiers;
Amendment 680 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75
Paragraph 75
75. Calls on the EU and its Member States to commit more actively to ensureing that religious minorities are respected worldwide, including in the Middle East, where Yazidis, Christians and Muslim minorities are being persecuted by ISIS and other terrorist groupISIS is carrying out a veritable genocide of the Christian minorities;
Amendment 737 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
83. Calls for increased support in the areas of promoting media freedom, protecting independent journalists and bloggers, reducing the digital divide and facilitating unrestricted access to information and communication, and uncensored access to the internet (digital freedom); stresses, however, the need to put in place alert systems to detect harmful content;
Amendment 747 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
87. Condemns allthe restrictions on digital communication, including the closing down of websites and the blocking of personal accounts by authoritarian regimes in order to restrict freedom of expression;
Amendment 759 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
Paragraph 88
88. Is concerned about the growth of illegal hate speech, meaning speech that attacks a person or a group on the basis of national origin, colour, religion, gender or sexual orientation, especially on social media platforms; calls on the Commission to involve representatives of civil society organisations to ensure that their views are taken into account in the negotiations on codes of conduct, and to consider what legal options it can invoke to close these sites that spread hate speech and to close the accounts of their authors; recalls that ISIS recruits massively through social networks and that its newspaper Dar-al- Islam is readily available online;
Amendment 774 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
Paragraph 90
90. Recalls that the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy underlines the need to ensure that respect for freedom of opinion and expression are integrated into the development policies and programmes relating to terrorism, including the use of digital surveillance technologies; stresses the need to develop effective communication strategies for countering terrorist and extremist propaganda, and recruitment methods, notably online and via encrypted mail applications such as Telegram;
Amendment 787 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94 a (new)
Paragraph 94 a (new)
94a. Regrets that Turkey has raised the possibility of reintroducing the death penalty and points out that this is a policy that conflicts with European values;
Amendment 808 #
Amendment 809 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 104
Paragraph 104
Amendment 818 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105
Paragraph 105
Amendment 825 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
Paragraph 106
Amendment 833 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107
Paragraph 107
Amendment 839 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108
Paragraph 108
Amendment 845 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 109
Paragraph 109
Amendment 850 #
2016/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110
Paragraph 110
110. Recommends that the EU develop a more comprehensive approach to democratisation processes, as monitoring free and fair elections is only one dimension, and stresses that political transition and democratisation need to be combined with respect for human rights, the promotion of justice, transparency, accountability, reconciliation, the rule of law, economic and social development, measures to combat extreme poverty, and the establishment of democratic institutions;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2145(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s European Cloud Initiative as part of the implementation of the Digital Single Market (DSM) Strategy and the Digitising European Industry Package, thus fostering the growth of the European digital economy and thus contributing to itsEuropean firms’ global market positioning;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2145(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the Commission’s intention to remove barriers to the free movement of data and data services and disproportionate data localisation requirements by linking the European Cloud Initiative to the free flow of data proposal; considers that, in order to achieve a digital society, the free flow of data must be regarded as the fifth freedom within the Single Market; points out that this digital revolution must benefit EU businesses and citizens and be carried out in strict compliance with European personal data protection requirements;
Amendment 42 #
2016/2145(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to identify best certification schemes and commonly used standards for data sharing across Member States, to lay out a market-driven pan-European set of high standards facilitating data sharing, and to prefer open and global standards over proprietary standards whenever justified;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2145(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. HighlightsDeplores the fact that at present only 12% of the financing committed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments goes to digital-related actions; urges the Commission to present targeted steps which could enhance the involvement of the EFSI in DSM-related projects and projects focusing on providing infrastructure funding for the digital economy, including data-sharing initiatives and digital accessibility;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to launch an in-depth debate on how far the traditional reasoning underlying competition law is suited to the specific conditions of the digital world and its new challenges, and asks it to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to remove barriers to innovation and to enable EU consumers to seize all the opportunities that a genuine digital single market can offer;
Amendment 13 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to combat the abuse of dominant positions and thereby remove barriers to innovation and to enable EU consumers to seize all the opportunities that a genuine digital single market can offer; calls for the closure of lengthy key proceedings in this area before the end of this year;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that, in their answers to the consultation on digital platforms, many economic operators say they regret the absence of a level playing field; takes the view that, in order to create fair conditions of competition, it is necessary to guarantee comparable rules for comparable digital services; also believes that the new economic models should be subject to the same rules as the traditional services they replace;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes that, while platforms permit millions of undertakings, including many European SMEs, to exploit the advantages of e-commerce in terms of distribution, advertising and access to consumers, certain practices are increasingly being condemned and many questions are currently being raised in connection with B2B relations; stresses in this context that more than 80% of the replies to the public consultation on digital platforms called for EU action to ensure fairness in B2B relations; takes the view that regulatory and non- regulatory action could be necessary, as the market does not seem capable of remedying these situations by itself; calls on the Commission to take prompt action to halt certain practices which could endanger numerous European SMEs;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for active monitoring of all possible competition issues related to unjustified geo- blocking and other restrictions on online sales; regrets that most e-commerce takes place nationally and that a true internal market without national barriers is not existing in this sector; welcomes the ongoing e-commerce sector enquiry, which should be conducted thoroughly and brought to an expeditious close and which may provide useful input for other actions within the digital single market strategy;
Amendment 45 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates the need for the timely and proper implementation of Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions, and encourages the Commission in the strongest possible terms to monitor its implementation closely and to pursue this issue with the Member States; strongly regrets that the implementation is proceeding slowly and many of the Member States have adopted not even a proposal for implementing legislation; therefore, encourages the Commission in the strongest possible terms to monitor its implementation closely and to pursue this issue with the Member States; stresses that access to justice, which may include the availability of collective redress, is essential for the attainment of the objectives of EU competition policy;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that Parliament, in its report on unfair trading practices in the food supply chain, drew the Commission’s attention to the difficulty of ensuring fair competition given the dual role of distributors which make their own products; welcomes the Commission’s ongoing analysis aimed at determining whether distributors’ brands can create anti-competitive advantages on the market, and calls on the Commission to inform Parliament of the results of this inquiry;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Notes that, in its resolution on the annual report on competition policy for 2014, the European Parliament called on the Commission to closely monitor alliances between major distributors in Europe, and welcomes the Commission’s willingness to discuss the impact of such alliances on producers and consumers within the European Competition Network;
Amendment 57 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Looks forward to the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+, and calls for the full involvement of the European Parliament under the ordinary legislative procedure; considers that effective tools to tackle distortions of competition are crucial for the functioning of the single market, and that it is imperative to ensure that consumers and businesses can rely on the consistent application of EU competition rules throughout the EU.; considers that European-wide minimum standards are particularly needed as regards leniency programs, sanctions and the independence of national competition authorities;
Amendment 60 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the current revision of the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER); recalls that there is legal uncertainty regarding the issue of whether the allocation of public funding to tourism organisations in its current form is in line with EU state aid rules; calls on the Commission to provide an adequate legal state aid basis for the Member States to support tourism as an important economic factor in the internal market; therefore, stresses the need to take up a new GBER exemption.
Amendment 39 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that Islamist terrorism has brought guerrilla warfare to European streetsis increasingly targeting Europe; underlines that, consequently, security of the individual has become paramount, eroding the traditional distinction between its external and internal dimensions; calls on the Member States to step up efforts to tackle terrorism and to enhance information exchange, particularly in the area of counter- terrorism;
Amendment 85 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. UnderlinStresses that, as Europe is no longer in control of its security environment and has lost the luxury of choosing the time and place of actionin view of the deterioration in the European security environment, the CSDP, which has, until now, focused mainly on crisis management operations, should complement these operations withbe able to carry out crisis prevention and crisis resolution, and truly ensure the common security and defence of the entire area of freedom, security and justic missions and thereby participate fully in keeping Europe secure;
Amendment 103 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines, equally, that the CSDP should be based on a strong collective defence principle, efficient financing and full coordination with other international institutions, including NATO;
Amendment 175 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the significant contribution of CSDP missions and operations to international peace and stability; notes the level of political ambition set by the EUGS for an integrated approach to conflicts and crises concerning the engagement of the Union at all stages of the conflict cycle through prevention, resolution and stabilisation, and the commitment to avoid premature disengagement;
Amendment 225 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that the bedrock for EU- NATO cooperation is provided by the complementarity of their missions and, consequently, of their inventories of instruments; stresses that the relations between the two organisations should continue to be cooperative and not competitive; calls on the Member States to meet the NATO capacity goal of a minimum defence spending level of 2% of GDP;
Amendment 230 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 279 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that a robust European Defence Technological and Industrial Base, which includes facilities for SMEs, is a fundamental underpinning of the CSDP and a prerequisite for a common market, which should supply all buyers with adequate and affordable means, responding to their individual needs; is concerned at the steady decline of defence research funding across the Member States, which is putting at risk the industrial and technological base and, consequently, Europe’s strategic autonomy; calls on the Member States to supply their armies with equipment manufactured by the European defence industry, rather than industrial competitors;
Amendment 295 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. WelcomesCalls for a strengthening of the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) increasing role in coordinating capability-driven programmes, projects and activities, indispensable to an efficient CSDP; welcomes the EDA’s Capability Development Plan and stresses the need for further commitments to ensure its full implementation;
Amendment 310 #
2016/2067(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls for European law to be reformed to allow defence industries to benefit from the same state aids as those enjoyed by US industries;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2062(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that the public consultation undertaken in advance of the Aviation Strategy indicates that consumers still face challenges when booking air travel; calls on the Commission to report more fully on the progress made to bring travel websites into compliance with EU law, and its future plans for enforcement in this area, as regards both online and offline air ticket sales;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2062(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Welcomes the notable increase in airport connectivity in the EU over the last 10 years; regrets the fact that some regions are still poorly served, however, and calls on Member States to increase connectivity still further, given that it is so vital for the competitiveness of those regions;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2062(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Welcomes the Commission's intention to maintain high safety and security standards while alleviating the burden of checks by making use of new technologies;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that retail financial services have suffered substantial legislative inflation in the past five years and that several directives have recently been, or are currently being, transposed; considers that the impact of this legislation should be assessed before any fresh legislative initiative is taken;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that businesses face numerous difficulties in developing their cross-border operations; calls therefore on the Commission and Member States to make a detailed examination of the obstacles to cross-border operations and to the completion of the single market in the financial sector;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Recommends a proportionate regulatory approach which does not act as a brake on innovation in advance; calls on national regulators and the Commission to provide regulatory tools which encourage businesses to innovate, particularly by means of flexible regulatory systems which leave the room for manoeuvre needed for experimentation and for the development of new technologies;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to ensure that digitalisation brings better market access for businesses on an equal footing, especiallyincluding for SMEs and fintechs, and greater consumer choice, bringing down price differences of financial services within the EUensuring fair competition for businesses which is also beneficial to the consumer of financial services within the EU in terms of supply, pricing and quality of goods and services;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that digitisation creates new opportunities for consumers and businesses with regard to competition and services, and could help to improve the competitiveness of the financial services industry; acknowledges, however, that digitisation cannot by itself overcome certain legal obstacles to cross-border operations; calls therefore on the Commission to make the necessary adjustments to European legislation to make it possible to adapt existing European directives and regulations to the needs of the digital society;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the the Commission to assess whether European legislation is sufficiently well adapted to the needs of the digital economy; calls for the elimination of obstacles to distance selling of financial goods and services while guaranteeing a high level of consumer protection; draws attention to the need to promote mutual recognition and interoperability of digital identification techniques for the private sector within the EU, without affecting the level of security of existing systems;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the increasing number of new types of service provider operating in this market; considers that this may bring significant benefits for consumers, with adequate regulation to ensure high levels of security and transparency; calls, accordingly, for a competitive framework which treats the various actors on the market equitably;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned thatStresses that greater consumer trust in financial services remains lowis needed, and calls on the Commission to bring forward measures to improve consumer financial literacy, to increase the transparency of these products, and to remove consumer barriers to switchingencourage the financial education of consumers so that they can take good decisions and act responsibly; expresses its concern for compliance with, and proper transposition of, obligations relating to the transparency of financial services; encourages the comparability of these products when it is possible, particularly by means of easy-to-use comparison websites;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that unjustifiedit is important to recall that businesses are not permitted to discriminatie on bagrounds of nationality, sedx onr residence and price differences for common retail financial products between Member States requires urgent action; suggests that comparison tools play a role in bringing down price differenligion and must comply with the requirements to avoid discrimination laid down in Article 14 of, and Protocol 12 to, the European Convention on Human Rights; suggests that comparison tools can help consumers to compare the prices and quality of the various goods and services;
Amendment 58 #
2016/2056(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Emphasises the importance of availability of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and online dispute resolution (ODR), especially cross-border, as efficient redressas efficient conflict resolution is key to the single market and consumer trust;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that, with the emergence of new threats, Member States have to commit to providing appropriate resources and investing more in military capabilities in order to guarantee the security of European citizens;
Amendment 24 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the internal market instruments offer solutions for effective cooperation among Member States and for building on economies of scale, in order to avoid duplications and make expenditure more efficient in times of budget constraints and in view of the imminent risks of the EU defence sector losing critical expertise and innovation, autonomy and competitiveness advantages; is concerned at the steady decline of defence research funding across the Member States and the lack of strong European demand for armaments;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to provide a detailed and comprehensive analysis of the duplication that exists today at national level in defence in different areas, such as armaments and equipment programmes, national standards and requirements, auxiliary installations, training sites and training; stresses the importance of creating economies of scale in order to remedy the existing deficiencies in terms of capacity;
Amendment 59 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that stimulating technological developments in Europe is vital in order to satisfy the upcoming needs of European armed forces, as is fostering a more integrated internal market through the development of joint cooperative programmes, under which the Joint Research Centre could aggregate dual-use technology efforts across the EU, and particularly in the light of the significant capacity deficiencies in relation to drones and satellite observation;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights the importance of intensifying the synergies between security and defence and the synergies with other Union policies, and of building on integrated capabilities in order to develop common approaches in the areas of, for example, hybrid threats, terrorism, arms and people trafficking, external border security, illegal immigration, common intelligence, cybersecurity and customs controls; calls on the Member States and the European institutions to examine and address the shortcomings of the existing counter-terrorism tools;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the current crisis is also an opportunity for the EU if it is used to make the EU work better; recalls that European citizens see an effective common foreign and security policy as a priority area of action for the EU and that this is one of the areas where European cooperation can yield most value added; emphasises, therefore, that Member States must change their mentality since nowadaysand stop thinking about foreign policy and security in a narrow minded national perspective is obsoles a strictly national matter; is convinced that no single Member State alone is able to tackle any of the challenges we face today; urges Member States to finally show sufficient levels of political will and trust in one another to make it possible to use the tools at hand in a concerted manner in order to pursue our interests and values; reiterates that the EU can only be a strong global player on an equal footing with other major powers if all Member States speak with one voice and act together in the framework of a strong EU foreign policy;
Amendment 156 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Emphasises that the EU must strengthen its security and defence capabilities, as it can only use its full potential as a global power if it combines its unrivalled soft power with hard power; recalls that stronger civilian and military capacities are key elements for the EU to fully respond to crises, build the resilience of partners and protect Europe; notes that since power politics is again dominating international relations, defence and deterrence capabilities are critical for our leverage in diplomatic talks; in this regard, reiterates that the Common Security and Defence Policy needs to be strengthened and deepened, as the only realistic way to strengthen our defence capabilities in a time of budgetary constraints is to increase synergies by stepping up defence cooperation;
Amendment 172 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is convinced that in view of an already underfinanced EU budget, additional efforts for operations, administrative costs, preparatory actions and pilot projects under the Common Security and Defence Policy, additional funding from the Member States is also needed; believes that Member States should seize the opportunity of the current revision/review of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) to that end; calls on the Member States to meet the NATO capacity goal of a minimum defence spending level of 2% of GDP;
Amendment 220 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the Roadmap and the commitments of the Bratislava summit and expects the Member States to make a specific commitment to the implementation of the Roadmap;
Amendment 292 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Takes the view that it is time to define a new, more realistic strategy for the EU’s relations with Russia, based on credible deterrence but also on dialogue in areas of common interest; stresses that sanctions have proven to be the most effective means for deterring Russian aggression; recalls that the full implementation of the Minsk agreement is a prerequisite for the suspension of sanctions; insists that the EU should consider imposing further sanctions in case Russia continues to violate international law; believes it is in the common interest of the EU and Russia to achieve a better relationship, provided international law is applied;
Amendment 395 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Underlines also the need to intensify the fight against Islamist terrorism, which affects ever larger parts of the Middle East and, North Africa and the Sahel and has also been creeping into Europe; urges the EU to undertake concerted diplomatic efforts, together with the US and other international allies, to convince partners in the region, such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran, of the need for a common strategy towards this global challenge;
Amendment 476 #
2016/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Calls on the EU not to withdraw fully from areas that are currently of less strategic interest but which could become important again in the future – either economically or from a human or military perspective – such as central Asia, sub- Saharan Africa or the Arctic, and which are attracting the interest of other world powers;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2031(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that modernisation of the Customs Union will further strengthen the already strong economic ties between Turkey and the European Union (EU) and will keep Turkey economically anchored to the EU; believes that strengthening trade relations could bring concrete benefits to citizens in Turkey and EU Member States, and also contribute to both sides engaging in a positive reform agenda while mitigating political tensions with Ankara on the deteriorating situation of the rule of law and fundamental freedoms; stresses however the deteriorating situation of the rule of law, of the Human Rights, of the democracy and fundamental freedoms such as freedom of press and freedom of expression in the country;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2031(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes note of Turkey’s recent rapprochement with Russia and the statements of the Turkish Government regarding the country’s possible accession to the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation; reiterates that the EU is Turkey’s main trading partner and that two thirds of the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Turkey comes from EU Member States; emphasises that the Customs Union requires Turkey to align its legislation with the acquis communautaire; stresses that Turkey continued not to open Turkish ports to Cypriot vessels and failed to apply to Cyprus the Additional Protocol to the Ankara Agreement ;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2031(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the growing geopolitical and economic challenges facing Turkey as a result of instability in its neighbourhood, terrorism and the aftermath of the coup attempt of 15 July 2016; stresses that while the chaos and instability in the Middle East, combined with poor relations with direct neighbourhood like Armenia, Greece, Syria and Cyprus, the Russian annexation of Crimea and intervention in Ukraine, are adversely affecting Turkey’s foreign trade within its neighbourhood, an upgraded Customs Union can help Turkey to overcome the challenges it faces, and contribute to transforming Turkey into a pillar of stability and an engine of growth for its citizens, if the necessary reforms are made by the government;
Amendment 42 #
2016/2031(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that Turkish regulatory alignment with EU standards resulting from the conclusion of the Customs Union has made the country more competitiveincrease trade between EU and Turkey ; believes that the modernisation of the Customs Union would provide an opportunity for Turkey to revisit its growth model and escape from the ‘middle income (country) trap’; welcomes the fact that the deepening of the Customs Union will have a positive influence on Turkey’s economic governance and strengthen Turkey’s independent regulatory institutions;
Amendment 72 #
2016/0404(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) While professional regulation of healthcare services, consisting of activities intended to assess, maintain, restore or improve the state of health of patients, remains, according to Article 59 of Directive 2005/36/EC, subject to compliance with the proportionality principle, it should be excluded from the scope of this Directive. With regard to the protection of public health, it should be highlighted that health and life of humans rank foremost among the interests protected by the Treaty and that it is for the Member States to determine the level of protection which they wish to afford to public health and the way in which that level is to be achieved.
Amendment 109 #
2016/0404(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Where a Member State intends to regulate a profession or to amend existing rules, account should be taken of the nature of the risks related to the public interest objectives pursued, in particular the risks to consumers, to professionals or third parties. It should also be borne in mind that, in the field of professional services, there is usually an asymmetry of information between consumers and professionals. Professionals havedisplay a high level of technical knowledge, which consumers may not have and consumers therefore find it difficult to judge the quality of the services provided to them. Member States should apply the proportionality criteria laid down in this Directive when introducing new or amending existing legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions to the extent that those criteria are relevant for a given profession. The extent of the assessment should be proportionate to the nature, the content and the impact of the provision being introduced for a given regulated profession.
Amendment 164 #
2016/0404(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
This Directive shall not apply to healthcare services consisting of activities intended to assess, maintain or restore the state of health of patients whether or not they are provided via healthcare facilities.
Amendment 215 #
2016/0404(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a (new)
2 a. The assessment of proportionality cannot represent a restriction of the capacity of the Member States to determine the level of the public interest protection they consider as appropriate in the field of the medical and paramedical professions, which therefore can differ within the EU.
Amendment 261 #
2016/0404(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the scope of the professional activities reserved to holders of a particular professional qualification, namely whether and why the activities reserved to certain professions can or cannot be shared with other professions;, provided that the security and the quality of the service can be guaranteed at the same level.
Amendment 60 #
Amendment 65 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Recalls that the internal market must be based on reciprocal trust among the Member States. To this end, and in order to ensure the authenticity of the information and documents required during the procedure for issuing the services e-card, the host Member State must be able to verify their validity in all circumstances.
Amendment 70 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Cross-border trade and cross-border investment in certain business and construction services are particularly low, showing a potential for better integration of services markets with significant negative repercussions for the remaining part of the economy. This underperformance leads to situations where the potential for more growth and jobs in the Single Market has not been fully exploited.
Amendment 80 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) For reasons of coherence, possible conflicts between the present Regulation and other EU acts governing specific aspects of access or exercise of a service activity in a specific sector should be solved as provided for in Article 3 of Directive 2006/123/EC for conflicts between that Directive and such acts, with the application of those other acts. As a result, the provisions in the present Regulation cannot be relied upon in order to justify prior authorisation schemes, prior notification schemes or establishment requirements which are prohibited by other EU acts governing specific aspects of access or exercise of a service activity in a specific sector such as Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 200019 . As a further result, this Regulation does in no way affect the obligations service providers should respect in accordance with Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council20 and Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council 21.21 , as well as EU Regulations 883/2004/EC and 2009/987/EC on the coordination of social security systems _________________ 19 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce in the internal market (OJ L178, 17.7.2000, p. 1) 20 Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p. 1) 21 Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System (‘the IMI Regulation’) (OJ L 159, 28.5.2014, p. 11)
Amendment 96 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure uniform implementation of this Regulation in relation to procedures to issue and update of a European services e-card, as well for formalities regarding secondment of staff and movement of self-employed other than the one referred to in the preceding recital, and EU Regulations 883/2004/EC and 2009/987/EC on the coordination of social security systems, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to adopt rules on electronic processing of those procedures. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 114 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Regulation does not affect the rules on national requirements in place in the host Member States in terms of service provision. Moreover, the Regulation will not infringe EU law in terms of employment conditions, in particular those of posted workers, but also in terms of health, security and environmental protection.
Amendment 118 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
This Regulation, in particular its Chapter III, shall be without prejudice to the rights of workers, the obligations of service providers and related controls in Member States laid down in Directives 96/71/EC and 2014/67/EU and EU Regulations 883/2004/EC and 987/2009/EC on the coordination of social security systems.
Amendment 128 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point a
(a) identification of the provider, the provider’s nationality and the country in which its business is based, including, where applicable, registration numbers in central, commercial or company registers and for tax and social security purposes;
Amendment 140 #
2016/0403(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Commission is empowered to adopt – after consulting relevant stakeholders, such as professional organisations – delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 in order to further specify:
Amendment 77 #
Amendment 86 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Requirements should be readily understandable so that service providers can take the necessary steps easily. In that connection, the establishment of single points of contact in line with the Services Directive is key. Making the necessary forms and documents available in all the EU languages would be a further help to service providers.
Amendment 123 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Prior to the issuance of the European services e-card, a host Member State should be allowed to invoke legitimate policy concerns. Nevertheless, in the interest of allowing for a simplified and swift procedure, the principle of tacit approval should be observed in issuing a European services e-card. That is the general principle introduced under Directive 2006/123/EC. An alert of impending tacit approval and the extension of the applicable deadlines by two additional weeks should ensure that the host Member State has the appropriate time and means to consider applications for a European services e-card. A lack of information from the host Member State on applicable requirements should also not impede automatic issue ofWith that aim in view, the host Member State should have the appropriate time and means to consider applications for a European services e-card.
Amendment 126 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) A European services e-card should be valid for an indefin limited period in time, of time, and subject to regular checks on compliance by service providers, without prejudice to, in relation to temporary cross-border services, the effects of case-by-case derogations in accordance with Directive 2006/123/EC.
Amendment 137 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
This Directive shall be without prejudice to the rights of workers, the obligations of service providers and related controls in Member States laid down in Directives 96/71/EC and 2014/67/EU and EU Regulations No 883/2004 and No 987/2009 on the coordination of social security systems.
Amendment 143 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. “h‘Home Member State”’ means: means the Member State to which a provider which has been certified as being legally established and in compliance with the law in its home Member State addressed the application for a European services e-card;
Amendment 160 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
A European services e-card shall be valid for an indefinite duration, unless limited period and subject to regular checks on compliance by service providers. It must also be possible to suspended, revoked or cancelled it, in accordance with Articles 15 to 17.
Amendment 164 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8a To make it easier for service providers to take the necessary steps, the Commission is empowered to adopt an implementing act: - which introduces standard forms in the language of the host country summarising the requirements in each area of activity, which are to be made available to businesses via points of single contact; - which provides for the translation of these standard forms into all the other EU languages. Member States are invited to forward to the Commission, within nine months, all the information on the procedural steps to be completed in connection with the requirements imposed on service providers as regards the provision of services through a branch, agency or office and as regards the temporary cross-border provision of service activities which is needed to draw up standard forms, specifying which information and documents are required under national law, if that information was not contained in the notification of the requirement itself submitted under Articles 15(7) and 39(5) of Directive 2006/123/EC.
Amendment 170 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The coordinating authority of the home Member State shall, within one week of hava reasonable period following receivedpt of an application for a European services e-card:
Amendment 176 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The coordinating authority of the home Member State shall, upon completion of the tasks referred to in paragraph 1, communicate without delayin a reasonable time frame the application to the coordinating authority of the host Member State, with information to the applicant.
Amendment 180 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Within two weeks froma reasonable period following receivingpt of the application, to be agreed upon between the host and home Member States, the coordinating authority of the host Member State shall examine it and inform the applicant and the home Member State of any requirements applicable to temporary cross-border provisions under the legislation of the host Member State with the exception of those referred to in Article 5(4). In line with the rights of Member States as referred to in Article 10, the coordinating authority of the host Member State may, within the same time- limita reasonable time frame, decide to object to the issue of the European services e-card by the coordinating authority of the home Member State where it demonstrates that the application of a prior authorisation scheme, prior notification scheme or requirements to the applicant is justified for one of those overriding reasons of public interest set out in Article 16 of Directive 2006/123/EC or is admissible in accordance with other acts of EU law.
Amendment 183 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The host Member State shall take due account in that assessment of the requirements that the applicant already meets in its home Member States. For the purpose of that assessment and within the above-mentioned time-limitshortest possible time frame, to be agreed on between the competent authorities of the host and home Member States, the coordinating authority of the host Member State shall be allowed to request necessary clarifications or necessary additional information from the home Member State or the applicant which is not yet contained in the application. In that case, the time limit for the assessment procedure referred to in this paragraph is suspended until the requested necessary clarification or necessary additional information is supplied. The procedure for requesting clarifications or additional information will be laid down by way of the delegated acts referenced in paragraph 4.
Amendment 188 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Taking into account the rights of Member States as referred to in Article 10, if the coordinating authority of the host Member State doehas not reacted within the time-limit referred to in paragraph 1a reasonable period of time, that time limit shall automatically be extended by twofour additional weeks and the electronic platform where the application for a European services e-card has been submitted shall issue an alert to the coordinating authority of the host Member State to the effect that failure to react shall imply that there is no objection to the issue of the European services e-card to the applicant.
Amendment 190 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 192 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The decisions and actions of the coordinating authority of the home Member State, notified without delay to the applicant through the electronic platform where the standard form for application is made available, shall be subject to appeal under national law of the home Member State.
Amendment 193 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The decision by the coordinating authority of the host Member State to object to the issue of the European services e-card, shall without delay be notified to the applicant through the electronic platform where the standard form for application is made available, and shall be subject to appeal under national law of the host Member State.
Amendment 194 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 196 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
In the context of a procedure for issuing a European services e-card for establishment in the form of a branch, agency or office, the coordinating authority of the host Member State shall, within four weeks froma reasonable period following receivingpt of the application, to be determined by the host Member State in agreement with the home Member State, identify which, if any, prior authorisation scheme or prior notification scheme as referred to in Article 5(2) is applicable, in compliance with EU law, to such establishment. If such a prior authorisation scheme or prior notification scheme has been identified, the host Member State shall also identify the conditions which the applicant is required to comply with, with the exception of those referred to in Article 5(5). The host Member State shall indicate why the application of such a prior authorisation scheme or prior notification scheme is necessary and proportionate for the pursuance of overriding reasons of public interest.
Amendment 198 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Taking into account the rights of Member States as referred to in Article 10, if the coordinating authority of the host Member State does not react within the time-limit referred to in paragraph 1, that time limit shall automatically be extended by two additional weeks and the electronic platform where the application for a European services e-card has been submitted shall issue an alert to the coordinating authority of the host Member State to the effect that failure to react shall imply that the European services e- card shall be issued to the applicant.
Amendment 200 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The applicant shall describeprovide evidence to show which specific conditions are complied with by previous compliance with equivalent requirements in the home Member State.
Amendment 201 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The coordinating authority of the host Member State shall assess, within one week upona reasonable period of time following receipt of proof of compliance with the conditions identified in accordance with paragraph 1, to be set by the host Member State in agreement with the Member State of origin, whether to issue the European services e-card or reject the application for the European services e- card.
Amendment 202 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
In case the coordinating authority of the host Member State decides to issue the European services e-card, it shall do so without delayin a reasonable time frame.
Amendment 203 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Upon receipt of the observations of the applicant or, where no observations have been made, upon expiration of the time- limit to present those observations, the coordinating authority of the host Member State shall decide, within one weeka reasonable time frame, whether to issue the European services e- card or reject the application for the European services e-card.
Amendment 212 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Host Member States shall ensure that the coordinating authority who issued a European services e-card immediately suspends its validity or revokes it in case, respectively, of a decision, in accordance with EU law, determining a temporary or permanent ban on provision of the service activities in question by the European services e-card holder in the host Member State.
Amendment 213 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Host Member States shall ensure that coordinating authorities who issued a European services e-card immediately revoke it in case the e-card holder:
Amendment 217 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that, in case of a decision, in accordance with EU law, determining a temporary or permanent ban on provision of the service activities by the European services e-card holder in the home Member State, the coordinating authorities who issued a European services e-card immediately suspend the validity of or revoke, respectively, all European services e-cards issued for the same provider and service activity in question.
Amendment 218 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that, in case of a decision determining a temporary or permanent ban on provision of the service activities by the European services e-card holder in the host Member State, coordinating authorities who issued a European services e-card quickly suspend the validity of or revoke, respectively, all European services e-cards issued for the same provider and service activity in so far as the national law of the home Member State determines, in accordance with EU law, the suspension or termination of service activities in its territory due to, respectively, the temporary or permanent ban in question in the host Member State.
Amendment 219 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States shall ensure coordinating authorities who issued a European services e-card immediately revoke all European services e-cards issued for the same provider and service activities in case that provider:
Amendment 222 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A Member State which detects a reason to trigger the suspension or revocation of a European services e-card, in accordance with Articles 15 or 16, occurring in its territory shall immediately communicate via IMI to the holder of the European services e-card in question the motivation therefore and shall give it the opportunity to be heard.
Amendment 225 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Member States shall ensure that, as soon as the conditions which led to the suspension of a European services e-card are no longer valid, the issuing coordinating authority reactivates, without delay, the suspended European services e-card.
Amendment 226 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Host and home Member States shall oblige the holder of a European services e-card to inform, as soon as possible, the coordinating authority which issued its European services e-card of the following:
Amendment 235 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F
Annex I – Section F
Amendment 236 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 41
Annex I – Section F – Division 41
Amendment 237 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 41 – Group 41.1
Annex I – Section F – Division 41 – Group 41.1
Amendment 238 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 41 – Group 41.2
Annex I – Section F – Division 41 – Group 41.2
Amendment 239 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 42
Annex I – Section F – Division 42
Amendment 240 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 42 – Group 42.1
Annex I – Section F – Division 42 – Group 42.1
Amendment 241 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 42 – Group 42.2
Annex I – Section F – Division 42 – Group 42.2
Amendment 242 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 42 – Group 42.9
Annex I – Section F – Division 42 – Group 42.9
Amendment 243 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 43
Annex I – Section F – Division 43
Amendment 244 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.1
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.1
Amendment 245 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.2
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.2
Amendment 246 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.3
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.3
Amendment 247 #
2016/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.9
Annex I – Section F – Division 43 – Group 43.9
Amendment 159 #
2016/0398(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 191 #
2016/0398(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. With regard to draft measures on services, opinions from the Commission or Member States during the consultation may not affect any cultural policy measures, in particular in the audiovisual sphere, which Member States might adopt in accordance with the law of the Union, taking account of their linguistic diversity, their specific national and regional characteristics and their cultural heritage.
Amendment 531 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 94
Article 94
Amendment 671 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 1
Article 102 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that all end-users of the service referred to in paragraph 2, including users of public pay telephones, are able to access the emergency services, or, where applicable, the internal emergency services, through emergency communications free of charge and without having to use any means of payment, by using the single European emergency number ‘112’ and any national emergency number specified by Member States.
Amendment 684 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 3
Article 102 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that all emergency communications to the single European emergency number ‘112’ are appropriately answered and handled in the manner best suited to the national organisation of emergency systems, considering the need to answer in a multilingual manner. Such emergency communications shall be answered and handled at least as expeditiously and effectively as emergency communications to the national emergency number or numbers, where these continue to be in use.
Amendment 689 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 102 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The Commission, in consultation with the relevant competent authorities shall adopt a recommendation on performance indicators for Member States. The Commission shall report on the effectiveness of the implementation of the European emergency call number "112" and on the functioning of the performance indicators every two years.
Amendment 697 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 102 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall make sure that citizens and visitors are adequately informed on their mobile phone about the means for disabled end-users to reach the emergency services, especially when travelling to other countries;
Amendment 710 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 6
Article 102 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that citizens are adequately informed about the existence and use of the single European emergency number ‘112’, in particular through initiatives specifically targeting persons travelling between Member States. The Commission shall support and complement Member States actions.
Amendment 722 #
2016/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 102 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Member States shall ensure, through the use of electronic communications networks, the establishment of an efficient "reverse- 112" communication system, in case of imminent or developing natural and/or man-made major emergencies and disasters, taking into account existing national and regional systems and without hindering privacy.
Amendment 81 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) "Direct injection" means a two- step process by which broadcasting organisations transmit their programme- carrying signals for reception by the public to service providers point to point via a private line – by wire or over the air, including by satellite – in such a way that the programme-carrying signals cannot be received by the general public during such transmission; the service providers then offer these programmes to the public simultaneously, in an unaltered and unabridged manner, for viewing or listening on cable networks, microwave systems, digital terrestrial, closed-circuit IP-based and mobile networks or similar networks.
Amendment 84 #
2016/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2
Application of the principle of ‘country of origin’ to ancillary online services (1)The acts of communication to the public and of making available occurring when providing an ancillary online service by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation as well as the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of the ancillary online service shall, for the purposes of exercising copyright and related rights relevant for these acts, be deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment. (2)When fixing the amount of the payment to be made for the rights subject to the country of origin principle as set out in paragraph 1, the parties shall take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the features of the ancillary online service, the audience, and the language version.rticle 2 deleted
Amendment 99 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database. The newis exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply toapplies only to the mining of texts and data for non- commercial purposes. In order not to prejudice the normal exploitation of their works in the interests of developing the mining of texts and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception. Research organisations should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships, rightholders should be allowed to develop licences on the market and receive remuneration. The flexibility of the contractual solutions should also make it possible to take into account the diversity of the mining acts carried out and their purpose.
Amendment 115 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 132 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digital uses of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities. The use of the works or other subject-matter or extracts under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. Thus, for example, the exception should be limited to the use of brief extracts for intellectual works, except in the case of plays and poems. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limitation should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching.
Amendment 139 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digital uses and cross-border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism wshould, for example, allow giving precedence to licences f not, on the other hand, apply to sheet music or materials which are primarily intended for the educational market, for which it should be possible to arrange licences. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustration for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemes.
Amendment 160 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Member States should,This directive is based on specific solutions developed by Member States in order to deal within the framework provided for in this Directive, have flexibility in choosing the specific type of mechanism allowing for licences fissues raised by mass digitisation through systems for out- of-commerce works. Such solutions take into account the specific characteristics of the various types of work out-of-commerce works to extend tor other subject- matter and of the various users; they are devised on the basis of consensus between the stakeholders. This Directive also embodies the prights of rightholders that are not represented by the collective management organisation,nciples informing the Memorandum of Understanding on Key Principles on the Digitisation and Making Available of Out-of-Commerce Works, signed on 20 September 2011 by representatives of European libraries, authors, publishers and collective management organisations under the aegis of the Commission. Member States should have a certain margin of discretion to choose the specific type of arrangement in accordance towith their legal traditions, practices or circumstances. Such mechanisms can include extended collective licensing, legal mandates and presumptions of representation.
Amendment 240 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provide access to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities andinstallations and thus performing an act of communication to the public and/or making available to the public, as well as an act of reproduction, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders who so request, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
Amendment 251 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect ofthe interests of ensuring legal certainty for users of services, these agreements should cover the liability of the latter when they are not acting professionally for acts falling under Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC that they perform. In respect of this Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider plays an active role, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-mattercontent provided by the service or promoting themat content, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.
Amendment 276 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing access to the public to largesignificant amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.
Amendment 282 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) In view of the requirements imposed by this directive regarding contracts and cooperation between information society service providers and rightholders, it is necessary to provide for an intermediate procedure which will permit the parties to seek an amicable solution to any dispute concerning the relevant provisions of this directive. Member States should support such a mechanism by designating an impartial body with relevant experience and competence to assist the parties in the resolution of their dispute.
Amendment 283 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39 b (new)
Recital 39 b (new)
(39 b) It should be recalled that, both in general and in the light of the references to Article 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC made in this directive, a work and/or other subject-matter is communicated to the public and/or made available to the public when a natural or legal person affords access to it to persons outside their normal family circle or most immediate associates. For this purpose it makes no difference that the latter can gain access to the works and/or other subject-matter at the same place or in different places and at the same time or at different times.
Amendment 293 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41 a) Authors and performers very often receive no remuneration when their works or interpretations are exploited, especially through online services, and do not have the legal tools to enable them to receive such remuneration. This situation is particularly evident in the audiovisual sector and the bargaining power of the authors and performers of audiovisual works is significantly weakened as a result. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in the Member States, a principle of fair remuneration should be put in place which is tailored to each mode of exploitation. Member States should be allowed great flexibility so that they can implement this remuneration in accordance with their legal traditions and national practices.
Amendment 319 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) ‘lawful access’ means access to lawfully acquired content.
Amendment 327 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful access for thenon-commercial purposes of scientific research.
Amendment 346 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter, or of extracts thereof, with the exception of content intended chiefly for the educational market and the market in musical scores, for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use:
Amendment 355 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) is limited to the duration justified for the sole purpose of illustration for teaching;
Amendment 361 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States may provide that the exception adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 does not apply generally or as regards specific types of works or other subject- matter, to the extent that adequate licences authorising the acts described in paragraph 1 are easily available in the market.
Amendment 372 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States mayshall provide for fair compensation for the harm incurred by the rightholders due to the use of their works or other subject-matter pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 394 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Access to content permitted by an exception or limitation shall not give the beneficiary of the exception or limitation the right to use the content concerned in the context provided for by another exception or limitation. Article 5(5) and the first, third and fifth subparagraphs of Article 6(4) of Directive 2001/29/EC shall apply to the exceptions and the limitation provided for under this Title.
Amendment 396 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Use of out-of-commerce works by cultural heritage institutions
Amendment 399 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide that when a collective management organisation, on behalf of its members, concludes a non-exclusive licence for non-commercial purposes with a cultural heritage institution, following consultations with representatives of rightholders, cultural heritage institutions and other users, a legal mechanism whereby exclusive or non-exclusive licences may be granted for the digitisation, distribution, communication to the public or making available of out-of-commerce works or other subject-matter permanently in the collections of the institution, such a non-exclusive licence may be extended or presumed to apply to rightholders of the same category as those covered by the licence who are not represented by the collective management organisations, provided that:
Amendment 401 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the collective management organisation is, on the basis of mandates from rightholders, broadly representative of rightholders in the category of works or other subject-matter and of the rights which are the subject of the licencorganisation responsible for granting licences is broadly representative of rightholders in accordance with the procedures laid down in the legislation of the Member State;
Amendment 403 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) all rightholders may at any time object to their works or other subject- matter being deemed to be out of commerce and exclude the application of the licence to their works or other subject- matter. This legal mechanism may take the form, in particular, of an extended collective licence, a legal mandate or a presumption.
Amendment 410 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
A work or other subject-matter shall be deemed to be out of commerce when the whole work or other subject-matter, in all its translations, versions and manifestations, is not available to the public through customary channels of commerce and cannot be reasonably expected to become so.
Amendment 412 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall ensure that the licences referred to in paragraph 1 are sought from a collective management organisation that is representative forin the Member State where:
Amendment 460 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works andor other subject-matter uploaded by their users
Amendment 469 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperation conclude equitable agreements with all holders of rights to those works at the request of the rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC. Under the terms of the agreements concluded with the rightholders, the information society service providers shall take measures to ensure the functioning of agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prev. The agreements should cover the liability of users of information society service providers whent the availability on their services ofse users are not acting professionally in respect of acts falling under Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/31/EC which they perform. When information society service providers (i) play an active part but are not required to conclude a licence agreement by the holders of rights to works or other subject- matter stored by them and to which they provide public access, or (ii) are eligible for the liability exemption provided for in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, but store and provide to the public access to a large number of protected works or other subject-matter, these information society service providers shall take measures to prevent protected works or other subject- matter identified by rightholders through theolders in cooperation with the service providers from being made available by their services. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-matter. Rightholders shall provide information society service providers with all relevant and necessary details to ensure the functioning of measures taken by the service providers pursuant to this article.
Amendment 492 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measures referred to in paragraph 1. Any complaint filed under one of the mechanisms shall be processed by the relevant rightholder within a reasonable period of time. The rightholder shall provide evidence for the rights being claimed.
Amendment 504 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments. In cooperation with the Member States, the Commission shall encourage the exchange of best practices across the Union regarding the results of any cooperation established pursuant to the implementation of paragraph 1.
Amendment 513 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a 1. Member States shall provide that where an author of an audiovisual work transfers to a producer his right to authorise or prohibit the making available of that work to the public, he shall retain the right to obtain equitable remuneration for making such work available. 2. That right to equitable remuneration for making the work available shall be nontransferable and may not be renounced. 3. The management of that right to equitable remuneration for making the work available shall be equitable shall be entrusted to collective management organisations representing audiovisual authors, unless other collective agreements, including voluntary collective management agreements, already guarantee such remuneration for audiovisual authors. 4. Authors’ societies shall receive this equitable remuneration from the audiovisual media services which make the audiovisual works available to the public.
Amendment 541 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14a Fair and separate remuneration Member States shall ensure that authors and performers receive fair remuneration for each mode of exploitation of their protected works and other subject-matter.
Amendment 548 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that authors and performers are entitled to request additional, appropriate remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the subsequent relevant revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.
Amendment 111 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) This Regulation should not affect the competition law provisions governing selective sales and should strike a reasonable balance between the banning of unjustified discrimination and the safeguarding of contractual freedom in order to allow scope for the development of tailored commercial strategies.
Amendment 112 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) This Regulation should not undermine national laws laying down single prices for books, whether printed or digital. Compliance with national laws governing single prices for books could be a justification for the application of different conditions of sale by distributors.
Amendment 121 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Given the specific nature of cultural works and the specific commercial models for their distribution, this Regulation should not affect the principle of the territoriality of copyright in cultural sectors.
Amendment 424 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. By [date: twofour years after the entry into force of this Regulation] and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall report on the evaluation of this Regulation to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. That report shall, where necessary, be accompanied by a proposal for an amendment of this Regulation, in light of legal, technical and economic developments.
Amendment 430 #
2016/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. The first evaluation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be carried out, in particular, with a view to assessing whether the prohibition of Article 4(1)(b) should also apply to electronically supplied services, the main feature of which is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter, provided that the trader has the requisite rights for the relevant territories; this in-depth evaluation shall take account of the specific nature of the copyright-protected works and the methods used to distribute them.
Amendment 161 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 4 – paragraph1
Article 4 – paragraph1
Amendment 178 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 6
Article 6
Member States shall ensure by appropriate means that audiovisual media services provided by media service providers under their jurisdiction do not contain (a) any incitement to undermine human dignity or any incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation; (b) any incitement to commit or to seek to justify terrorist acts;
Amendment 227 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that providers of on-demand audiovisual media services under their jurisdiction secure at least a 240% share of European works in their catalogue and ensure prominence of these works. Member States may require providers of on-demand audiovisual media services which target audiences on their territory but are established in another Member State to include a proportion of European audiovisual works as laid down in the Member State targeted.
Amendment 232 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that providers of on-demand audiovisual media services foreground European works in their catalogues. That foregrounding could take the form of a section accessible straight from the home page which is devoted to European works or of a minimum number or percentage of European works available on the home page, or of the promotion of such works by means of recommendation and promotion tools or services available as part of the on-demand audiovisual media services. Member States may require providers of on-demand audiovisual media services which target audiences on their territory but which are established in another Member State to implement the measures to foreground European audiovisual works laid down in the targeted Member State.
Amendment 244 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
The transmission of films made for television (excluding series, serials and documentaries), cinematographic works and news programmes may be interrupted by television advertising and/or teleshopping once for each scheduled period of at least 230 minutes.
Amendment 250 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. The daily proportion of television advertising spots and teleshopping spots within the period between 7:00 and 23:00a given clock hour shall not exceed 20 %.
Amendment 268 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) protect all minors from content which may impair their physical, mental or moral development;
Amendment 272 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) protect all citizens from content and commercial audiovisual communications undermining human dignity and containing incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin. sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation;
Amendment 280 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) protect all citizens from content containing incitement to commit or seeking to justify terrorist acts;
Amendment 282 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) protect all citizens from content which could impair their physical, mental or moral development;
Amendment 285 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 299 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) the streamlined processing of referrals from public authorities or approved associations,
Amendment 300 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f b (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f b (new)
(fb) earmarking sufficient human resources to ensure that such referrals can be processed effectively,
Amendment 301 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f c (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f c (new)
(fc) the removal of the content referred to in paragraph 1 through the use of reliable automatic recognition systems,
Amendment 302 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f d (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f d (new)
(fd) the closure of accounts which have been the subject of repeated referrals,
Amendment 303 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f e (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – point f e (new)
(fe) the possibility of asking the regulator to settle any dispute between the video-sharing platform and the author of the referral.
Amendment 305 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 28 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States may impose penalties on video-sharing platforms which do not meet these requirements.
Amendment 310 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 5
Article 28 a – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall not impose on video-sharing platform providers measures that are stricter than the measures referred to in paragraph 1 and 2. Member States shall not be precluded from imposing stricter measures with respect to illegal content. When adopting such measures, they shall respect the conditions set by applicable Union law, such as, where appropriate, those set in Articles 14 and 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC or Article 25 of Directive 2011/93/EU.
Amendment 325 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 28 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that video- sharing platform providers (a) which are not established on their territory, but which have either a parent company or a subsidiary that is established on their territory or which are part of a group and another entity of that group is established on their territory, (b) which are established in another Member State but target audiences on their territory, are deemed to have been established on their territory for the purposes of Article 3(1) of Directive 2000/31/EEC.
Amendment 326 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Amendment 328 #
2016/0151(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 b – paragraph 2
Article 28 b – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission a list of the video- sharing platform providers established or deemed to be established on their territory and the criteria, set out in Article 3(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC and in paragraph 1, on which their jurisdiction is based. They shall update the list regularly. The Commission shall ensure that the competent independent regulatory authorities have access to this information.
Amendment 209 #
2016/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title
Article 4 – title
Article 4 Transparency of tariffs and terminal rates
Amendment 215 #
2016/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 225 #
2016/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Amendment 249 #
2016/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 269 #
2016/0149(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6
Article 6
Amendment 212 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In the digital environment in particular, the competent authorities should be able to stop infringements quickly and effectively, notably where the trader selling goods or services conceals its identity or relocates within the Union or to a third country to avoid enforcement. In cases where there is a risk of serious and irreparable harm to consumers, the competent authorities should to be able to adopt interim measures to prevent such harm or reduce it, including, where necessary, the suspension of a website, domain or a similar digital site, service or account. FurthermorIn such a case, the competent authorities should also have the power to take down or have a third party service provider take down a website, domain or a similar digital site, service or account,
Amendment 218 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure that traders are sufficiently deterred from committing or repeating infringements and that they will not profit from those infringements, the rules on penaltiesanctions which have been adopted by Member States in accordance with the requirements of Union laws that protect consumers’ interests should also be applied to intra-Union infringements and widespread infringements. For those same reasons, consumers should be entitled to redress for harm caused by such infringements.,
Amendment 231 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In the context of widespread infringements and widespread infringement with a Union dimension, the rights of defence of the traders concerned should be respected. TWhile this requires, in particular, giving the trader the right to be heard and to use the language of its choice during the proceedings, it is also essential to ensure compliance with Union legislation on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information,
Amendment 239 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation and exercise of the minimum powers of competent authorities, set time limits and set out other necessary details of procedures intended, in accordance with this Regulation, to address intra-Union infringements, widespread infringements and details of the surveillance mechanism and administrative cooperation among competent authorities, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council60 , _________________ 60 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2. 2011, p. 13-18).
Amendment 248 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. This Regulation shall be without prejudice to the application in the Member States of measures relating to judicial cooperation in criminal and civil matters, in particular the operation of the European Judicial Network, and to the application of legal instruments regarding judicial cooperation in criminal matters.
Amendment 330 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point m
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point m
(m) impose penaltiesanctions, including fines and penalty payments, for intra-Union infringements, widespread infringements and widespread infringements with a Union dimension, and for the failure to comply with any decision, order, interim measure, commitment or other measure adopted pursuant to this Regulation;
Amendment 348 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where in accordance with national law prior authorisation to enter premises of natural and legal persons as referred to in point (d) of paragraph 2 is needed from the judicial authority of the Member State concerned, the power referred to in that point shall be exercised only after such prior authorisation has been obtained.
Amendment 355 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The competent authorities shall exercise the powers set out in Article 8 in a proportionate, efficient and effective manner and in accordance with this Regulation, Union and national law either:
Amendment 369 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Amendment 377 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Amendment 385 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) which penaltiesanctions have been imposed;
Amendment 386 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. The requested authority shall reply to the request using the procedures for requests for enforcement measures and within the time limits set out by the Commission in the implementing actappropriate time limits.
Amendment 387 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Amendment 393 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Amendment 403 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c – paragraph 2
A request for enforcement measures cannot be refused on the ground that insufficient information has been provided if a request for information on the same intra-Union infringement was refused on the grounds that criminal investigations or judicial or administrative proceedings have already been initiated or final judgment has already been given in respect of the same intra- Union infringement and against the same trader, as referred to in paragraph (1)(c).
Amendment 406 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 7
Article 15 – paragraph 7
Amendment 415 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. The competent authorities concerned may invite the Commission to take up the coordination role. The Commission shall inform the competent authorities concerned without delay whether it accepts the coordination role. If, however, that request is made by a majority of Members States accounting together for at least a majority of the population of the Union, the Commission shall not refuse the coordination role.
Amendment 421 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authorities concerned shall ensure that the necessary evidence, data and information are gathered effectively and efficiently. The competent authorities concerned shall ensure that investigations and inspections are conducted simultaneously and that interim measures are applied simultaneously to the extent that national procedural law so allows.
Amendment 437 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20
Article 20
Amendment 444 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Where there is a reasonable suspicion that a widespread infringement harmed, harms or is likely to harm consumers in at least three quarters ohalf the Member States accounting together for at least three quarters ohalf the population of the Union ("widespread infringement with a Union dimension"), the Commission shall launch a common action. For that purpose the Commission may request the necessary information or documents from the competent authorities.
Amendment 453 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Amendment 463 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Amendment 485 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Amendment 489 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Amendment 498 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Amendment 502 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Amendment 527 #
2016/0148(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 47 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Those penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 32 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Combating fraud, social dumping, abuse and circumvention of the rules in relation to the posting of workers is a priority. Strengthening European rules on the posting of workers is therefore an absolute imperative.
Amendment 35 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Almost twenty years after its adoption, it is necessary to assess whether and in view of the numerous instances of fraud, the Posting of Workers Directive stilldoes not yet strikes the right balance between the need to promote the freedom to provide services and the need to protect the rights of posted workers.
Amendment 40 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) The abuse observed in the implementation of the current Directive also derives from the application of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems, which must also be amended as quickly as possible.
Amendment 41 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4b) To combat wage and tax dumping, the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems must lead to the strict harmonisation of social security contributions systems between Member States.
Amendment 67 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In view of the long duration of certain posting assignments, it is necessary to provide that, in case of posting lasting for periods higher than 24 months, the host Member State is deemed to be the country in which the work is carried out. In accordance with the principle of Rome I Regulation, the law of the host Member Sates therefore applies to the employment contract of such posted workers if no other choice of law was made by the parties. In case a different choice was made, it cannot, however, have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law of the host Member State. This should apply from the start of the posting assignment whenever it is envisaged for more than 24 months and from the first day subsequent to the 24 months when it effectively exceeds this duration. This rule does not affect the right of undertakings posting workers to the territory of another Member State to invoke the freedom to provide services in circumstances also where the posting exceeds 24 months. The purpose is merely to create legal certainty in the application of the Rome I Regulation to a specific situation, without amending that Regulation in any way. The employee will in particular enjoy the protection and benefits pursuant to the Rome I Regulation. To prevent any risk of the law being circumvented, the aggregate duration of postings should be taken into account.
Amendment 79 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 182 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2 – point g a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2 – point g a (new)
‘(ga) equal social protection at work, including with regard to the prevention of and compensation for accidents at work;’
Amendment 188 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2 – point g b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2 – point g b (new)
(gb) the same level of contributions and old-age pensions;
Amendment 219 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1b a (new)
(ca) The following paragraph is added: ‘1aa. The employer in the Member State of origin must be able to provide evidence of substantial activities in its country of origin, by generating at least 50 % of its turnover in that Member State.’
Amendment 220 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c b (new)
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1b b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1b b (new)
(cb) The following paragraph is added: ‘1ab. There must be a period of service of at least six months in the contractual relationship between the posted worker and his or her employer prior to any posting.’
Amendment 221 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c c (new)
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1b c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1b c (new)
(cc) The following paragraph is added: ‘1ac. There must be a prohibition on posting by a company which is hiring a temporary worker provided by a temporary work agency of another Member State.’
Amendment 222 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c d (new)
(cd) The following paragraph is added: ‘1ad. Coordination between the national employment inspection bodies and European cooperation to combat fraud relating to the posting of workers must be stepped up.’
Amendment 240 #
2016/0070(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
(2a) The following Article is inserted: ‘Article 7 a The application of this Directive is suspended pending the revision of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and the implementation by that regulation of the homogenisation of the social security contributions, both by employers and others, relating to work performed by workers posted between Member States, within five years of the adoption of this Directive.’
Amendment 214 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) As consumer protection is a priority of the Union, manufacturers of vehicles circulating in the Union must be required to submit those vehicles for testing before being placed on the market and during their lifetime. Member States and the Commission must be guarantors of this double surveillance, one able to act where the other fails to do so.
Amendment 215 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) The EU must do all it can to prevent cheating by car manufacturers designed to manipulate pollution emission and fuel consumption tests in order to produce false results or circumvent any other rules. Such manipulation must stop once and for all.
Amendment 216 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 c (new)
Recital 5 c (new)
(5c) This Regulation seeks to address the slow pace of vehicle recall operations in Europe. The existing procedure does not guarantee effective protection of European citizens, unlike the US procedure, which allowed action to be taken quickly. From this perspective, it is essential to allow the Commission to require economic operators to take all necessary restrictive measures, including the recall of vehicles, in order that non- conforming vehicles, systems, components or other separate technical units are brought into line with this Regulation.
Amendment 217 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 d (new)
Recital 5 d (new)
(5d) If an irregularity is detected in vehicles in circulation which is contrary to the initial authorisation rules and/or puts consumer safety at risk or exceeds pollution limits it is in the interests of European consumers to be able to count on rapid, appropriate and coordinated corrective measures, including a vehicle recall, where necessary, applicable throughout the Union. Member States must provide the Commission with all the information in their possession so that it can take appropriate, rapid action to defend the integrity of the single market.
Amendment 271 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to increase transparency in the approval process and facilitate the exchange of information and the independent verification by market surveillance authorities, approval authorities and, the Commission, type approval document and third parties, disclosure of vehicle and testing information is necessary to carry out such checks. Relevant information should be provided in electronic format and be made publicly available, subject to exemptions due to protection of commercial interests and the protection of personal data. The information to be disclosed for these purposes is not be of the nature as to undermine confidentiality of proprietary information and intellectual property.
Amendment 283 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) The Commission must be able to verify conformity with type-approvals and with the legislation applicable to vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units and ensure the regularity of type-approvals by organising, carrying out or requiring to be carried out tests and inspections of vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units which have already been placed on the market.
Amendment 302 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) Type-approvals for category M1 and N1 vehicles are issued for a limited period of five years, and for category N2, N3, M2, M3 and O vehicles for a limited period of eight years.
Amendment 358 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 56 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 56 a (new)
(56a) 'defeat device' means any functional element of design, when functioning accordingly, that prevents the vehicle's approved control and monitoring systems from being effective and efficient as well as prevents compliance with the approval requirements under the whole spectrum of real-world driving conditions.
Amendment 388 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Article 6 – paragraph 6
6. The Member States shall periodically review and assess the functioning of their type-approval activities. Such reviews and assessments shall be carried out at least every four years and the results thereof shall be communicated to the other Member States, the European Parliament and the Commission. The Member State concerned shall make a summary of the results accessible to the public, in particular the number of type-approval granted and the identity of the corresponding manufacturers.
Amendment 396 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The Member States shall ensure that the market surveillance authorities and the type-approval authorities can properly perform the tasks foreseen by this regulation. To this end, they shall in particular equip them with the resources necessary for that purpose.
Amendment 418 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Market surveillance authorities shall perform regular checks to verify compliance of vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units with the requirements set out in this Regulation as well as with the correctness of the type approvals. Those checks shall be performed on an adequate scale, by means of documentary checks and real- drive and laboratory tests on the basis of statistically relevant samples. When doing so, market surveillance authorities shall take account of established principles of risk assessment, complaints and other information. For the sample checks, market surveillance authorities shall use 0.5 samples per 1,000 new vehicles, per components or per separate technical units each sold per year as an indicative target for each Member State.
Amendment 481 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Those tests and inspections may take place on new vehicles supplied by manufacturers or the economic operator as provided in paragraph 2 below, or on registered vehicles in agreement with the vehicle registration holder.
Amendment 489 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Manufacturers holding type- approvals or the economic operators shall, upon request, supply to the Commission a statistically relevant number of production vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units selected by the Commission that are representative for the vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units available for placing on the market under that type- approval. Those vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units shall be supplied for testing at the time and place and for the period the Commission may require, depending on the situation.
Amendment 493 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
For the purpose of enabling the Commission to carry out the testing referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, Member States shall make immediately available to the Commission all data related to the type- approval of the vehicle, systems, components and separate technical units subject to compliance verification testing. Those data shall include at least the information included in the type-approval certificate and its attachments referred to Article 26(1).
Amendment 496 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
For vehicles approved in accordance with the step-by-step or multistage type- approval procedure, Member States shallmust also provide the Commission with the type-approval certificate and its attachments referred to in Article 26(1) for the underlying type-approvals of systems, components and separate technical units.
Amendment 500 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. Vehicle manufacturers shall make public data which are needed for the purpose of compliance verification testing by third parties. This data shall in particular comprise parameters and settings that are necessary to accurately replicate test conditions that were applied at time of the type-approval testing. The data does not cover specific design details and technical specifications of parts and elements of the vehicle which do not need to be adjusted or altered I order to replicate the test conditions. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts in order to define the data to be made public and the conditions for such publication, subject to the protection of commercial secrets and the preservation of personal data pursuant to Union and national legislation. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 87(2).
Amendment 502 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. Vehicle manufacturers shall make public data which are needed for the purpose of compliance verification testing by third parties. These data must include the necessary information to replicate the conditions of the test carried out upon type-approval of the vehicle. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts in order to define the data to be made public and the conditions for such publication, subject to the protection of commercial secrets and the preservation of personal data pursuant to Union and national legislation. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 87(2).
Amendment 505 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission should guarantee that such data are made available for the purpose of further testing and follow up in order to use every evidence to avoid any neglecting.
Amendment 515 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Where those tests and inspections put into question the correctness of the type approval itself, the Commission shall immediately inform the approval authority or authorities concerned as well as the Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement.
Amendment 518 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
The Commission shall publish a report of its findings following any compliance verification testing it has carried out and forward it to the European Parliament as soon as possible.
Amendment 519 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
The Commission shall publish a report of its findings following any compliance verification testing it has carried out. It shall submit the report to the European Parliament.
Amendment 549 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
In order to ensure transparency of its work vis-à-vis third parties and non- governmental organizations interested in the enforcement of legislation in automotive sector, at least once a year the Forum shall meet in an extended composition and invite those third parties and non-governmental organisation to attend the meeting.
Amendment 560 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The Commission should guarantee that independent third parties could to bring their test results for consideration by the Forum and the Commission should follow-up on such suspicion.
Amendment 589 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The manufacturer shall, to protect the environment, health and safety of consumers, investigate and keep a register of complaints and non-conformities of vehicles, systems, components, separate technical units, parts or equipment that he placed on the market and keep his importers and distributors informed of such monitoring. If the number of complaints and/or non- conformities concerning safety or emission related equipment exceed 30 cases or 1 per cent of the total of vehicles, which ever value is higher, systems, components, separate technical units, parts or equipment of a particular type, variant and/or version that have been placed on the market, detailed information shall be sent to the relevant approval authority responsible for the vehicle, system, component, separate technical unit, part or equipment as well as to the Commission without delay. The information shall contain a description of the issue and details necessary to identify the affected type, variant and/or version of the vehicle, system, component, separate technical unit, part or equipment. This early warning data shall be used for identifying potential trends in consumer complaints and investigating the need for manufacturer initiated recalls and/or market surveillance activities by Member states and the Commission.
Amendment 594 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A manufacturer who considers that a vehicle, system, component, separate technical unit, or part or equipment that has been placed on the market or entered into service is not in conformity with this Regulation or that the type approval has been granted on the basis incorrect data, shall immediately take the appropriate measures necessary to bring that vehicle, system, component, separate technical unit, part or equipment into conformity, to withdraw it from the market or to recall it, as appropriate. These corrective measures shall be provided free of charge for the vehicle owner.
Amendment 622 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. The importer shall, to protect the health and safety of consumers, investigate and keep a register of complaints, non- conformities and recalls of vehicles, systems, components, separate technical units, parts or equipment that he has placed on the market and keep his distributors informed of such monitoring. All complaints and/or non-conformities concerning environmental or safety aspects of the vehicle shall be communicated to the manufactures without delay.
Amendment 636 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. A distributor shall verify, before making available on the market, registering or entering into service of a vehicle, system, component or separate technical unit, that that vehicle, system, component or separate technical unit bears the required statutory plate or type-approval mark, that it is accompanied by the required documents and by instructions and safety information, required by Article 63, in the official language or languages of the relevant Member State, and that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 11(7) and Article 14(4) respectively. 2. The distributer shall, to protect the environment, health and safety of consumers, investigate complaints and non-conformities of vehicles, systems, components, separate technical units, parts or equipment that he has placed on the market. Furthermore, all complaints and/or non-conformities concerning environmental or safety aspects of the vehicle shall be communicated to the importer or manufacturer without delay.
Amendment 741 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. Those national fees regarding type- approvals activities shall be levied on the manufacturers who have applied for type- approval in the Member State concerned. The national fees regarding market surveillance activities shall be levied by the Member State in which the products are placed on the market. Fees shall not be levied directly by technical services.
Amendment 767 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Type-approvals for vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units shall be issued for a limited period of 5 years without the possibility of prolongation of categories M1 and N1 shall be issued for a limited period of 5 years and for vehicles of categories N2, N3, M2, M3 and O for a limited period of 8 years. The expiry date shall be indicated in the type-approval certificate. After the expiry of tThe type-approval certificate, it may be renewed upon application by the manufacturer and only where the approval authority has verified that the type of vehicle, system, component and separate technical unit complies with all the requirements of the relevant regulatory acts for new vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units of that types.
Amendment 776 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) where the production of vehicles in conformity with the approved type of vehicle is permanently discontinued on a voluntary basis;; the production of a vehicle shall be considered permanently discontinued when no vehicle of the type concerned was produced over a period of two years.
Amendment 846 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. Where vehicles, accompanied by a certificate of conformity, or systems, components or separate technical units accompanied by a certificate of conformity or bearing an approval mark do not conform to the approved type, or are not in conformity with this regulation or were approved on the basis of incorrect data, the approval authorities, market surveillance authorities or the Commission may take the necessary restrictive measures in accordance with Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008, to prohibit or restrict the making available on the market, registration or entry into service on the market of non-compliantshall require without delay the relevant economic operator to take all appropriate corrective measures to bring the vehicle, system, component or separate technical unit into compliance with those requirements, or take restrictive measures, either to withdraw the vehicles, systems, components or separate technical units, or to withdraw them from thate market or to recall them, including the withdrawal of the type-approval by the approval authority that granted the EU type-approval, until the relevant economic operator has taken all appropriate corrective measures to ensure that vehicles, systems, components or separate technical units are brought into conformityor to recall it within a reasonable period, depending on the nature of the risk.
Amendment 847 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. Where vehicles, accompanied by a certificate of conformity or systems, components or separate technical units accompanied by a certificate of conformity or bearing an approval mark do not conform to the approved type, or are not in conformity with this regulation or were approved on the basis of incorrect data, the approval authorities, market surveillance authorities or the Commission may take the necessary restrictive measures in accordance with Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008, to prohibit or restrict the making available on the market, registrshall require economic operators immediately to take the restrictive measures necessary to ensure that vehicles, systems, components or other separate technical units that do not conform to the approved type comply with this regulation, or entry into service on the market ofto take all the steps required to withdraw all non-compliant vehicles, systems, components or other separate technical units, or to withdraw them from that market or to recall them from that market as quickly as possible, including the withdrawal of the type-approval by the approval authority that granted the EU type-approval, until the relevant economic operator has taken all appropriate corrective measures to ensure that vehicles, systems, components or separate technical units are brought into conformityor to recall them.
Amendment 1113 #
2016/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 91 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 91 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 715/2007
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
(3a) in Article 5, the following subparagraph is added after paragraph 2 point c: 'Manufacturers seeking EU type-approval for a vehicle using a BES, AES or defeat device, as defined in this Regulation or Regulation 2016/646/EU, shall provide the type-approval authority with all information, including technical justification, that may be reasonably required by the type-approval authority to determine whether the BES or AES is a defeat device and whether a derogation to the prohibition on the use of defeat devices under Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) 715/2007 is applicable. The approval authority shall not grant EU type-approval until it has completed its assessment and has determined that the type of vehicle is not equipped with a prohibited defeat device in accordance with this Article and Regulation (EC) No 692/2008.'.
Amendment 29 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas counterfeiting is a serious threat to public health and safety and the total value of counterfeit goods trafficking has increased significantly in recent years, exacerbating the devastating impact of counterfeiting on innovation, employment and the branding of European companies;
Amendment 113 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’s determination to address the difficulties faced by SMEs as a result of the complexity of differing national VAT regulations; extends its full support to the Commission in respect of the VAT reform; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of further coordination and, in particular, to assess the possibility of a single tax in the e-commerce sector and to tackle the distortion of competition caused by the different VAT regimes applicable to public and private bodies;
Amendment 150 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission to develop a strategy to ensure the neutrality of all the rules applicable to all infrastructure projects, regardless of their construction and management modes, whether public, private or in public-private partnerships;
Amendment 159 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recalls the urgent need to provide consumers with an equivalent level of protection online and offline; stresses the need for all economic operators operating online and offline in the single market to take all reasonable and appropriate measures to fight against counterfeiting, in order to ensure consumer protection and product safety;
Amendment 187 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that, in the collaborative economy, the same rulall similar services should apply tomeet the same servicregulatory objectives, with a view to ensuring a level playing field and consumer safety while avoiding fragmentation that would hamper the development of new business models;
Amendment 254 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to further support the Member States in developing a strong culture of compliance and enforcement, including by developing implementation plans for new major legislation and organising compliance dialogues with Member States; stresses that correct enforcement and better regulation are essential wherever regulatory fragmentation is hampering business activity and reducing consumer choice and should cover all business sectors and apply to existing and future legislation;
Amendment 292 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Reiterates its call for the rapid adoption of the Product Safety and Market Surveillance Package by the Council; underlines the importance of providing relevant information on retail products, in particular the indication of country of origin, which is crucial to protect consumers and to strengthen the fight against counterfeiting;
Amendment 296 #
2015/2354(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to tighten up the penalties for counterfeiting and to make sure that EU legislation in this area is fully enforced;
Amendment 30 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as nationalre are still non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to the free movement of goods and services, such as national regulatory and non-regulatory technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers;
Amendment 63 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justified or are disproportionate;
Amendment 75 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that extended non-compliance with Union law by Member States is detrimental for the single market; considers also that the slow compliancetransposition process leads to some Member States benefiting from an undue prolongation of the transpositioncompliance deadline;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slowlate transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation;
Amendment 97 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; considers that the Commission should hold transposition workshops should be held in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Draws attention to the low levels of cross-border public procurement, with less than 20 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms;
Amendment 120 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to focus on ground-level enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the Member States;
Amendment 134 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to act decisively to improve the application of mutual recognition; anticipates, in that context, the Commission’s plans to increase awareness and reviseof the Mutual Recognition Regulation with a view to revising, where appropriate, the existing guidance documents;
Amendment 138 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Draws attention to the problems for service providers, especially in business services and construction, stemming from multiple unjustified or disproportionate requirements concerning authorisations, registration or prior notification requirements;
Amendment 148 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Draws attention also to the unjustified or disproportionate restrictions in some Member States as regards the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards unjustified or disproportionate restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession; considers that these restrictions are serious obstacles to cross-border service provision;
Amendment 158 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to address these barriers, including through improved mutual recognition and, if appropriate, by taking legislative action, such as the Commission’s recently announced Services Passport initiative; stresses that it is important to ensure that the Services Passport is coordinated with the European professional card;
Amendment 165 #
2015/2346(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Points out that many of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions arethe existence of unjustified or disproportionate and createrules maintains unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas this challenge requires global solutions; whereas, however, 86 % of the world’s refugees live in developing regions, with least developed countries hosting 26 % of the total; whereas the million people who arrived in the EU in 2015 represented 0.2 % of the EU population, compared with much higher percentages in neighbouring countries;
Amendment 91 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the increase in human mobility, if managed in a safe, orderly, regular and responsible manner, can provide significant benefits, as recognised by the 2030 Agenda, but these are often largely underestimated; whereas the ageing of the European population requires, among other measures, relyingmay prompt Member States to provide for the recruitment onf foreign workers in order to guarantee an adequate balance between active and retired peoplemeet specific labour-market needs;
Amendment 100 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas if the Union wishes to introduce a common migration policy it must begin by controlling its external borders effectively;
Amendment 179 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that EU development cooperation should continue to address the root causes of forced displacement by promoting peace, democracy and, security and economic development, reducing poverty and inequality, strengthening basic services, addressing state fragility and promoting human rights and good governance, in line with Sustainable Development Goal 16 in the new 2030 Agenda;
Amendment 353 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for the establishment of a genuine, value-based common European migration policy – with adequate legal channels for migration as a sustainable long-term policy to promote growth and cohesion within the EU – in order to set a clear framework for EU relations with third countries; welcomes the EU Action Plan against migrant smuggling (2015-2020), which envisages closer cooperation with third countries, but underlines that the implementation of a common EU legal migration policy would be instrumental in breaking the business model of smugglers; points out that the EU must first properly secure its external borders;
Amendment 391 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. ExpresseCalls concerns regarding the quantitative approach in the new Partnership Framework and the related ‘migration compacts’, which see the ‘measurable increas the EU to sign readmission agreements with third countries inso the number and rate of returns’ as one of the EU’s main goals, as the number of returns clearly depends on the nature of migration flows and on the situations in the countries of origin; stresses that the short-term objectives of the compacts should focus on how bat irregular migrants can be sent back to their countries of origin, on condition that the country in question is considered ‘safe’ by the EU and that they are not eligible for asylum; calls on Member Statest to address the challenges faced by third countries, including by developing legal migration channels, as a result of whichdeal with asylum applications more quickly; takes the view that an effective return policy will reduce the levels of irregular migration and death tolls in the Mediterranean will decreaseand help to tackle human trafficking;
Amendment 482 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls, as an interim measure and in view of the extremely urgent need to develop and stabilise countries surrounding the EU, for these countries to receive substantial assistance from the intra-European development funds (ERDF, etc.);
Amendment 534 #
2015/2342(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Stresses that the EU should be more proactive in conflict prevention; calls on the EU to use its Battlegroups to prevent countries from collapsing into political instability that could lead to civil wars and displacement; urges the Member States to increase their defence budgets;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
– having regard to Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime,
Amendment 38 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas human trafficking is one of the most profitable organised criminal activities in the world, alongside the trade in illegal drugs and arms, generating more than EUR 32 billion in revenue each year;
Amendment 94 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on governments to put in place legal measures to guarantee transparency and traceability of supply chain products and forEncourages companies to disclose their efforts to eradicate human trafficking from their supply chains; calls on Member States to carry out due diligence on the operations of EU companies in third countries and to hold them accountable for trafficking in human beingsin an effort to prevent trafficking in human beings from occurring at any point along their entire supply chain, including for affiliated companies and sub-contractors;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the EU and its Member States to constructively engage in the negotiations of the Open-ended InterGovernmental Working Group on the elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights and to implement the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;
Amendment 139 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Denounces worrying gaps between state obligations and the extent to which they are met in practice when it comes to victims’ rights; welcomes Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime; hopes that the directive has been properly transposed by the Member States, given that the deadline for its implementation was 16 November 2016;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Deplores the inadequatStresses that more attention must be given to victims in criminal proceedings; calls for trafficked personon the Member States not to be detained trafficked persons and not to be put them at risk of being punished for offences committed under coercion in the context of their situation as victim of THB;
Amendment 151 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Urges that the criminal justice response guarantees access to justice for victims and information about their legal rights; calls on all states to comply with their international and European obligation to uphold the rights of victims under their jurisdiction, and to ensure full support for victims independent of their willingness to cooperate in criminal proceedings;
Amendment 184 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on EU representatives to systematically addresspay particular attention to trafficking in human beings in its dealings with all third- country counterparts at all levels, including through public statements;
Amendment 203 #
2015/2340(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. UrgesCalls on the EU to find tangible solutions regarding rlegularal, non-exploitative and safe ways into the EU for migrants and refugees; calls on the EU to step up its fight against ‘smugglers’; recalls that safe and if possible voluntary return should be guaranteed to trafficked persons by the receiving state and state of origin, and legal alternatives offered for repatriation in cases where such repatriation would pose a risk to their safety and/or of their family;
Amendment 4 #
2015/2323(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concerned that the liberalisation and integration of the retail energy markets is still not complete, resulting in insufficient competition and choice of suppliers;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2323(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of access to real time or near real time information on energy consumption and related costs; calls therefore for the rapid deployment of ICT, e.g. mobile applications, online platforms, data hubs and smart meters within a clear framework on data protection, security, and access to data for all market participants, thereby ensuring that consumers retain control over their data;
Amendment 50 #
2015/2323(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to take further action to improve the frequclarity and transparency of energy bills and their clarity and transparency as regards types of energy sources, consumption and price structure; calls for EU guidelines on price comparison tools, e.g. on transparency and reliability, and for access for all consumers to at least one price comparison tool for energy services;
Amendment 33 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimates there are over 10 million stateless people, to which should be added 1.5 million Palestinians;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. DeplorWelcomes the recourse to lists of safe countries, which causes a threat to hang over the examination of individual applications forwill make it easier to identify individuals who require international protection;
Amendment 119 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls attention to the specific types of violence to which women and young female migrants are subjected; reiterates that children are entitled to special protection based on the best interests of the child;
Amendment 185 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 213 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses the need to distinguish economic migrants from refugees who are fleeing a conflict zone or persecution and therefore have the right to asylum;
Amendment 270 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for Member States to honour their pledge to earmark 0.7 % of their gross national income (GNI) to development aid; calls forstresses that this aid never tocould be made conditional upon cooperation on migration matters;
Amendment 291 #
2015/2316(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for safe legal access routes to be developed for migrantrefugees and asylum seekers, for resettlement programmes to be stepped uplaunched, humanitarian visas granted and visas, including airport transit visas, to be suspended for people fleeto be made possible for people who are in clear danger ing conflict zones;
Amendment 118 #
2015/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls the need for strongercessary cooperation between the EU and NATO in the area of security and defence; is convinced that EU- NATO cooperation should cover the building of resilience by the two bodies and in conjunction with our neighbours, as well as defence investment; considers that cooperation on space-based capabilities and services offers prospects for improving compatibility and synergy between the two frameworks; is convinced that this would also strengthen NATO’s role in security and defence policy and in collective defence;
Amendment 124 #
2015/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Points out, however, that the EU must continue to try to best ensure space- related and military autonomy; points out that the EU must have its own machinery establishing a Defence Union;
Amendment 146 #
2015/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that effective promotion among Europeans of the applications of EU space programmes that have a direct impact on users, such as Galileo services, is crucial for the success of those programmes; regrets, however, the delay to the Galileo project and the poorly anticipated costs;
Amendment 152 #
2015/2276(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Remains cautious about the major risks associated with privatisation of the space sector; , in particular in the light of its specific characteristics in connection with sovereignty and strategic autonomy;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2275(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the EU’s role needs to be seen in the context of the contributions made to PSOs by numerous countries and organisations; whereas, for example, the US is the world’s largest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping operations and provides direct support to the AU through its African Peacekeeping Rapid Response Partnership, as well as approximately USD 5 billion in support of UN operations in the Central African Republic, Mali, Côte d’Ivoire, South Sudan and Somalia; whereas China has become an active participant in UN peacekeeping operations and the Forum of China-Africa cooperation includes the AU Commission; whereas, after Ethiopia, it is India, Pakistan and Bangladesh that are the largest providers of personnel to UN peacekeeping; whereas these various sources of funding are coordinated by the African Union Partners Group on Peace and Security;
Amendment 79 #
2015/2275(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the African Peace Facility provides both an entry point and a potential lever for creating a stronger partnership between the EU and the AU; believes, further, that this facility is an important source of funding for Africa and that, on that basis, it plays a vital role in enabling the African Union and, through it, the eight regional economic communities (RECs) to plan and carry out their operations; considers it vital that the EU institutions and Member States should remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully exploited; acknowledges that there are other funding mechanisms in use, but believes that given the Facility’s predictability and reliability, its singular focus on Africa, as well as its clear goals, it is especially important with regard to PSOs in Africa;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2275(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Insists that the EU, in supporting PSOs, should not act in isolation but should, rather, take full account of the contributions of other international actors, improve coordination with them and rapidity of response, and focus its efforts on certain priority countries, using the most appropriate and experienced Member States as lead nations; points up the importance of regional economic communities (REC) within the general security architecture in Africa;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas Tunisia is one of the European Union’s European Neighbourhood Policy priority countries;
Amendment 64 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Commends the good cooperation between Tunisia and its neighbours, as illustrated for example by the signing of a preferential trade agreement and the establishment of local transborders committees with Algeria aimed at fostering local development, and by the intertwining of Tunisia’s economy with Libya’s and by the solidarity of the Tunisian people with displaced Libyans; expresses the utmost concern regarding a possible foreign military intervention in Libya;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the government to take swift measures to prevent the use of torture; encourages Tunisia to abolish the death penalty.
Amendment 142 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a macro-financial assistance of EUR 500 million and calls for a swift adoption by the Council and Parliament; calls for this assistance to be reserved for investments and for the European Parliament and the Council to be informed of the total expenditure;
Amendment 211 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. recognises that Tunisian security is weakened by the current internal situation in Libya; notes the building of a wall at the border with Libya; expresses concerns at the high number of Tunisian foreign fighters joining Daesh and other terrorist groups; underlines the necessity to reform the country’s intelligence services while respecting the rule of law and human rights conventions;
Amendment 247 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the EU and the Tunisia Mobility Partnership signed in March 2014 and calls for its rapid implementation; calls for the signature of a visa waiver for Tunisia; notes that though mobility partnerships rely on national competences, they are included in the EU proposal within the ENP and recommends that Member States show their solidarity withassist Tunisia by facilitating visas forwhich prioritise entrepreneurs, students, and researchers, etc.;
Amendment 254 #
2015/2273(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Stresses the importance of the free movement of people, and supports enhancing mobility within the neighbourhood, in a secure and well managed environment, through visa facilitation and liberalisation, particularly for students, young people, artists and researchers; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, to develop possibilities for circular migration schemes which would open up safe and legal routes for migrants; condemns trafficking in human beings, most of the victims of which are women, and stresses the importance of reinforcing cooperation with partner countries in order to combat it;
Amendment 134 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the EU in consequence to enhance coherent and structured cooperation on defence research, the industrial base and cyber defence through pooling and sharing, in order to use defence budgets more efficiently. The European Defence Agency’s role needs to be strengthened and its resources increased to enable it to act more effectively. Member States should take more responsibility for building European capabilities and increase their military research expenditure through the EDA. Furthermore, a true European intelligence and forecasting capacity needs to be developed; calls on the Member States to intensify their exchange of information on intelligence-related issues, in particular by systematically entering information into European platforms such as the Schengen Information System (SIS) and the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS), to cross- check the information gathered with a view to improving terrorism prevention, and to strengthen cooperation with Europol; welcomes, in this connection, the opening of a European Counter Terrorism Centre;
Amendment 202 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that in order to gain more credibility as a global security and foreign policy actor, the EU should take greater responsibility and focus on filling the security vacuum in its neighbourhood and among our; believes that greater attention should be awarded to areas outside the EU’s near neighbourhood, with a view to working with its neighbours’ neighbours;
Amendment 214 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is of the opinion that in order to build stability and peace, the EU should keep up its enlargement commitments and continue cooperation with very closely associatedneighbouring countries within the context of the newrecently revised European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP); recalls that according to Article 49 TEU any European state may apply to become a member of the European Union, provided it adheres to the Copenhagen criteria and the principles of democracy and respect for fundamental freedoms and human and minority rights, and ensures the rule of law;
Amendment 246 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to conclude promptly the ongoing negotiations on readmission agreements;
Amendment 250 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Takes the view that it is in the EU's interests to help develop and stabilise the Levant and North Africa; calls on the Commission to strengthen the European Development Fund and to allocate funding to these countries as a matter of priority, over a period of five years; reminds the Member States, also, of the importance of contributing to the Emergency Fund for Africa, in order to address the deep-seated causes of irregular migration in Africa; calls on the Commission to introduce proper monitoring of the use of these funds, in an effort to make sure that they have been employed effectively;
Amendment 324 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Supports the principle that EU Member States should commit to using 2 % of their GDP for defence expenditure by 2024 in order to attain a higher degree of defence capability; emphasises that, at present, there are wide disparities among the 28 Member States;
Amendment 329 #
2015/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Emphasises the importance of supporting the European defence industry with a view to enhancing its capacity and being a major player on the international scene;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the increasingly volatile security environment within and outside the Union calls for a strengthening of the CSDP to make it a more effective policy instrument;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2258(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas cuts in national defence budgets are making it difficult for Member States to maintain their armed forces and preventing enhancement of the Union’s defence capabilities;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2234(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Condemns the massacre of Christian farmers by separatist rebels on the island of Mindanao on 24 December 2015; welcomes the initiative by the Philippine NGO PeaceTech to put Christian and Muslim schoolchildren in touch with each other via Skype in an effort to foster contact between the two communities;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2234(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Encourages the government to invest in new technologies and the internet in order to promote cultural exchange and trade among the islands that make up the Philippines;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point a - point i
Paragraph 2 - point a - point i
i. to ensure the highest level of transparency in the negotiations, in particular by allowing access to documents and by organising a consultation with Parliament and civil societyrelevant stakeholders throughout the process;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point a - point ii
Paragraph 2 - point a - point ii
ii. to ensure that before considering the removal of barriers, the agreement seeks to create a level playing field in the services sector, and has as its main objective to highlight and maintainpromote and safeguard the high level of protection of consumers, workers and the environment enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) while preserving a highly competitive social market economy;
Amendment 50 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point b - point i a (new)
Paragraph 2 - point b - point i a (new)
ia. to facilitate more active participation of EU businesses, including SMEs, in public procurement globally, as this can contribute to stimulating private-sector innovation and to the emergence of new, high-growth, innovative companies and sectors; to stress that this possibility must not undermine the capacity of EU governments to maintain their public services;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point b - point ii a (new)
Paragraph 2 - point b - point ii a (new)
iia. to underline that the public procurement must be part of any final comprehensive agreement given that it represents a substantial part of the EU’s and other trading partners’ economies and therefore is a key economic interest for the EU;
Amendment 71 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c - point ii
Paragraph 2 - point c - point ii
ii. to ensure that the negotiations comply with the new directives on public procurement and concessions, in particular as regards the definition of public-public cooperation, exclusions and SME accesw public procurement and concession directives are complied with in the negotiations, in particular as regards the definition of public-public cooperation, exclusions, SMEs access and the award criteria on best value rather than lowest price, the possibility for contracting authorities to cooperate and form intercommunalities, and the thresholds below which the procurement is not subject to EU or international rules;
Amendment 81 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c - point iv
Paragraph 2 - point c - point iv
iv. to ensure that transparent and effective measures are put in place to protect consumers against fraudulent online commercial practices; most importantly, to ensure that consumers will be protected at home, when they travel, when they shop online and will benefit from easy access to dispute resolution mechanisms and effective resolution of dispute;
Amendment 202 #
2015/2229(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 e (new)
Paragraph 44 e (new)
45e. Welcome’s the Council’s increasingly systematic use of restrictive measures against third countries which deliberately breach their commitments on human rights;
Amendment 324 #
2015/2229(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
66. Condemns in the strongest terms all forms of discrimination, including those based on race, religion, unbelief, colour, gender, sexual orientation, language, culture, social origin, caste, birth, age, disability or any other status; urges the EU to intensify its efforts to eradicate all types of discrimination, racism and xenophobia through human rights and political dialogues, the work of the EU Delegations and public diplomacy; urges the EU also to continue promoting the ratification and full implementation of all UN Conventions that support this cause, such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination or the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities;
Amendment 381 #
2015/2229(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75 a (new)
Paragraph 75 a (new)
75a. Proposes that the EU should be able to adjust the level of its financial aid to third countries according to their policy in support of human rights;
Amendment 102 #
2015/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the disbursement of EU funds should be conditionality- and incentives- based, along the lines of the principles agreed for the European Neighbourhood Policy, rewarding performance on a number of benchmarks to be established for each country, and depending on measurable progress with regard, in particular, to the fields of democratisation, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, development, human security and good neighbourly relations;
Amendment 159 #
2015/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Expresses its deep concern at the growing trend towards clampdown on civil society on the pretext of security and stability; is concerned by the increase in human trafficking in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.
Amendment 4 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that sustainable economic growth in Europe can only be achieved through productivity gains and developing sectors characterised by high added value; encourages in this sense all the efforts made by the Commission in supporting the transition towards a digital economy; considers it essential to remedy the current fragmentation of national rules on digital services and to build a more innovative and transparent Digital Single Market based on fair competition and providing a high level of consumer protection; calls on the Commission to comply with the planned schedule aimed at achieving a true Digital Single Market, in order to contribute to the EU's economic growth and improve its competitiveness;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that whilst it is impossible to hold back the digital revolution, it is possible to shape its coursWelcomes the new Commission strategy for a digital single market that will bring growth and jobs to Europe;
Amendment 10 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Sees the digitisation of the economy as an ineluctable and beneficial development – spurring progress, growth and innovation among European companies, not least SMES – and believes it should be supported;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes the proposals of the Commission to accelerate the digitalisation in Europe; emphasizes that the digitalisation affects all aspects of the lives of the European citizens;
Amendment 12 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Emphasises that the basis for a media framework for the 21st century should be technology neutrality and assuring better access to digital content and digital services;
Amendment 13 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that whilst it is impossible to hold backemployment policies must support the digital revolution , it is possible toand shape its course;
Amendment 16 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that stimulating growth, innovation, consumer choice and competitiveness is of the utmost importance and believes that the digital single market is key to achieving this objective by removing barriers to trade, streamlining processes for online businesses and supporting creators, investors and consumers; calls in this regard for competitiveness tests on all new proposalall new proposals to be subject to competitiveness tests and to detailed impact assessments examining their effects on growth, SMEs and employment as well as their potential costs and benefits;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 26 b (new)
Citation 26 b (new)
- having regard to the Regulation (EU) 2015/758 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 concerning type-approval requirements for the deployment of the eCall in-vehicle system based on the 112 service and amending Directive 2007/46/EC1a, __________________ 1a OJ L 123, 19.05.2015 p.0077
Amendment 22 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 26 c (new)
Citation 26 c (new)
- having regard to the Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Regulation on consumer ODR)1, __________________ 1 OJ L 165, 18.06.2013 p.0001
Amendment 23 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that, in order to achieve economic convergence through European regions, the digital divide must to be reduced substantially and access to the internet guaranteed to all European citizens and companies; encourages further public and private investment in infrastructure; considers that these investments should serve to strengthen EU competitiveness in key growth sectors in the Digital Single Market; welcomes the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)’'s intended efforts in this area;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the communication of the Commission" Towards a Connected Digital Single Market Act" and the included commitment to modernise the copyright framework to adapt them to the digital age while at the same time ensuring the right balance between a fair remuneration of the author, the public interest of dissemination of knowledge and preserving cultural diversity;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recommends reviewing the level of regulation for the areas of Directive 2010/13/EU in which the aims of the legislation are not being achieved; believes that European-level minimum requirements for all audiovisual media services should be put in place; stresses that high standards should apply to all audiovisual media services to ensure youth protection, consumer protection and data protection;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the economic importance of the cultural and creative industries, which, with a turnover of EUR 535.9 billion and 7.1 million jobs, and as the third largest source of employment in the EU, are a driving force behind growth in Europe; considers that this sector, whose cornerstone is intellectual property and particularly copyright, requires a consolidated and enhanced regulatory framework in order to guarantee the vitality, influence and above all diversity of European culture;
Amendment 28 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses the potential of the Digital Single Market to stimulate social and generational inclusion which requires a regulatory framework that makes private investment in creative infrastructure commercially attractive as this will ultimately be beneficial to creators and end-users;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that, for the digital economy to flourish, access to capital for both new and existing enterprises must be improved; welcomes the work of the Commission on the Capital Markets Union; encourages further legislative harmonisationa key pillar of the Investment Plan, aiming to tackle investment shortages head-on by in acreas such as crowd-funding and digital currenciesing and diversifying the alternative funding sources for Europe's businesses and long-term projects including capital markets, venture capital and crowd- funding;
Amendment 33 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -2 a (new)
Paragraph -2 a (new)
-2a. Calls on distributors to publish all available information concerning the technological measures necessary to ensure interoperability of their content;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the country of origin (or country of broadcasting) principle enshrined in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive is still a significant prerequisite for the provision of audiovisual content across borders and a milestone on the way to a common market in services; emphasises, however, the need to adapt EU law to the realities of the internet and the digital environment, and to pay special attention to companies offering audiovisual content on-line or on-demand which try to evade taxation and audiovisual regulation in certain Member States by basing themselves in countries with a very low tax rate or audiovisual regulation;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -2 b (new)
Paragraph -2 b (new)
-2b. Insists on the need to pursue the Commission’s Work Programme with a view to the adoption of a series of digital- market-related measures to modernise copyright rules, adapting them to the digital era;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -2 c (new)
Paragraph -2 c (new)
-2c. Underscores the crucial role played by the legal framework for copyright in sustaining the creative process and enabling authors to earn a living as professionals in the cultural and creative industries; with reference in this regard to the recent studies by, respectively, the European Parliament on Contractual Arrangements applicable to Creators and the Commission on remuneration of authors, calls on the Commission to ensure that the core element of any reform of copyright law is the equitable remuneration of authors for the use of their work on line;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 40 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the country of origin of the advertising profit, the language of the service and the targeted public of the advertisement and content should be considered as part of the criteria to determine the audiovisual regulation to be applied to audiovisual media services or to contest the initial determination of the competent Member State;
Amendment 49 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that dismantling barriers to the cross-border development of transport and tourism e-commerce is of the utmost importance; Calls on the commission to ensure the interoperability of systems and the use of common standards so as to build a truly inclusive Digital Single Market;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for targeted, evidence-based reforms to enhance cross-border access to legally available online content but stresses the importance of not mandating pan- European licences; calls instead for reforms to enable the enhanced portability of legally acquired content to be prioritised, and for the introduction of commercial models for flexible licensing, benefiting consumers without undermining either the principle of territoriality for exclusive rights or that of freedom of contract, both of which play a fundamental role in the financing of audiovisual works;
Amendment 57 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that a cross-border taxation system is needed to createharmonisation of taxation levels could enhance the creation of a true European Single Market and to prevent the tax avoidance practices used by several digital platforms, as highlighted by recent inquiries; calls on the Commission to support extending the public country-by- country reporting regime on taxes for multinational companies to all sectors;
Amendment 63 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reiterates the need for renewed efforts to combat fraud and tax avoidance and evasion, and therefore calls for more emphasis to be placed on good tax governance in the Single market; reminds that savings of EUR 9 billion per year could be generated through measures such as the standardisation of electronic invoices and coordination of cross-border tax systems; stresses therefore the need to strengthen and improve tax coordination, with due respect for national competences, so as to prevent unfair competition and market distortions and ensure equal opportunities in the Digital Single Market;
Amendment 65 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the importance of the contribution made by cultural content to the development of the European digital economy; observes that a large part of the revenue generated by Internet intermediaries is directly or indirectly linked to the use of this cultural content;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that the existing tax framework cannot continue to be applied given the specificities of the digital economy, and therefore calls on the Member States to come up with a new taxation policy suitable for the digital economy; emphasises that, with a view to ensuring fair competition and boosting EU citizens’ confidence in the fairness of tax systems, a European strategy for adapting existing tax arrangements to make them applicable to digital companies is urgently needed;
Amendment 68 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas all Union policies and legislations in the area of the Digital Single Market should allow new opportunities for users and businesses to emerge, especially within today’s service society, while taking a holistic approach that considers their social dimension as they inevitably involve structural changeoffer EU citizens a larger variety of cross-border services, stimulate the creation of innovative online services at competitive prices and facilitate easier access for businesses, and in particular SMEs, to cross-border markets;
Amendment 70 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Stresses that dismantling barriers to the cross-border development of e- commerce is of the utmost importance due to the fact that cross-border parcel delivery and VAT rules applicable to the sale of goods and services – which, due to their fragmentation and a lack of transparency, hamper cross-border e- commerce; believes that the interoperability of systems, and the use of common standards are needed to ensure in order to build a truly inclusive Digital Single Market;
Amendment 70 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises that any reform of the copyright framework should take as a basis a high level of protection, since rights are crucial to intellectual creation and provide a stable, clear and flexible legal base that fosters investment and growth in the creative and cultural sector, whilst removing legal uncertainties and inconsistencies that adversely affect the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 73 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any initiative to modernise copyright is preceded by a wide-ranging study of its likely impact on the production, financing and distribution of audiovisual works, and also on cultural diversity;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Stresses the importance of electronic identification and trust services for increasing the volume and quality of electronic trade with a view to growth; recalls, therefore, on the Member States to take all necessary measures to implement the Regulation (EU) N° 910/2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market by 1 July 2016;
Amendment 75 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Asks the Commission to ensure in this respect fair remuneration for creators and rightholders and to guarantee that persistence and perseverance is exercised throughout the creative supply chain;
Amendment 77 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the Commission’'s decision to review internet platformslaunch a public debate with two consultations on geo-blocking and on platforms, online intermediaries, data, cloud computing and the collaborative economy; encourages the Commission to create a legislativn appropriate framework ensuring the development of innovative ideas, protection of work standards and compliance with existing fiscal rules and creating the right conditions and a level playing field for digital networks and innovative services to flourish; and maximise the growth potential of the digital economy;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the Commission’s decision to review internet platforms; and encourages ithe Commission to create a suitable legislative and tax framework ensuring the development of innovative ideas, protection of work standards and compliance with exfor these new business models, setting out in particular a new concept of territoriality in order to prevent unfair competition and tax optimisationg fiscal rules;
Amendment 79 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that as job and skills profiles become more complex, new demands are being placefor changes to basic and continuous training and further educationre emerging; emphasises the importance of social dialogue in efforts to bring course content up to date and, develop skills strategies and update the skills required to use, and to create, new services;
Amendment 82 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that further efforts are needed to overhaul copyright law and that any revised provisions should apply to all media; it is necessary to make the appropriate amendments to the regulatory framework of copyright in order to tackle the true problem of the cultural and creative industry, namely that of rebalancing the transfer of value within the digital economy;
Amendment 83 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that further efforts are needed to overhaulreview copyright law and that any revised provisions should apply to allonly where it is strictly necessary, while taking into account the convergence of media;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas there is a strong need for an improved and robust digital economy in Europe. Barriers between Member States must be removed to create a real 'Digital Single Market' which constitutes one of the cornerstones of growth and employment in the EU;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Member States, in the context of overall VAT reform, to consider the possibility of making e-books subject to the same rate of VAT as cultural goods;
Amendment 96 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on Member States to adjust their education systems in response to these new labour market requirements and to promote the acquisition of digital skills;
Amendment 97 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the financing of audiovisual content relies for a significant part on the principle of territoriality of rights, which allowed a strong cultural diversity within the European production.
Amendment 98 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. BStresses the need to adjust the definition of the status of intermediary in the current digital environment; believes that internet service providers should bear greater responsibility for illegal content made available on the internet and should, along with other actors in the supply chain such as payment providers, play a significant role in tackling copyright abuses;
Amendment 102 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Encourages the Member States to develop the digital skills of teachers as part of their training;
Amendment 106 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Underlines that "premium access" through the presale of rights is one of the core conditions for financing audiovisual content, as it allows a return on investment and new resources to finance future audiovisual content;
Amendment 108 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that a thorough analysis of different types of 'Sharing Economy' platforms should be carried out, with a view to ensuring that relevant legislation allows the development of these services to enable new forms of consumption and production, while at the same time, guaranteeing high levels of consumer protection;
Amendment 108 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas rules that have been crucial in the classical (offline) business world must be appropriately translated into rules for the digital world;
Amendment 110 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Underlines that audiovisual content may have different market value from a Member State to another, depending on the characteristics of the national market, and requires targeted and specific promotion campaign to get the content to its public;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Calls the Member States to extend the scope of the quotation exception, without prejudice to the authors' moral rights, to short audiovisual quotations for non- advertisement and non-political uses, provided that the work used is clearly credited, that the quotation does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not prejudice the legitimate interests of the authors;
Amendment 114 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Calls for further dialogue between the rightholders, the online platforms and the creators relying on these platforms in order to achieve a mutually beneficial cooperation, where copyrights are protected while allowing and encouraging innovative ways of creating;
Amendment 116 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Takes the view that the legislature should consider solutions for the displacement of value from content to services;
Amendment 121 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for the status of and arrangements governing the responsibility of intermediaries and online platforms to be clarified as part of the future reform of copyright law in order to restore the balance of interests involved, which is not safeguarded at present; takes the view that these online intermediaries generate income from cultural works and content, but this income is not shared with the creators; considers it vital, therefore, not to hamper the development of the digital single market, while at the same time guaranteeing fair remuneration for creators;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that creative works, which represent one of the main sources that guarantee the functioning of the digital economy and sustain information technology sector stakeholders, should be the subject of a fair transfer of value to the benefit of their authors;
Amendment 126 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points outEmphasises that the digitalisation-driven trend towards more flexible working practices may also give rise to precarious forms of employment to which current standards as regards social security, working time, working location, worker participation and employment protection no longer apply; calls for self-employed persons with quasi-employee status to be placed on an equal footing with employed persons under employment law represents an opportunity for work to be organised in new ways enabling greater efficiency in the performance of tasks and a better work/life balance;
Amendment 127 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to consider solutions aimed at remedying the displacement of the value of creative works from content to services; stresses the need to adjust the definition of the status of intermediary to match the current digital environment;
Amendment 128 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the legal thinking behind Directive 93/83/EEC2 already provides a suitable point of departure for measures to improve cross-border access to content in the digital single market, and stresses that the principle of this directive was to address a technology – namely satellite technology – which is no longer relevant in an on-demand digital market. __________________ 2 Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable transmission (OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15).
Amendment 129 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a high level of consumer protection and satisfaction entails necessarily entails choice, flexibility, information, responsibility of all operators along the value chain and trust in a secure online environment;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recalls that under Article 5 of Directive 2000/31/EC, providers of online services are obliged to clearly indicate their identity, and that compliance with this requirement is vital to ensuring consumer confidence in e-commerce;
Amendment 131 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a high and consistent level of consumer protection and satisfaction across all digital services necessarily entails choice, flexibility, information and trust in a secure online environment with high-level of data protection;
Amendment 138 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas a regulatory environment which better incentivizes investments in fixed and mobile electronic communications infrastructures is an essential requirement for a flourishing Digital Single Market; Widely available advanced communications infrastructures is essential for an inclusive digital economy;
Amendment 140 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas for the Digital Single Market to be competitive and to deliver its benefits to citizens and businesses, a level playing field for operators must be created. Market players need a reliable, fair, transparent and proportionate regulatory framework that allows them to compete fairly and equitably and to come up with innovative ideas and products without facing burdensome regulation;
Amendment 141 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Encourages the Commission and the Member States to set the basis for mutual recognition of the digital skills developed by European citizens through the education system or through training programs.
Amendment 143 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Encourages the Member States to provide people with the digital skills that enable them to make full use of new digital technologies.
Amendment 144 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the increasing development of e-commerce and online activities provides new possibilities for consumer protection and IPR enforcement; whereas the application of a duty of care along the supply chain would reinforce consumer and business trust online[CE1] by increasing cooperation and exchange of information and best practices to combat illegal goods and content;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to encourage portability of content and interoperability while respecting economic models based on territoriality of rights in Europe, particularly as regards the financing of audiovisual production; observes that territoriality is at the heart of the economy in this sector of copyright, and that therefore it must not be jeopardised, particularly not by a system of pan- European licences;
Amendment 146 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. whereas creativity and innovation are the drivers of the digital economy, and whereas it is essential therefore to ensure a high level of protection of intellectual property rights;
Amendment 150 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that the sharing economy requires a rethinking of social relations in the working world;
Amendment 153 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Stresses that Member States need to adjust their labour legislation to the digital economy, and to the sharing economy in particular;
Amendment 153 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls the Commission and the Member States to set up a European certificate or grading system to establish a common assessment of the digital skills developed by European citizens, following the example of the European common framework of reference for language learning and teaching.
Amendment 154 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Encourages the Member States to boost ICT education by promoting specialised training for teachers and ensuring the availability of appropriate devices and future-proof learning materials in schools.
Amendment 160 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Underlines the importance of proper training for teachers on digital skills, on the way to teach these skills efficiently to students, and on how to use these skills to support the learning process in general.
Amendment 162 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission’s aim to withdraw the proposal on a Common European Sales Law and the intention to propose rules for digital content; notes the proposal to introduce the ‘home option’ in order to bring down barriers to cross- border trade; insists on the need for comprehensive evidence and consultation with stakeholders before this approach is pursued, in particular as regards the impact it would have on the current protection provided to consumers under national law, especially in terms of remedies for failure to comply with the terms of contracts for online sales.
Amendment 165 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Underline the importance of enhancing the portability within the European Union of online services of legally acquired and legally made available content, whilst fully respecting copyrights and the interests of right- holders.
Amendment 168 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomesRegrets that the Commission’s aim to withdraew theits proposal onfor a Common European Sales Law and the intention to propose rules for digital content; notes the proposal to introduce the ‘home option’ in order to bring down barriers to cross- border trade; insists on the need for comprehensive evidence and consultation with stakeholders before this approach is pursued, in particular as regards the impact it would have on the current protection provided to consumers under national law, especially in terms of remedies for failure to comply with the terms of contracts for online sales.without consulting the European Parliament, recalls that Parliament adopted its first reading position with vast majority on 26.02.2014, Welcomes however the Commission’s intention to propose rules for digital content; reiterates Parliaments repeated request that any new proposal should be based on EP’s first reading position;
Amendment 169 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4e. Stresses that cross-border access to legally made available audiovisual content should not hinder its financing process and subsequently the European cultural diversity.
Amendment 174 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4f. Underlines that the legal audiovisual online offer should be furthermore developed in order to enhance the accessibility to a wide and diverse content for the consumers, with various language and subtitle options.
Amendment 176 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that this "digital revolution" can bring enormous positive changes to the European economy, by raising productivity, dramatically reducing marginal costs for companies, creating millions of jobs and bringing unprecedented new economic opportunities; Is of the opinion that those opportunities can only be embraced through concerted efforts of the European institutions, Member States, business and the society;
Amendment 177 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 g (new)
Paragraph 4 g (new)
4g. Calls the Member States to optimise the media chronology, in order to accelerate the availability of audiovisual content for the consumers, while maintaining a sustainable first and second window of diffusion.
Amendment 178 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that in order for Europe to fully seize the potential for growth, jobs and global competitiveness in all sectors of the economy of new developments or technologies such as Cloud Computing, 5G development, Big Data or the Internet of Things, the completion of the Digital Single Market must be a priority;
Amendment 181 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission, the Member States and the social partners to suggest ways of enhancadapting social security for self- employed persons in need of protection, in order to safeguard the effectiveness of existing national systems.to this new way of working, particularly in regard to self-employed workers in the context of the sharing economy;
Amendment 185 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that digital developments also provide for a meaningful change in public administration, establishing much more effective, simplified and user-friendly e- administration. In this regard it is very important for the citizens and the business to have interconnected commercial registers;
Amendment 210 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the European commission to propose initiatives that will overcome legal fragmentation and allow companies to reap the benefits of the single market, giving consumers a wider choice;
Amendment 220 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that users’ trusttrust of citizens and businesses in digital services is vital to innovation and growth in the digital economy and that reinforcing that trust for both consumers and economic operators should be at the basis of both public policy and business models;
Amendment 222 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that users’ trust in digital services is vital to innovation and growth in the digital economy and that reinforcing that trust, i.e. through data protection and security standards, should be at the basis of both public policy and business models;
Amendment 237 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that the lack of a European digital framework has fostered developments which have highlighted the failure to reconcile the interests of large and small providers and, more recently in particular, the need to establish a level playing field;
Amendment 253 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the urgent need for the Commission and Member States to promote a more dynamic economy for innovation to flourish and for companies to scale up, through the development of e- government, a modernised regulatory frameworkand non-regulatory framework for the digital economy that is fit for investments in enhanced digital infrastructures fit for the emergence and scale- up of innovative businesses, and a long term investment strategy into boost digital infrastructure, skills, research and innovation;
Amendment 255 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the urgent need for the Commission and Member States to promote a more dynamic economy for innovation to flourish and for European companies to scale up, through the development of e- government, a modernised integrated regulatory framework supporting investments in infrastructures and fit for the emergence and scale- up of innovative businesses, and a long term investment strategy in infrastructure, skills, research and innovation; to this end, calls for considering the possibility of financing through the EFSI;
Amendment 274 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that a long term investment strategy in infrastructure, skills and services combined with a comprehensive Text and Data Mining legal framework are needed to support open science and innovation, and leverage both public and private investments in research;
Amendment 277 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need for cross-border financial instruments of venture capital which can support innovative SMEs in the scale up phase encouraging the emergence of European leaders in this new digital environment.
Amendment 290 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with Member States, to further develop initiatives to boost entrepreneurship that range from changing the mind-set on how success is defined to promoting an entrepreneurial and innovation culture; believes, in addition, that the diversity and specific attributes of the different national innovation hubs could be turned into a real competitive advantage for the EU if they are effectively interconnected; therefore more focus should be put on building innovative ecosystems where different sectors, i.e. financial, medical, transport, real estate, biotechnology, of the economy cooperate together in implementing new technologies; in this respect involvement of financial instruments, such as, venture capital for best projects is crucial;
Amendment 307 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned aboutby the different national approaches taken ton regulating the internet and the sharing economy; urges the Commission to take action to preserve the integrity of the single market and the internet as an trusted and secured open and global platform for communication and innovation while safeguarding citizens' interest in consistent consumer protection standards across all digital services and fair competition in the digital economy;
Amendment 323 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned about the different national approaches taken to regulating the internet and the sharing economy; urges the Commission to take action to preserve the integrity of the single market and the internet as an open and global platform for communication and innovation as well as safeguard citizens' interest in consistent consumer protection standards across all digital services and fair competition in the digital economy;
Amendment 339 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is concerned by the different national fiscal approaches regarding the digital and sharing economy;
Amendment 369 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’'s initiative to improve theconsumers' legal protection of consumers as regardsconcerning intangible digital content; points out that while consumers buying genuine tangible digital content, goods and services are protected by consumer protection laws, consumer rights when buying intangible digital content remain largely unregulated; agrees that consumers should enjoy a comparablthe same level of protection regardless of whether they purchase digital content online or off, goods and services online or offline; calls on the Commission and Member States to adopt the necessary measures against the sales of illicit content and goods online;
Amendment 378 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to improve the legal protection of consumers as regards intangible digital content; points out that while consumers buying tangible digital content are protected by consumer protection laws, consumer rights when buying intangible digital content remain largely unregulated; agrees that consumers should enjoy a comparable level of protection regardless of whether they purchase digital content online or offline and whether they purchase tangible or intangible goods, products or content;
Amendment 384 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that consumers should be at the heart of the digital single market and calls for the adaptation of the current regulatory consumer protection framework for the digital age;
Amendment 387 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Welcomes the important steps that have been taken in recent years on online dispute resolution and underlines that other areas of e-commerce still need to be addressed to ensure a level playing field and help European e-commerce to accelerate;
Amendment 392 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Believes that better consumer protection has to be balanced with the needs and capacities of business, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises. The rights and obligations of consumers and businesses go hand-in- hand and must come to a fair balance for both sides;
Amendment 395 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the importance of reliable information and transparency as consumers must be able to compare not only prices, but also quality and sustainability of goods and services online;
Amendment 397 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Considers that dismantling barriers to the cross-border development of e- commerce is of the utmost importance. This concerns, in particular, cross-border parcel delivery and VAT rules applicable to the sale of goods and services – which, due to their fragmentation and a lack of transparency, hamper cross-border e- commerce;
Amendment 398 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Believes that building a truly inclusive Digital Single Market requires the interoperability of systems, the use of common standards and the application of the same rules online as offline;
Amendment 404 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that a full harmonisation ofEmphasises that developing the rules and the legal framework govconcerning online sales irrespective of whether they are cross- border or domestic sales, while maintaining the coherence of online and offline rules regarding legal remedies, constitutes the most practical and proportionate approachshould be done in a technology neutral manner, which allows consumers and businesses to choose the appropriate technology for each purpose; welcomes the efforts to boost e-commerce irrespective whether cross-border or domestic sales;
Amendment 414 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that a full harmonisation of the legal framework governing online salesthe supply of digital content irrespective of whether they are cross- border or domestic saletransactions, while maintaining the coherence of online and offline rules regarding legal remedies, constitutes the most practical and proportionate approach;
Amendment 431 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that there is a need for further improvement and harmonisation of consumers' protection rules for both on-line and offline purchases of tangible goods and believes that this should be done together. Consumers should have the same rights and remedies regardless if they buy these goods on-line or offline;
Amendment 438 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that there is a risk that the Commission’s proposals entail a growing disparity between the applicable legal standards for offline and online purchases and for movable goods and digital content; points out that the Commission is planning a REFIT of the whole consumer acquis for 2016; calls on the Commission in this context once against to consider whether the Commission’s planned proposals ought not to be launched at the same time as the REFIT;
Amendment 439 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that there is a risk that the Commission’s proposals entail a growing disparity between the applicable legal standards for offline and online purchases; believes that online and offline sales should be treated equally and that the consumer protection framework should be updated for the digital age to ensure a level playing field for consumers and for businesses;
Amendment 443 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses that digital products such as e-books should be subject to the same VAT-rate as the equivalent product in physical format in order to avoid discrimination in the single market;
Amendment 457 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 458 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 459 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is sceptical about the legal nature ofBelieves that the model contracts regarding online sales of tangible goods in the absence of statutory regulationcould be one of the tools to spread best practices;
Amendment 483 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to adjust the different tax rates governing online and offline products of the same nature;
Amendment 485 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Considers that the principle of adequate information of consumers should apply in the field of e-commerce. Excessive information can lead to no information at all and may discourage consumers from buying online; considers therefor that current provisions should be adjusted to empower consumers to take informed decisions;
Amendment 487 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Appreciates Commission's overall efforts in preparing new online dispute resolution platform and reiterates the need for further improvements in regard to translation facilities, especially for less frequently used language combinations; calls on the Commission to monitor closely the process of the transposition and implementation of the Directive on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes (2013/11/EU) and Regulation on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes (2013/524 (COD)); calls on the commission to strengthen the efforts and dialogue with Members States which did not transpose on time all provisions of these legislations and not to postpone the launch of the Online Dispute Resolution platform;
Amendment 490 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for an ambitious enforcement framework for the Services Diron the Commission to identify all barriers affective;ng en-courages the Commission to make use of all means at its disposal to ensure the full and correct implementatiommerce, such as related to cross-border payments, ban of sale of certain types of goods or ban ofn existing rules, including fast-track infringement procedures whenever incorrect or insufficient implementation of the directive is identified- commerce as a sales form, establishment requirements i.e. restrictions on the registration of country code top-level domains and others, and take decisive actions against them;
Amendment 492 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for an ambitious enforcement framework forof the consumers' acquis and of the Services Directive; encourages the Commission to make use of all means at its disposal to ensure the full and correct implementation of existing rules, including fast-track infringement procedures whenever incorrect or insufficient implementation of the directive isare identified;
Amendment 506 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that accessible, affordable, efficient and high-quality delivery servicePoints out that last year only 15% of consumers are an essential prerequisite for thriving cross-border e-commerce; supports the proposed measures to improve price transparency, interoperability and regulatory oversight that should target both the smooth functioning of cross- border parcel delivery markets and compliance with relevant social and labour rights, allowing enough flexibility for the delivery market to evolve and adapt to technological innovaported buying online from online seller from another EU Member State, while 44% did it from domestic seller and inefficient delivery services were one of the most reported reasons of withdrawing from online transactions;
Amendment 525 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Inadequacies of parcel delivery for online commerce could be solved only with a broader, European single market perspective, therefore more emphasis should be put on dismantling barriers postal operators encounter in cross- border delivery; in this context reminds the Commission that its report to the European Parliament on the implementation of the postal directive (2008/6/EC) is already 2 years overdue; calls on the Commission to carefully evaluate the state of implementation of universal service obligation and draw appropriate conclusions;
Amendment 527 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Relies upon the high level of competition in delivery markets to adapt to consumer needs online and to guarantee fair prices;
Amendment 539 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Welcomes the establishment of a joint ad-hoc working group on cross- border parcels delivery between the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the European Regulators Group for Postal Services (ERGP) to analyse whether regulatory insights from the electronic communications sector can be transferred to the cross-border parcels sector;
Amendment 552 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that ambitious actions are needed to improve access to legal digital content, in particular by ending unjustified geo- blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical locationjustified price differences; points out in this connection that the correct and complete application of Article 20(2) of the Services Directive and Article 8(3) of the Consumers’ Rights Directive is essential; considers, at the same time, that certain practices may be justified on account of the fragmentation of the law which persists in the Member States;
Amendment 554 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that ambitious actions are needed to improve access to legal digital content, and tangible goods and services by in particular by ending unjustified geo- blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location;
Amendment 560 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that ambitious actions are needed to improve access to legal digital content, in particular by ending unjustified geo- blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location;
Amendment 578 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that ambitious actions are needed to improve EU-wide access to legal digital content, in particular by ending geo- blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location;
Amendment 590 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Asks the Commission to propose measures to end practices such as IP tracking or the deliberate non- interoperability of systems restricting the choice of consumers and to guarantee the portability of people's digital lives;
Amendment 596 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Acknowledges that geo-blocking may be justified in certain cases, for example in the audiovisual sector, where financing production depends to a large extent on territorial exclusivity;
Amendment 603 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Supports in particular the Commission’'s planned scrutiny of the practical enforcement of Article 20(2) of the Services Directive, in order to analyse possible patterns of discrimination against consumers based on their country of residence; calls on the Commission to identify and define concise case groups of or general interests, such as public health (e.g. prohibition of selling tobacco products or alcohol to minors online) justifiedying discrimination under Article 20(2) of the Services Directive in order to outlaw unjustified discriminatory behaviour by private entities and in order to provide interpretative assistance to authorities responsible for applying Article 20(2) in practice; calls on the Commission to make concerted efforts to add the provision of Article 20(2) to the Annex of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 in order to utilise the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network’'s investigation and enforcement powers;
Amendment 611 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Supports in particular the Commission's approach to address geo- blocking in an effective and targeted manner and considers that it is important to focus on technological measures and technical practices resulting in unjustified limitations on access to services provided across borders, on the conclusion of cross-border contracts, and also on adjacent activities, such as payment and delivery;
Amendment 616 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Further points out the importance of the ongoing cCompetition sSector iInquiry into the e- commerce sector in order to investigate, inter alia, whether unjustified geo-blocking restrictions infringe the rules of EU competition law; stresses the importance of increasing consumer and business confidence by introducingased on this sector enquiry results, changes to the Block Exemption Regulation, most importantly Article 4a and Article 4bay be needed, in order to limit undesirable re-routing and territorial restrictions;
Amendment 617 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Further points out the importance of the ongoing competition sector inquiry into the e-commerce sector in order to investigate, inter alia, whether unjustified geo-blocking restrictions infringe the rules of EU competition law; stresses the importance of increasing consumer and business confidence by introducing changes to the Block Exemption Regulation, most importantly Article 4a and Article 4b, in order to limit undesirable re-routing and territorial restrictions;
Amendment 638 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Emphasises that incentivising private investments in fast and ultra-fast communication networks is a requirement for any digital progress, with competition remaining the main driver of infrastructure investments, innovation, affordable prices and choices for consumers; considers that little evidence exists, in the still fragmented European telecommunications market, of a link between consolidation of operators and increased investment in networks;
Amendment 647 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Emphasises that incentivising private investments in fast and ultra-fast communication networks is a requirement forto any digital progress, with competition remaining the main driver of infrastructure investments, innovation, affordable prices and choices for consumers; considers that little evidence exists, in the still fragmented European telecommunications market, of a link between consolidation of operators and consolidation may increased investment in networks, however its potential impact on the competition and prices for consumers should be carefully assessed;
Amendment 657 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Emphasises that incentivising private investments in fast and ultra-fast communication networks is a requirement for any digital progress, with competition remaining the main driver of and that consequently there is a need to foster competition at all levels, including new infrastructure deployment; Notes that the EU's regulatory framework must incentivise infrastructure investments, innovation, affordable prices and choices for consumers; considers that little evidence exists, in the still fragmented European telecommunications market, of a link between consolidation of operators and increased investment in networks; Considers that a stable and predictable regulatory environment is a precondition that must be guaranteed in order to promote the much needed investment;
Amendment 669 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Believes that the regulatory framework should better reward the risks of private investments in new infrastructures. This will ultimately be beneficial to the end-user also in remote areas;
Amendment 680 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Asks the Commission to take the necessary measures enabling all citizens to be connected to the internet at the highest speed and the lowest possible costs;
Amendment 681 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)
Paragraph 19 d (new)
19d. Calls the Commission to assess the regulatory restrictions on operators that keep them from taking business risks and investing in sparsely-populated or geographically-challenging areas. In this respect, EU State Aid regime should play a key role where private investment alone cannot be ensured. Therefore, the current application of state aid rules must be reconsidered to enable a better roll-out of broadband and other solutions;
Amendment 683 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Considers that where private investment alone cannot be ensured, citizens and businesses need to be enabled to participate in the Digital Single Market through other measures; an ambitious goal on full Internet coverage should be set;
Amendment 686 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. Believes that the financing instruments in the Juncker plan will be crucial sources of investment;
Amendment 711 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that since the development of over-the-top services has increased demand and competition to the benefit of consumers, modernisation of the telecommunication framework should not lead to more regulatory burdens, but should drive innovation and fair competition; emphasises the importance of regulatory simplicity and predictability to boost infrastructure investments and to ensure similar rules for similar services;
Amendment 715 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that sincwhile the development of over- the- top services has increased demand and competition to the benefit of consumers, consumers are faced with new risks related to fragmented consumer protection standards; considers therefore that modernisation of the telecommunication framework should not lead to moreunnecessary regulatory burdens, but should ensure a high level of consumer protection, drive innovation and fair competition for all actors across the EU;
Amendment 781 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that uniform enforcement of the Connected Continent package, including the end of roaming surcharges and the net neutrality principle, requires the establishment of a single European telecommunications regulatora transparent application policy across the Member States, which takes into account all spectrum users;
Amendment 782 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that uniform enforcement of the Connected Continent package, including the end of roaming surcharges and the net neutrality principle, requires the establishment of a singlefficient coordination between European telecommunications regulators;
Amendment 807 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Urges the Commission to develop an innovation-friendly policy that fostersacilitates market entry; fosters fair and effective competition between, and innovation in, between online platforms; considers that the priorities should be transparencyransparency, good cooperation with all the actors, facilitation of switching between platforms or online services, non-discrimination, access to platforms, and identifying and addressing barriers to the emergence and scale- up of platforms and ensuring a level playing field between competitors should be priorities;
Amendment 841 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Notes that the increasing trend towards horizontal concentration in the industry and vertical integration along the value chain can provide new business opportunities but may also create bottlenecks that might hamper competition;
Amendment 852 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Appreciates the Commission’'s initiative to analyse the role of platforms inas part of the Digital Economy as part ofSingle Market Strategy and calls on the Commission to ensure that all actors along the supcoming Internal Market Strategyply chain apply a duty of care by taking all necessary measures against the sales of illicit content and goods;
Amendment 862 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Appreciates the Commission’s initiative to analyse the role of platforms in the Digital Economy as part of the upcoming InternalDigital Single Market Strategy;
Amendment 875 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Urges the Commission to distinguish between technical intermediaries providing straightforward hosting services and platforms seeking to make protected works available to the public, and clarify the provisions of Directive 2000/31 on electronic commerce and Directive 2001/29 on copyright and related rights in the information society;
Amendment 880 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24c. Promotes an appropriate European fiscal framework for addressing the new challenges raised by the digital economy, in particular concerning a territorialization adapted for the digital economy;
Amendment 881 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Urges the Commission to take into account the essential contribution of the cultural and creative industries in the digital economy and ensure that rights holders are entitled to remuneration for the online use of their works by platforms;
Amendment 886 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Encourages the Commission to analyse the need to protect consumers in the sharingNew 3.3.2 New opportunities offered by the sharing economy Encourages the Commission to analyse the need to drive innovation and at the same time to protect consumers in the sharing economy which is essential for the competiveness of the EU economy and, where appropriate and if necessary, to come forward with proposals to ensure the adequacy of the consumer- related legislation framework in the digital sphere, including possible abuses;
Amendment 900 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Welcomes the increased competition due to the growth of the sharing economy and appreciates consumers' access to a broader range of goods and services at competitive prices and easier access;
Amendment 909 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Encourages the Commission and Member States to promote the sharing economy which could bring new opportunities and welcomes the potential of this new model to provide new consumers' safety features, such as turning cash-in-hand transactions into safe electronic payments, or providing more information about products and services;
Amendment 925 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Considers, in order to ensure trust and security in digital services, that increased resources from the public and private sector are required to strengthen the security of IT systems and, internet platforms, online networks and the encryption of communication, to improve cyber-attack prevention and to increase awareness of the risks and knowledge of basic security processes among users of digital services, inter alia via public-private partnership;
Amendment 957 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Considers that the rights and duties of all operators of the digital value chain should be clarified through the application of a duty of care principle, which should apply to online intermediaries;
Amendment 975 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Believes that a thriving European Digital Economy is a cornerstone for boosting job creation and growth in the EU and that it is fundamental also to the modernisation of traditional industry; notes the important role of SMEs as enablers of job creation and welcomes the development of new business models and services;
Amendment 976 #
2015/2147(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Stresses that the digitalisation of other industries including manufacturing, the energy and transport sectors, the retail sector and SMEs, public services and education needs to be actively strengthened;
Amendment 124 #
2015/2138(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Stresses the importance and the potential of a European approach on the teaching of history, while bearing in mind the competence of Member States on the matter, as some historic events were determinant in the emergence of the European ideal and values;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the link between the single market and EU trade policy, and the fact that open and free global trade is essential to making the single market function and grow in a spirit of reciprocity and mutual benefit;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 28 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Takes note of the new strategy and recalls that commerce has to encourage the development of international trade, while taking account of the specificities and sensibilities of certain sectors and emphasises that European goods and services form part of global value chains;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees with the Commission on the need to take a holistic yet ambitious approach to public procurement ensuring reciprocity in access to public procurement; reiterates the importance for the European Union of having a reciprocity instrument for public procurement;
Amendment 61 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the TiSA and TTIP negotiations, calls for them to be completed swiftly as ambitious and balanced agreements, and underlines the need to ensure greater market access for European service providers;
Amendment 71 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the strategy’s focus on the global digital market and preventing the development of new barriers to trade in digital goods and services; supports, in line with data protection rules, all measures to increase the free flow of data provided EU data protection rules are adhered to;
Amendment 79 #
2015/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for negotiations – in parallel to trade agreements – on greater mobility for professionals, and recognition of professional qualifications, and visa facilitation;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2103(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas robotics can play a role in transforming our society for the better; whereas robotics and artificial intelligence play an active part in the digitisation of the economy in many sectors, such as industry, construction and aeronautics, and can lead to innovations and new business models, and the Union must embrace developments in this area to advance the DSM;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2103(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital A (new)
Recital A (new)
Aa. whereas the market for robot services is constantly expanding;
Amendment 14 #
2015/2103(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the digital transformation of European manufacturing industry, which accounts for 15% of EU GDP, could have a value-added potential of EUR 1.25 trillion in 20251, and the adoption of autonomous and robotic technologies could result in a competitive advantage for Europe; __________________ 1 contribute to boosting European industrial output and result in a significant competitive advantage for Europe; __________________ 1 STOA, Scientific Foresight Study, Annex STOA, Scientific Foresight Study, Annex 1, p. 37.
Amendment 26 #
2015/2103(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Encourages the development of an ambitious European strategy for research and innovation in robotics in order to fully develop its potential for growth and jobs in Europe;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2103(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that harmonised standardisation for robotics is necessary; stresses that it is essential for common, safe and high-level standards to be developed in this future-oriented area and calls on the Commission to engage with international standardisation bodies to work further on improving standards in this field;
Amendment 54 #
2015/2103(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises that robotics and AI technologies are increasingly used in autonomous vehicles, such as autonomous cars and civilian drones; notes that some Member States are already enacting or considering legislation in this area in particular; stresses that while overregulation in robotics and robotic systems should be avoided, and calls instead for future-proof minimum harmonisation, especially in relation to autonomous vehiclesit is essential to ensure a high level of security and protection of personal data and privacy.
Amendment 7 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European doctrine of the right of competition, which seeks to favour the consumer’s purchasing power, has had a strong influence on the functioning of the food supply chain;
Amendment 20 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. having regard to the risk, which is increasingly frequent thanks to vertical integration, of conflicts of interest affecting distributors who sell both their own and their competitors’ products;
Amendment 62 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas European competition law should enable the final consumer to purchase goods at a competitive price, but must also ensure free and fair competition between undertakings, notably in order to encourage them to innovate;
Amendment 90 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the setting up of the Supply Chain Initiative, which has resulted in the adoption of a set of principles of good practice in B2B relations in the food supply chain and a voluntary framework for the implementation of those principles; believes that efforts to promote fair trading practices in the food supply chain can make a real impact; regrets, however, that farmers’ organisations had no choice but to withdraw from the agreement since their demands had not been sufficiently taken into account;
Amendment 95 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the principles of good practice and the list of examples of fair and unfair practices in vertical relations in the food supply chain; shares the view that these standards now need to be enforced and their effectiveness assessed;
Amendment 101 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomNotes the setting up of national platforms of organisations and businesses in the food supply chain to promote fair trading practices and seek to put an end to UTPs, but wonders whether they are really effective;
Amendment 111 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recognises there to be an extremely fragmented spectrum of public and private legislation across the 28 Member States in the field of UTPs in the food supply chain, with this reflecting the widespread belief that UTPs ought to be addressed via political initiatives rather than in terms of specific issues, even if major differences of opinion remain as to the ensuing results;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Confirms the existence of UTPs in the food supply chain despite all the mechanisms described above, and acknowledges that they are contrary to the basic principles of law;
Amendment 124 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Confirms the existence of UTPs in the food supply chain and acknowledges that they are contrary to the basic principles of law and that they stem from imbalances in contractual powers in a concentrated market that are on a scale exceeding that of a dominant position within the meaning of antitrust rules;
Amendment 131 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Emphasises that any serious analysis of UTPs cannot fail to take into account the new economic paradigm that has emerged in recent years: a mass retail sector (MRS) in which market access and competition at points of sale has become a critical competitive variable under the control of supermarkets. Some competition authorities have stressed not only the role played by MRS buyers, but also identified specific practices that transfer excessive and/or unjustified risk to suppliers and which could undermine their competitiveness. They have also found that ‘private labels’ introduce a horizontal dimension to competition in respect of industrial brands which had never previously been a factor;
Amendment 143 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that UTPs imposed by parties in a stronger bargaining position clearly have a negative impact, including on employment; stresses that UTPs can hamper investment and product innovation;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that UTPs imposed by parties in a stronger bargaining position clearly have a negative impact; stresses that UTPs can hamper investment and product innovation, quality and variety and may therefore reduce the choices available to consumers;
Amendment 167 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Acknowledges, nonetheless, that voluntary and self-regulatory schemes are not enough to put an end to UTPs once and for all, owing to the lack of effective enforcement mechanisms; since in view of the relative strengths of the players on this market it is unlikely that the situation will be satisfactorily resolved via a freely- negotiated agreement; recognises that purely voluntary codes are very important and useful for identifying issues. However, they also have major drawbacks, such as the broad scope for non-participation, conflicts of interest, dispute settlement mechanisms that fail to reflect supplier ‘fear factor’, the lack of genuine penalties for non-compliance and scant or non-participation by the competent authorities;
Amendment 179 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that action to combat UTPs will help to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market and to develop cross- border trading in the EU; the fragmented nature of the markets in the EU exposes European suppliers, distributors and consumers to a range of diverse market conditions, with certain behaviour being permitted in some Member States but not in others. This results in inequitable surplus distribution along the value chain in the various countries concerned;
Amendment 189 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Considers it essential to change the paradigm underlying European competition law which, since the Treaty of Rome, has served the consumer-citizen by the continual lowering of prices and which, now that Europe is faced with mass unemployment, must increasingly take into account the interests of the worker-citizen;
Amendment 190 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission to be strict in its application of European competition law and in particular to impose firm penalties for abuse of a dominant position in the food supply chain;
Amendment 191 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls on the Commission to submit to Parliament as soon as possible the evaluation report announced in its communication of 15 July 2014;
Amendment 192 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Calls on the Commission to assess the progress achieved by the Supply Chain Initiative and its national platforms;
Amendment 193 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 d (new)
Paragraph 14 d (new)
14d. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the application mechanisms put in place by the Member States to boost the confidence of all parties in the proper functioning of a sustainable food supply chain;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 e (new)
Paragraph 14 e (new)
14e. Calls on the Commission to propose, on the basis of its report announced in its communication of 15 July 2014, additional legal or other measures to be put in place at EU level to counteract the scourge of UTPs;
Amendment 217 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission to submit specific proposals for EU legislation or other regulatory tools banning UTPs in the food supply chain that will enable markets to operate as they should and fair and transparent relations to be maintained between food producers, suppliers and distributors;
Amendment 218 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission to submit specific proposals for EU legislation banning UTPs in the food supply chain that will enable markets to operate as they should and fair and transparent. Economic regulation may prove necessary in order to prevent market disruption and the devastating effects of this on consumers, as well as repercussions that go beyond the interests of those immediately affected. Competition rules operate on an ex-post basis, when ex-ante regulations to be maintained between food producers, suppliers and distributors would be preferable to resolve structural issues and create market access conditions, providing potential market entrants with legal certainty and hence encouraging them to invest. Such regulation might also take into consideration other public policies that merit protection;
Amendment 223 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses that the experience of public intervention in other sectors suggests that economic regulation is a necessary complement to competition rules. Regulatory action has been taken to protect against the dangers of anti-competitive practices, despite the fact that no individual operators enjoyed dominant positions, in the fields of computerised reservation services, the interconnectivity of mobile telecommunications networks and the provision of internet access services. In other words, the Commission’s passive attitude in respect of the food supply chain contrasts with its proactive approach in other sectors;
Amendment 238 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Suggests that work should begin onat EU rules on the establishment or recognition of national public agencieslevel, including legislative work, for the establishment of public agencies at national level with responsibility for enforcing laws to combat unfair practices in the food supply chain; takes the view that public agencies of this kind should be empowered to conduct investigations on their own initiative and on the basis of informal information and complaints dealt with on a confidential basis (thus overcoming the fear factor), as well as to impose penalties;
Amendment 239 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Suggests that it might be more appropriate, given the current tendency in various Member States, and the burgeoning body of literature on private regulation, to move towards co-regulation rather than straightforward self- regulation. Suggests that work should begin on EU rules on the establishment or recognition of national public agencies with responsibility for enforcing laws and/or voluntary codes to combat unfair practices in the food supply chain; takes the view that public agencies of this kind should be empowered to conduct ex oficio investigations on their own initiative andor on the basis of informal information andor complaints dealt with on a confidential basis (thus overcoming the fear factor), as well as to impose penalties;
Amendment 248 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes strongly that a single, clear, precise and binding definition of UTPs should be drawn up, so as to allow effective common rules to be laid down with a view to combating such practices;
Amendment 258 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for due account to be taken, when drafting rules in this area, of the specific features of each market and the legal requirements obtaining on it, the different situations and approaches in individual Member States, the degree of consolidation or fragmentation of individual markets, and other significant factors; takes the view that such regulatory efforts should ensure that there is relatively broad discretion to tailor the measures to be taken to the specific features of each market and should be based on the general principle of improving enforcement by involva considerable degree of harmonisation of practices withing the relevant public agenciessingle market;
Amendment 259 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for due account to be taken, when drafting rules in this area, of the specific features of each market and the legal requirements obtaining on it, the different situations and approaches in individual Member States, the degree of consolidation or fragmentation of individual markets, and other significant factors; takes the view that such regulatory efforts should ensure that there is relatively broad discretion to tailor the measures to be taken to the specific features of each market and should be based on the general principle of improving enforcement by involving the relevant public agencies; stresses that one solution may be an EU framework that complements the voluntary codes and establishes general principles that reflect the differing situations at national level. This would mean that the Member States which already have effective systems could leave these very much unaltered (with small adjustments to bring them into line with any joint measures adopted). Member States with ineffectual systems could improve them, while those without any system could introduce one based on shared EU principles;
Amendment 267 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to assess the voluntary and self-regulatory schemes put in place to date and. Matters in this area hinge on the quantitative and qualitative assessment of the issues raised and resolved by the various operators in the food supply chain. Calls also the Commission to assess the effectiveness of the regulatory action taken at national and EU level; calls for an assessment of the likely impact of the various types of EU regulatory action that have been proposed, with due account being taken of all the possible implications for the various stakeholders and for consumer welfare;
Amendment 272 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Amendment 281 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the European Parliament's Annual report on EU Competition Policy, particularly paragraph 104,
Amendment 285 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 b (new)
Citation 17 b (new)
- having regard to the UK Groceries Code Adjudicator investigation into Tesco PLC from January 2016,
Amendment 302 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the steps taken to date by the Commission to combat UTPs with a view to securing a more balanced market; regrets the Commission's conclusion in its 2016 report on unfair business-to- business trading practices in the food supply chain, that it does not currently propose to adopt a harmonised regulatory approach to tackle unfair trading practices at EU level;
Amendment 317 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Reiterates farmers reluctance to join the Supply Chain Initiative due to the lack of anonymous complaints and sanctions; notes that in the case of Finland, farmers joined the SCI and subsequently left due to these limitations;
Amendment 338 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the regulatory action taken by some Member States, which have introduced provisions supplementing national competition law, broadened the scope of application of the directives on UTPs byfact that more than 20 Member States have or are planning to introduce legislation to tackle UTPs, indicating the extendingt of their provisions to cover B2B relations, and set up independent enforcement agenciesblem and the need for legislative action at EU level so as to ensure a level playing field;
Amendment 348 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the Supply Chain Initiative and other national and EU voluntary systems (codes of good practice, voluntary dispute settlement mechanisms) should be further developed and promoted; encourages producers and traders to become involnotes that the Commission states in its recent report that the SCI needs to be improved, in such initiatives; takes the view that they should play a leading role in efforts to combat UTPparticular to take account of confidential complaints, and the granting of investigations and sanctioning powers to independent bodies;
Amendment 371 #
2015/2065(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. UNotes the Commission's intention in its 2016 report to closely monitor the different approaches for tackling UTPs at Member State level; urges the Commission to submit specific proposals for EUframework legislation banning UTPs in the food supply chain that will enable markets to operate as they should and fair and transparent relations to be maintained between food producers, suppliers and distributorso as to ensure a level playing field across the Member States;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2001(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to its resolutions of 13 December 2012 containing the European Parliament’s recommendations to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service on the negotiations of the new EU-Russia Agreement1, of 12 September 2013 on the pressure exerted by Russia on Eastern Partnership countries (in the context of the upcoming Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius)2, of 6 February 2014 on the EU-Russia summit3 and, of 18 September 2014 on the situation in Ukraine and the state of play of EU- Russia relations4 and of 12 March 2015 on the murder of the Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov and the state of democracy in Russia, __________________ 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0505. 2 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0383. 3 Texts adopted, P7_TA- PROV(2014)0101. 4 Texts adopted, P8_TA- PROV(2014)0025.
Amendment 202 #
2015/2001(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that at this point, Russia, because of its actions, can no longer be treated as, or considered, a ‘strategic partner’; pPoints out that strategic partnerships are only conceivable with countries that do not jeopardise the international order, which is based on democracy, state sovereignty (including the choice of internal constitutional order and foreign policy orientation), the inviolability of state borders, respect for the rule of law and the principles of international trade, and mutual trust;
Amendment 319 #
2015/2001(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Firmly supports the swift creation of a robust European Energy Union, specifically the diversification of energy partners and the interconnection of national energy networks in order to reduce considerably the dependence of individual Member States on external energy suppliers; is of the firm conviction that the challenges to and vulnerability of European solidarity, and the exposure of individual Member States, to the illegitimate use of energy as a political and diplomatic bargain chip can only be combatted efficiently through the full implementation of the Third Energy package and the completion of a transparent, integrated, synchronised and resilient European internal energy market;
Amendment 376 #
2015/2001(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Renews its call for the development of EU reconnaissance capabilities of weaponised information and the preparation of information contingency plans, including the strengthening of analytical and monitoring capabilities, especially in the Russian language, in order to be able to identify, and respond swiftly and appropriately to, purposefully biased information; calls on the Commission to earmark without delay adequate funding for concrete projects aimed at countering Russian propaganda within the EU and abroad; welcomes, in this connection, the conclusions of the European Council of 20 March 2015 calling on the High Representative, in cooperation with the Member States and institutions of the Union, to draw up an action plan on strategic communication in order to counter Russia’s disinformation campaigns; calls on the Commission and the Member States to devise as well a mechanism for the collection, monitoring and reporting of financial, political or technical assistance provided by Russia to political parties and other organisations within the EU, with a view to assessing its involvement in, and influence over, political life and public debate in the EU;
Amendment 73 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) European integrated border management is a shared responsibility of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and; the national authorities responsible for border management, including coast guards to the extent that they carry out border control tasks. While Member States retain the primary responsibility for the management of their section of the external borders in their interest and in the interest of all Member States which have abolished internal border control, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should ensure the application of Union measures relating to the management of the external borders by reinforcing, assessing and coordinating the actions of Member States which implement those measures.Member States should transfer immediately the management of their section of the external borders to the Agency;
Amendment 75 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Having regard to the increasing migratory pressures at the external borders, to the necessity of ensuring a high level of internal security within the Union and to safeguard the normal functioning of the Schengen area as well as the overarching principle of solidarity, it is necessary to reinforcehat the Member States delegate to the Union the management of the external borders b. By building on the work of Frontex and further develop it into an, the responsibility of the management of the external borders should lie with an Agency, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, with a shared responsibility for the management of the external borders.hich should have its own technical and budgetary means, its own staff, including extended power ; the Agency should be under the authority of the President of the Council ;
Amendment 81 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should organise the appropriate technical and operational assistance to Member States so as to reinfbe morce their capacity to implement their obligations with regard to the control of the external borders, andefficient to face challenges at the external border resulting fromnamely irregular immigration or cross- border crime. In this respect, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should, at the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, organise and coordinate joint operations for one or more Member States and deploy European Border and Coast Guard Teams as well as the necessary technical equipment, and it may deploy experts from its own staff.
Amendment 86 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) At particular areas of the external borders where Member States face disproportionate migratory pressures characterised by large influxes of mixed migratory flows, referred to as hotspot areas, the Member States should be able to rely on the increased operational and technical reinforcement by the migration management support teams composed of teams of experts deployed from Member States by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the European Asylum Support Office, and from Europol or other relevant Union Agencies, as well as experts from the staff of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should assist the Commission in the coordination among the different agencies on the ground. The Agency should have an autonomous right to intervene in order to allocate its agents and equipment based on the complexity of border protection as well as particular areas of external borders where Member States face disproportionate migration pressures.
Amendment 97 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should be independent as regards operational and technical matters and have legal, administrative and financial autonomy. To that end, it isan Agency under the political responsibility of the Union and have legal, administrative and financial autonomy. For this reason the Executive Director of the Agency should be appointed by a common accord of the Head of State or government of the Member State of the Schengen area, after consulting the European Parliament. It is also necessary and appropriate that it should be a Union body having legal personality and exercising the implementing powers, which are conferred upon it by this Regulation.
Amendment 347 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1
Article 68 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission, after consulting the European Parliament, shall propose candidates for the post of the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director based on a list following publication of the post in the Official Journal of the European Union and other press or internet sites as appropriate.
Amendment 349 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Management Boarda common accord of the Head of State or government of the Member State of the Schengen area on the grounds of merit and documented high-level administrative and management skills, as well as senior professional experience in the field of management of the external borders and return. The Management Board shall take its decision by a two- thirds majority of all members with a right to vote.
Amendment 351 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 33 #
2015/0307(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters, many of whom are Union citizens, demonstrates the urgentnecessity to strengthen the checks at external borders with regard to Union citizens.
Amendment 145 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Conformity should cover material defects as well as legal defects. Third party rights and other legal defects might effectively bar the consumer from enjoying the goods in accordance with the contract when the right's holder rightfully compels the consumer to stop infringing those rights. Therefore the seller should ensure that the goods are free from any righte observance of a third -party, which precludes the consumer from enjoying the goods in accordance with the contract rights in respect of the goods.
Amendment 214 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Directive shall not apply to any duratangible medium incorporating digital content where the duratangible medium has been used exclusively as a carrier for the supply of the digital content to the consumer.
Amendment 215 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. This Directive shall not apply to public auctions.
Amendment 268 #
2015/0288(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
At the time relevant for establishing the conformity with the contract as determined by Article 8, the goods must be free from any rights of a third partyies concerning the goods, including based on intellectual property, so that the goods can be used in accordance with the contractmust be respected.
Amendment 376 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) data which is produced and supplied in digital form, for example video files, audio files, applications, digital games and any other software,
Amendment 429 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. 'interoperability' means the acompatibility of digital content to perform alland its functionalities in interaction with a concrete digital environmentwith a physical and software environment other than that in which it is supplied;
Amendment 434 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
9a. 'interoperability of a digital book file' means the compatibility of a digital book file and its functionalities with a physical and software environment other than that in which it is supplied, with no restriction on duration and supplied exclusively in an open standard;
Amendment 435 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 b (new)
9b. 'open standard' means an interoperable data format whose technical specifications have been published and which can be freely accessed and used;
Amendment 491 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. services consisting of public performances in which the digital content is one of the elements of the artistic performance or spectacle, such as cinematographic projections or live spectacles.
Amendment 517 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4a. 10. This directive does not affect intellectual property rights, in particular, as regards the rights of the author, the rights and obligations set out under Directive 2001/29/CE.
Amendment 556 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) be of the quantity, quality of the file, description, duration and version and shall possess functionality, interoperability and other performance features such as accessibility, continuity and security, as required by the contract including in any pre-contractual information which forms integral part of the contract;
Amendment 596 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. In order to conform with the contract the digital content must also meet the requirements of Articles 7 and 8.
Amendment 614 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7a. Interoperability of digital books 1. Digital books provided for an unlimited duration of time must be interoperable and must therefore be provided in an open format. 2. If the supplier uses technical protection measures, it shall make the necessary interoperability information available to other digital book file suppliers if they request it.
Amendment 618 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. At the time the digital content is supplied to the consumer, the digital content shall be free of anyrespect the rights of a third partyies, including those based on intellectual property, so that the digital content can be used in accordance with the contract.
Amendment 624 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where the digital content is supplied over a period of time, the supplier shall, for the duration of that period, keepensure that the digital content supplied to the consumer free of anyspects the rights of a third partyies, including thatose based on intellectual property, so that the digital content can be used in accordance with the contract.
Amendment 913 #
2015/0287(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the contract provides for the supply of the digital content for an indeterminate period or where the initial contract duration or any combination of renewal periods exceed 12 months, the consumer shall be entitled to terminate the contract any time after the expiration of the first 12 months period.
Amendment 47 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) There are a number of barriers which hinder the provision of these servicesreasons why these services are not accessible to consumers temporarily present in another Member State. Certain online services include content such as music, games or films, which are protected by copyright and/or related rights under Union law. In particular, the obstacles to cross- border portability of online content services stem from the fact that, and the rights for the transmission of content protected by copyright and/or related rights such as audiovisual works are often licensed on a territorial basis as well as from the fact that o. Online service providers maycan also choose to serve specific markets only.
Amendment 53 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In addition, the Court held in Joined cases C-403/08 and C-429/08, Football Association Premier League and Others, EU:C:2011:631, that certaina restrictions to on the provision of services cannot be justified in light of the objective of protecting intellectual property rights if it goes beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective.
Amendment 62 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Therefore, the objective of this Regulation is to adapt the legal framework in order to ensure that the licensing of rights no longer presents barriers to cross-border portability of online content services in the Union andstablish a common approach enabling online content services to be provided to subscribers temporarily present in a Member State other thatn the cross- border portability can be ensuredir Member State of residence.
Amendment 109 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) For the licensing of copyright and related rights, this means that relevant acts of reproduction, communication to the public and making available of works and other protected subject-matter, as well as the acts of extraction or re-utilization in relation to databases protected by sui generis rights, which occur when the service is provided to subscribers when they are temporarily present in a Member State other than their Member State of residence, should be deemed to occur in the subscribers’ Member State of residence. The service providers, therefore, should be deemed to carry out such acts on the basis of the respective authorisations from the right holders concerned for the Member State of residence of these subscribers. Whenever service providers can carry out acts of communication to the public or reproduction in the Member State of the subscriber on the basis of an authorisation from the right holders concerned, a subscriber who is temporarily present in a Member State other than his Member State of residence should be able to access and use the service and where necessary carry out any relevant acts of reproduction such as downloading which he would be entitled to do in his own Member State of residence. The provision of an online content service by a service provider to a subscriber temporarily present in a Member State other than his or her Member State of residence and the use of the service by such a subscriber in accordance with this Regulation should be strictly regulated and should not constitute a breach of copyright and related rights or any other rights relevant for the use of the content in the service.
Amendment 121 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) SIt is essential that service providers should ensure that their subscribers are properly informed about the conditions of enjoyment of online content services in Member States other than the Member State of residence of the subscribers. The Regulation enables right holders to require that the service provider make use of effective means in order to verify that the online content service is provided in conformity with this Regulation. It is necessary, however, to ensure that the required means are reasonable and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this purpose. Examples of the necessary technical and organisational measures may include sampling of IP address instead of constant monitoring of location, transparent information to the individuals about the methods used for the verification and its purposes, and appropriate security measures. Considering that for purposes of the verification what matters is not the location, but rather, in which Member State the subscriber is accessing the service, precise location data should not be collected and processed for this purpose. Similarly, where authentication of a subscriber is sufficient in order to deliver the service provided, identification of the subscriber should not be required.
Amendment 142 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1
Article 1
This Regulation introduces a common approach to ensuring that subscribers to online content services in the Union, when temporarily present in a Member State, can access and use these service other than their Member State of residence, can access and use these services, without infringing the copyright and related rights attaching to the content to which they have access.
Amendment 188 #
2015/0284(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
(1) The provider of an online content service shall enable a subscriber who is temporarily present in a Member State other than his or her Member State of residence to access and use the online content service.
Amendment 39 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Certain issues in Directive 91/477/EEC need further improvement to promote harmonious application by the Member States.
Amendment 44 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established and holding in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before the date of entry into force of this Directive should be able to keep those firearms in their possession subject to authorisation by the Member State concerned and provided that those firearms have been deactivated in accordance with Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2403 or that they are exempt from requirement to be deactivated for reasons connected with the conservation of cultural and historical heritage, provided that obligations relating to safekeeping are met.
Amendment 57 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) This directive concerns the legal use of firearms and the security-related conditions for their acquisition, possession and use. Given the risks of misuse for criminal or terrorist purposes resulting from the loss or theft of a legally acquired firearm, appropriate measures should be laid down for the storage of firearms which meet public security and public order requirements.
Amendment 73 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) To avoid that markings are easily erased and to clarify on which components the marking should be affixed, common Union rules on marking should be introduced. These rules should take account of the new materials used in weapon manufacture and the emergence of three-dimensional weapons. They should also take into account imported weapons.
Amendment 76 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Firearms may be used for far more than 20 years. In order to ensure their traceability, records of them should be kept for an indeterminate period of time until destruction is certified by the relevant authorities.
Amendment 79 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Selling arrangements of firearms and their components by means of distance communication may pose a serious threat to security as they are more difficult to control than the conventional selling methods, especially as regards the on line verification of the legality of authorisations. It is therefore appropriate to limit the selling of arms and components by means of distance coay down more effective provisions regulating the purchase and sale of firearms, components and ammunication, notably internet, to dealers and broker on the internet and to limit sales to dealers and registered brokers holding permits or licences issued by Member States.
Amendment 87 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Furthermore, the risk of alarm weapons and other types of blank firing weapons being converted to real firearms is high, and in some of the terrorist acts converted arms were used. It is therefore essential to address the problem of converted firearms being used in criminal offences, notably by including them in the scope of the Directive. Technical specifications for alarm and signal weapons as well as for salute and acoustic weapons should be adopted in order to ensure that they cannot beit is impossible to converted them into firearms.
Amendment 91 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure appropriate exchange of information between the Member States on authorisations granted and on refusals and on any interruption of an authorisation, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of adopting an act to enable the Member States to create such a system of exchange of information on authorisations granted and on refusals. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 128 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
For the purposes of identifying and tracing each assembled firearm, Member States shall, at the time of manufacture of each firearm or at the time of import to the Union, require a unique marking including the name of the manufacturer, the country or place of manufacture, the serial number and, the year of manufacture, if not already part of the serial number and the type or model of the firearm as well as its calibre. This shall be without prejudice to the affixing of the manufacturer's trademark.
Amendment 139 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall make the pursuit of the activity of dealer or broker within their territory conditional upon authorisation on the basis of at least a check of the private and professional integrity and of the abilities of the dealer or broker, and also on the basis of the transparency of the commercial activity. In the case of a legal person, the check shall be on the legal person and on the person who directs the undertaking.
Amendment 149 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4b – paragraph 2
Article 4b – paragraph 2
2. The system referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least a check of the private and professional integrity and of the abilities of the dealer or broker and also a check of the transparency of the commercial activity. In the case of a legal person, the check shall be on the legal person and on the person who directs the undertaking.
Amendment 156 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) are not likely to be a danger to themselves and to others, to public order or to public safety; having been convicted of a violent intentional crime shall be considered as indicative of such danger.
Amendment 187 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Member States may authorise bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established: (a) to keep in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before [the date of entry into force of this Directive] provided they have been deactivated in accordance with the provisions that implement Article 10(b)Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2403; or (b) to keep in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before [the date of entry into force of this Directive] exempted from the requirement to be deactivated for reasons connected with the conservation of cultural and historical heritage, provided that obligations relating to safekeeping are met and it is guaranteed that the weapons thus conserved do not constitute a risk for public safety or public order.
Amendment 218 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 10b – paragraph 1
Article 10b – paragraph 1
Member States shall make arrangements for the deactivation of firearms to be verified by a competent authority in order to ensure that the modifications made to each of the essential components of a firearm render it irreversibly inoperable. Member States shall, in the context of this verification, provide for the issuance of a certificate or record attesting to the deactivation of the firearm or the apposition of a clearly visible mark to that effect on the firearm.
Amendment 229 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
4. The competent authorities of the Member States shall exchange information regularly, effectively and electronically on the authorisations granted for the transfers of firearms to another Member State, on any interruption to authorisations granted, as well as information with regard to refusals to grant authorisations as defined in Article 7.
Amendment 230 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall submit every five years a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive, accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals in particular as regards the categories of firearms of Annex I and the issues related to the modular design of arms and to new technologies such as 3D printing. The first report shall be submitted two years after the entry into force of this Directive.
Amendment 339 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1e a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1e a (new)
(ba) The following paragraph is added: ‘1ea. For the purposes of this Directive, “collector” shall mean a natural or legal person who collects and conserves firearms and other components and who is recognised as such by the national authorities of a Member State.’
Amendment 344 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b b(new)
Article 1 – point 1 – point b b(new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1e b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1e b (new)
Amendment 566 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shallmay provide for standard medical tests for issuing or renewing authorisations as referred to in paragraph 1 and shall withdraw authorisations if any of the conditions on the basis of which it wasthey were granted isare no longer met.
Amendment 574 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Collection as referred to in Article 1(1h) shall be a valid reason to acquire and possess firearms in categories B, C, and D for persons who are at least 18 years of age and not likely to be a danger to themselves, to public order, or to public safety. A conviction for a violent intentional crime shall be considered as indicative of such danger.
Amendment 579 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 609 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Member States may authorise bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established to keep inmuseums to hold and acquire category A, B, C and D firearms and their poessession firential parmts classified in category A acquired before [the date of entry into force of this Directive] provided they have been deactivated in accordance with the provisions that implement Article 10(b)and ammunition, provided that strict conditions for secure storage are applied.
Amendment 623 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Member States may authorise, by derogation, the acquisition of category A firearms and their essential components and ammunition if necessary for reasons of public security.
Amendment 636 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
The acquisition of firearms and their parts and ammunition concerning categories A, B and C by means of distance communication, as defined in Article 2 of Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(*), shall be authorised only with respect to dealers and brokers and shall be subject to the strict control of the Member Stateis possible provided that at least one of the stages of the transaction is carried out under the supervision of a national authority or a person authorised to sell weapons.
Amendment 671 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 7
Article 1 – point 7
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
An authorisation to hold a category B firearm granted before this directive enters into force may be extended by Member States after its entry into force even if such entry into force causes it to be classed as category A. Such authorisations shall, however, be null and void in the event of a change of ownership.
Amendment 672 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 1 – point 7 a (new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
7a) The following Article is inserted: 'Article 7a Hunters and marksmen may acquire and hold category B semi-automatic weapons under the following conditions: - marksmen must be registered members of a sports shooting club or association accredited by the public authorities, - a hunter may possess a maximum of five category B firearms, and a marksman may possess a maximum of 12 category B firearms, - upon the application of an accredited sports shooting association and subject to the favourable opinion of a national sports shooting federation, marksmen may receive a derogation enabling them to hold more than the maximum number of firearms for the purposes of training for and participation in national and international competitions, - a hunter or marksman may not permanently hold more than 10 magazines and 1000 items of ammunition.'
Amendment 736 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12
Article 1 – point 12
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
The Commission shall, by [date], assess the necessary elements of a system for the exchange of information contained in the computerised data-filing systems referred to in Article 4(4) between the Member States. The Commission's assessment shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal taking into account existing instruments regarding exchange of information and innovations linked to new technology such as 3D printers and the use of QR codes."
Amendment 740 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point -i (new)
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point -i (new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 2
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 2
-i) in category A, point 2 is replaced by the following: "2. Automatic firearms and any system or component enabling or facilitating the conversion of a semi- automatic firearm into an automatic firearm;”
Amendment 66 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) development of a truly European Single Market by tackling missing infrastructure, including in the areas of transport, particularly in industrial, urban and rural centres; energy, in particular energy interconnections and storage; and digital and telecommunications infrastructure;
Amendment 74 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) providensuring financial support for the companies referred to in Article 1(1), incluby providing working capital risk financing to boost competitiveness and economic growth in the EU and to support economic, social and territorial cohesion.
Amendment 158 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The investment environment within the Union should be improved by removing barriers to investment, such as obstacles to Public Private Partnerships (PPP) which persist at national and European level, reinforcing the Single Market and by enhanci ng regulatory predictability. The work of the EFSI, and investments across Europe generally, should benefit from this accompanying work.
Amendment 3 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
Citation 8
– having regard to the European Commission Progress Report on Georgia of 27 March 20114,
Amendment 5 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly report of 5 September 2014 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Georgia,
Amendment 6 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
– having regard to the draft agreement on the integration of Abkhazia into Russia submitted to the Abkhazian Parliament by the leader of Abkhazia on 13 October 2014,
Amendment 9 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas there is strong national and cross-party consensus in Georgia in favour of European integration and whereas, according to a recent study by the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, 69% of the population of Georgia approve of the signing of an association agreement with the European Union;
Amendment 37 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Warmly welcomes the signature of the Association Agreement as constituting a significant step forward in EU-Georgia relations and embodying a commitment to the path of political association and economic integration; welcomes the financial assistance granted to Georgia in 2014 in accordance with the principle ‘more funds for more reform’; stresses that the ratification of the Agreement is not the final goal in itself and that full implementation thereof is key;
Amendment 66 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes the efforts by the Georgian authorities in the area of democratic reforms, including tackling the reform of the judiciary, and the need to investigate properly and fully all allegations of violations of human rights; recognises the fundamental principle of equality before the law; stresses, however, that all prosecutions should be transparent, proportionate and free from political motivation, and should adhere strictly to due process; stresses the need for the Georgian authorities to seek to bring about national reconciliation;
Amendment 76 #
2014/2816(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Encourages the European Union to ensure synergies between the opportunities for support afforded by the European Endowment for Democracy, the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, the Instrument for Stability and the Civil Society Facility in order to bolster the democratic process in Georgia;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that Directive 2001/29/EC (Infosoc Directive) was adopted in 2001 and that the digital usesupply of material subject to copyrightin accordance with copyright and the use thereof has changed and dramatically increased since then, with new operators emerging, resulting in an imbalance with regard to value sharing;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls that the value generated in the digital economy by copyrighted works should be shared fairly with the rights holders; calls on the Commission to assess the extent and impact of this value transfer in favour of digital technical intermediaries;
Amendment 31 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the fact that Member States’ provisions on copyright and related rights vary considerably, and that the exclusivity which copyright grants its owner is, in principle, limited to the territorial boundaries of the Member State where the right has been granted, which leads to market fragmentation across the EU; recalls that the European market is not homogeneous and that national markets evolve at different rates; recalls also that consumption patterns, and hence content also, correspond to specific expectations in each Member State;
Amendment 41 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StressNotes that territorial fragmentation may require users aspiring to offer content-related services across the EU to secure multiple licenses; emphasises the fact that differences in limitations and exceptions create additional legal costs and legal uncertainty; recalls that consumers may be denied access to certain content servioday it is possible to grant contractual multi-territorial licences subject to market conditions; notes, however, that in view of the specific nature of the audiovisual and film sectors with their high production costs, different distribution and financing methods may be justified, depending on the places on geographical groundsf consumption;
Amendment 80 #
2014/2256(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the importance of promoting greater interoperability for software and terminals, as lack of interoperability hampers innovation and reduces competition in the EU and slows down innovation; the resulting lack of interoperability is hampering the development of new content services at the expense of artists seeking a broader public throughout Europe; believes that lack of interoperability may lead to market dominance of one particular product, which in turn stifles competition and limits consumer choice in the EU.
Amendment 435 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines the fact that, until the Treaties cease to apply to the United Kingdom, it will continue to participate in all decision-making of the Union throughout its institutions, with the exception of the negotiations and the agreement concerning its own withdrawal; considers that intermediate arrangements will need to be made concerning the UK’s participation in European decision-making, as it will be politically difficult to allow a Member State in the process of leaving to influence decisions affecting– particularly European Parliament votes – affecting the future of the Union of which it will soon cease to be a member;
Amendment 448 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for the headquarters of the European Medicines Agency, currently in London, to be moved to another Member State;
Amendment 449 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls for the establishment of an ‘observer’ status applicable to all United Kingdom representatives, whether elected or unelected, at the EU institutions; the status would enable the representatives to participate in debates until the United Kingdom leaves the European Union without taking part in decisions, including votes in the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union; proposes that the European Parliament’s Committee on Constitutional Affairs is given a mandate to set out the arrangements for this ‘observer’ status on behalf of all the institutions;
Amendment 821 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Points out that the excessive number and redundancy of emergency resolutions, but also of some subjects which address only the subsidiarity of Members States in the European Parliament’s reports, weaken their political and diplomatic impact;
Amendment 892 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 897 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates its call for a singlPoints out that the seat ofor the European Parliament; proposes that Parliament and the Council each decide the location of their own seat after having obtained the consent of the other; further proposes that the s is in Strasbourg and that its places of work can only be changed by meatns of all the other EU institutions,n agmencies and bodies be determined by Parliadment andto the Council on a proposal by the European executive, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedureTreaty on European Union;
Amendment 906 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39a. Calls, in the interests of transparency, for a study to be carried out on the cost of all the European Union’s agencies and bodies being spread across the Member States; calls for a study to be carried out to calculate the savings that would be made by moving all the European Union’s decentralised bodies to its capital: Strasbourg;
Amendment 908 #
2014/2248(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39a. Calls, in the light of the decentralised European Union institutions and the need for citizens to see and feel close to the European Parliament, for the permanent recognition as part of treaty revisions of the fact that the European Parliament has officially and historically had its headquarters in Strasbourg;
Amendment 17 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the United States is the EU’s key strategic partner; stresses that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is the most significant recent EU-US project and will reinvigorate the transatlantic partnership as a whole, beyond its trade aspects; emphasises that its successful conclusion is of high geopolitical importance, particularly in view of the economic and commercial progress made by China and at a moment when the US is pivoting to Asia and concluding the Trans-Pacific Partnership; underlines that the TTIP will have a positive impact on jobs, competitiveness and growth for the two economies, which have both been hit by the crisis;
Amendment 36 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
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 convergence of standards and the establishment of common regulations and rules that could later be adopted at global level;
Amendment 45 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced, however, that TTIP should not only cut down barriers but also aim at according to the TFEU, EU standards and regulatory environments shall ensure this high level promoting European high levels of consumer protection; observes that in most sectors EU and US standards and regulatory environments ensure this high level; considers, therefore, that approximating our regulations represents a unique chance to establish high-quality standards and laws for consumers which will be the de facto international standards;
Amendment 109 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission to ensure that European companies, including SMEs, are not discriminated against when tendering for public contracts on the US market at all government levels, and to ensure transparent access at a level equal to or higher than that applying to US companies today in Europe under the new EU procurement rules; in order to counterbalance the existing asymmetric situation where European companies have only access to 32 % of public contracts in the US;
Amendment 145 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for the setting-up of an ambitious and effective cooperation mechanism aimed at creating common standards where possible in existing procedures, and at establishing a dialogue between regulators on technical procedures to ensure that there is no unintended divergence in future standards in key sectors; believes that EU-US common standards should be promoted in all international forums;
Amendment 55 #
2014/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – indent 4 a (new)
Paragraph 3 – indent 4 a (new)
- stepping-up the EU’s response to Islamic terrorism inside and outside the Union,
Amendment 162 #
2014/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – indent 1 a (new)
Paragraph 16 – indent 1 a (new)
- coordination between the EU’s strategic framework in external relations and the new EU security agenda, as well as a deepening of cooperation in the areas of combating of terrorism and of information,
Amendment 212 #
2014/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for a reform of the EU’s approach to migration policy; insists on the need to address the root causes of irregular migration, by strengthening cooperation with non-EU countries currently affected by migration and human trafficking and using all policy and assistance instruments, including development and trade policies, humanitarian aid, conflict prevention and crisis management; reiterates its call to step up humanitarian support to countries which host refugees and to strengthen Regional Protection Programmes, run in collaboration with UNHCR close to regions of origin; stresses that migration management should be a priority in EU cooperation with neighbours in the east and south;
Amendment 338 #
2014/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Insists on the need to substantially revise the EU´s policy towards its southern neighbourhood, and to develop a comprehensive strategy focusing the EU’s instruments and scarce budgetary resources on support for the building of functioning and inclusive states capable of delivering security for their citizens, confronting religious extremism and enhancing the rule of law, which is a key precondition for investment and economic development; recalls and endorses the 5+5 dialogue which supplements the action of the Union for the Mediterranean and enables ten countries from the Western Mediterranean to work, in particular, on security cooperation and issues related to regional security and stability in the Mediterranean; points to the unused potential of cross- border trade within the region; insists on close cooperation on managing migration flows, while respecting human rights;
Amendment 349 #
2014/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Takes the view that additional EU support should be granted to partner governments which are committed to and make tangible progress towards democratisation, such as Tunisia, Jordan and Morocco, on the basis of ‘more funding for more reforms’;
Amendment 358 #
2014/2219(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Urges the EU leadership to develop, in close coordination with the US and involving major powers (e.g. Russia and China), a strategy encouraging regional actors (including Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Gulf Cooperation Council governments, Iran, the Arab League and Kurdish forces) to unite in order to pcut an end to proxy wars and haltoff financial support to fundamentalists, to fight Islamist terrorism and to develop a solution for peace and stability in the region; supports the engagement of all parties involved in the Middle East peace process in finding a comprehensive, constructive and sustainable solution to the Middle East conflict; emphasises the need to preserve the territorial integrity and national unity of Libya and urges the HR/VP to provide impetus for a stronger engagement of regional actors on mediation and conflict resolution;
Amendment 12 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to its urgency resolutions on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law,
Amendment 21 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2014 on the EU and the global development framework after 2015,
Amendment 22 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 b (new)
Citation 25 b (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 27 November 2014 on the 25th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child,
Amendment 82 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Encourages the EU to ensure there is synergy between the opportunities for support afforded by the Instrument for Stability, the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the European Endowment for Democracy (EED);
Amendment 149 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Urges the EEAS, EU delegations and EU special representatives to cooperate closely with the members of Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs during the drafting of resolutions concerning instances of violations of human rights, democracy and the rule of law throughout the world;
Amendment 174 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the dedicated Council conclusions on human rights defenders on the tenth anniversary of the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders (HRDs); commends, furthermore, the Commission for its increased use of EIDHR funding to provide emergency grants to human rights defenders under imminent threat, and encourages the Commission to further explore new ways of supporting HRDs; recalls, in this context, the importance of the European Endowment for Democracy (EED) as a tool to promote and protect pro-democracy activists, bloggers and journalists throughout the world;
Amendment 265 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Strongly supports the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; recalls the importance of promoting corporate social responsibility (CSR), including in business operations outside the EU, and ensuring its respect along the whole supply chain, in particular with regard to the illegal timber trade, wildlife trafficking and trading of minerals from conflict zones; is convinced that European companies and their subsidiaries and subcontractors should play a key role in the promotion and dissemination of international standards on business and human rights worldwide;
Amendment 378 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
68. Welcomes the legalisation of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil unions in an increasing number of countries, seventeen at the moment, around the world; encourages the EU institutions and the Member States to further contribute to the recognition of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil union as a political, social and human and civil rights issue;
Amendment 389 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69
Paragraph 69
69. Welcomes the annulment in October 2013 of the Moldovan law prohibiting the ‘propagation of any other relations than those related to marriage or family’, and calls on Lithuania and Russia to follow the Moldovan example; regrets the outcome of the Croatian referendum of December 2013, which endorsed a constitutional ban on equal marriage; stresses that such referendums contribute to a climate of homophobia and discrimination; considers that LGBTI persons’ fundamental rights are more likely to be safeguarded if they have access to legal institutions such as cohabitation, registered partnership or marriage;
Amendment 395 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70
Paragraph 70
70. Welcomes the ratifications of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD); reiterates the importance of efficient implementation both by the Member States and the EU institutions and stresses, in particular, the need to credibly integrate the principle of universal accessibility and all the rights of persons with disabilities into all EU policy instruments, especially with regard to development cooperation;
Amendment 410 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Calls on the Commission and the EEAS to continue to take action regarding the rights of the child, with a specific focus on violence against children, including torture, as cases of torture and detention of children have been reported by organisations such as UNICEF and Amnesty International; calls for particular focus on the issues of forced child labour, child poverty and child malnutrition, child marriage, enlistment of children in armed groups and their disarmament, rehabilitation and subsequent reintegration, as well as placing the issue of child witchcraft on the agenda of human rights dialogues with the countries concerned; stresses the importance of prioritising children’s rights within EU external policy;
Amendment 417 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
Paragraph 73
73. Reiterates the need to step up efforts to implement the Revised Implementation Strategy of the EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict; calls, in this context, for more effective use to be made of resources available under the Stability Instrument and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights in order to address the phenomenon of child soldiers; encourages the EU to further deepen its cooperation with the UN Special Representative for Children affected by Armed Conflicts; calls for the universal ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and notably the third Optional Protocol which will allow children to submit their complaints to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child;
Amendment 436 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74
Paragraph 74
74. Stresses the urgent need to develop stronger policies at Union level to address the pressing issues related to migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in a manner consistent with international human rights law and fundamental human dignity, and calls on the EU to introduce a common European asylum system and to guarantee effective common standards for reception procedures throughout the Union in order to protect the most vulnerable; invites the VP/HR, the Commissioner for Migration and Home Affairs and the EEAS to promote a true spirit of cooperation and equitable burden-sharing among Member States in order to tackle the multiple challenges that persist in this regard; recalls the commitment of the Commission to developing adequate legal migration channels, and, to this end, calls for a revision of the Dublin Regulation, which places disproportionate responsibility on Member States for the Union’s external borders and hinders migrants’ ability to seek and obtain asylum;
Amendment 479 #
2014/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
Paragraph 77
77. Reiterates its commitment to the continued improvement of Parliament’s own procedures, processes and structures in order to ensure that human rights and democracy are at the core of its actions and policies; draws attention to the European Parliament's long-term commitment to human rights, as reflected in its award of the Sakharov Prize for freedom of thought; considers, furthermore, that effective Parliament-wide cooperation and mainstreaming of human rights is required for the Subcommittee on Human Rights to fulfil its mission, as specified in the Rules of Procedure, to ‘ensure coherence between all the Union’s external policies and its human rights policy’;
Amendment 11 #
2014/2158(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to closely evaluate the implementation by Google of the binding commitments resulting from the agreement of February 2014; believesensure a level playing field in the digital single market and to combat abusivee of dominant positions created by the so-called ‘first mover’ advantages and network effects in the digital sector should be more closely monitoredby certain market participants, by launching criminal proceedings where necessary, rather than merely carrying out one investigation after another;
Amendment 31 #
2014/2158(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that Union competition policy should not be detrimental to industrial policy; calls on the Union to promote the development of European industrial champions in growth- generating areas such as the digital sector and, to that end, to rethink the rules on state aid;
Amendment 37 #
2014/2158(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on Member States to implement the new EU public procurement rules in a timely manner in order to boost fair competition and ensure best value for money for public authorities; urges the Commission to ensure their application to the fullest possible extent in order to tackle distortions of competition caused by bid- rigging, abuses of dominant positions and discrimination in the public procurement sector; calls on the Commission and the Member States to frame their action within a global framework by linking the Union’s competition policy within Europe with the defence of a level playing field for European companies in third countries; stresses, in this respect, the need to improve the openness of third countries’ public procurement procedures in accordance with the principle of reciprocity
Amendment 45 #
2014/2158(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to carefully monitor the centralisation of purchases in public procurement markets in order to avoid excessive concentration of purchasing power and collusion, and to preserve market access opportunities for SMEs in accordance with the Small Business Act for Europe;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2153(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that energy policy must be an integral part of the EU’s overall external policy, and that further efforts are needed to ensure better synergies between energy objectives and foreign policy; points out that energy cooperation is one of the cornerstones of European integration, and calls on the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) and the European External Action Service to include energy security in the Union’s external action strategy and to coordinate closely the relevant foreign policy tools and instruments of the Member States and the EU institutions;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2153(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that, in view of the EU’s high dependence on energy imports and the current dominance of a single gas supplier, it is urgent to diversify energy supply sources and energy routes in certain Member States, it is urgent to develop networks for interconnection among the Member States, to diversify energy supply sources and energy routes, to set European targets for strategic reserves of gas and oil, to retain within the Union the full range of relevant expertise, e.g. in refining, and to strengthen mechanisms for tackling emergencies, for solidarity and for protecting critical infrastructure;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls that a voluntary Memorandum of Understanding on the Sale of Counterfeit Goods via the Internet has been in existence since May 2011and calls on the Commission to assess the results of the implementation of the MoU, and to report back to the European Parliament;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses the need to establish performance benchmarks in respect of these agreements, so as to gauge their effectiveness and keep European citizens informed;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2151(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the threat and damage to the European economy, employment consumer health and safety the purchase of IPR infringing goods may result in; thus compliments the Commission on its engagement with consumers, in particular those of the younger generation, who are unaware of the consequences of such infringements, via public information campaigns and other relevant means, and encourages it to continue; welcomes, in particular, the efforts of the Observatory located within the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) that are aimed at raising awareness among consumers of the benefits of choosing IPR respecting products and facilitating access to such products;
Amendment 26 #
2014/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that smart regulation and regulatory fitness must be based on impact assessments, assessments of existing policies (' fitness checks') and competitiveness proofing tests;
Amendment 55 #
2014/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that stakeholders, local and regional authorities and Member States should be more closely involved in identifying implementation difficulties at local, regional and national level and should provide feedback to the Commission; calls for the use of indicators for measuring compliance costs as well as the costs of non-regulation (along the lines of the ‘Cost of non- Europe’);
Amendment 60 #
2014/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls for partnership agreements for the implementation of EU legislation to be drawn up, on a voluntary basis, between the Member States and the Commission, involving local and regional authorities where appropriate;
Amendment 62 #
2014/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Stresses the need to ensure the effectiveness of inspections and of the supervision of EU legislation at Member State level; encourages, in this regard, the streamlining of national inspection capacities, the strengthening of peer review and of the exchange of best practice between the Member States, and the development of inspection-assistance capacity at EU level, which can become operational at the request of the Member States concerned in accordance with a cost-benefit approach;
Amendment 66 #
2014/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the need to improve EU communication policy with regard to EU legislation so that it is easier for people to understand and accept; Calls on the Commission to further develop the Your Europe Portal in cooperation with the Member States, in order to give SMEs easy access to practical information on relevant EU rules and their application in Member States in a multilingual format;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to use the opportunity presented by the mid-term review of the Europe 2020 Strategy and the revision of the Integrated Guidelines to strengthen the role of the Single Market in growth, innovation and jobs and to reinforce EU competiveness in the key growth areas identified as the services sector, the energy sector, the transport sector and the digital single market;
Amendment 8 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the shift in the 2014 country- specific recommendations to strengthening growth and employment, lauds in this context the Commissions’ work to define country-specific recommendations relating to the Single Market, but calls for more determined efforts to guide and coordinate national and EU policies so as to complete the Single Market and reap its potential to boost growth and create jobs; emphasises that the assessment should also examine how the main stakeholders alike benefit from the Single Market and tackle obstacles in its performance;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the shift in the 2014 country- specific recommendations to strengthening growth and employment, but calls for more determined efforts to guide and coordinate national and EU policies so as to complete the Single Market and reap its potential to boost growth and create jobs while continuing on the path of ambitious structural reforms in the Member States;
Amendment 28 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that a strong injection of EU fundingpublic and private funds is fundamental in order to stimulate the real economy and, to foster recovery in all Member States and to create jobs for the young; welcomes therefore the 300 billion euro investment programme proposed by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker; supports the Commission’s recommendation to give priority to public investment in infrastructure, research, innovation and human capital;
Amendment 29 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that a strong injection oftargeted EU funding is fundamental in order to stimulate the real economy and to foster recovery in all Member States; stresses that the financing of the real economy, and of SMEs in particular, has not been fully restored; points out that major differences in access to credit further exacerbate the growing internal divergence trends; supports the Commission’s recommendation to give priority to public investment in infrastructure, research, innovation and human capital;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Considers easier access to funding for SMEs as a priority and calls on the full implementation of the Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and SMEs (COSME) (2014-2020);
Amendment 47 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that the economic crisis has greatly worsened the living conditions of many European citizens and has led to a sharp increase in levels of inequality and poverty; points out that universal access to high- quality public services is key to fostering economic growth while guaranteeing social cohesion and allowing for more resilient economies and societies;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Emphasises the importance of providing the Commission service for Foreign Policy Instruments with adequate resources to carry out the implementation of the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace, CFSP operations, the Partnership Instrument and the election observation missions under the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.
Amendment 12 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Takes note of the European Court of Auditors' recent special report on the establishment of the EEAS published on 30 June 2014 and its recommendations to enhance the EEAS's added value and efficiency, such as working with the Commission to mitigate the impact of the rigidity of its financial and staff regulations on the efficiency of EU delegations in order to devote more resources to political tasks.
Amendment 49 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) At political level, the Council has repeatedly called for even greater interoperability in Europe and for continued efforts to modernise European public administrations. In particular, on 24 and 25 October 2013, the European Council adopted conclusions stressing that the modernisation of public administrations should continue through the swift implementation of services such as e- government, e-health, e-invoicing and e- procurement, which rely on interoperability. Additionally, in order to establish a more effective, simplified and user-friendly e-administration, a meaningful change in European public administration, with support and higher level of commitment from Member States, is necessary. Efficient online public services are crucial for fostering the trust of businesses and citizens in digital services.
Amendment 59 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) In order to allow all citizens and businesses to fully benefit from the programme, it should be stressed that fostering e-skills remains a priority for the Union, and that ICT literacy and skills should be promoted at every stage of traditional and vocational education.
Amendment 83 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ’interoperability solutions’ means common frameworks, common services and genericfunctional tools facilitating cooperation between disparate and diverse organisations, either autonomously funded and developed by the ISA2 Programme or developed in cooperation with other Union initiatives, based on identified requirements of European public administrations;
Amendment 87 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘common frameworks’ means common reference architecture, specifications, standards, methodologies, guidelines, common semantic assets and similar approaches and documents;
Amendment 104 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) be extensible and applicable to other business or policy areas; and flexible with regard to future technological developments and other, or new, business or policy areas;
Amendment 109 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. In the implementation of the ISA2 Programme, due consideration shall be given to the European Interoperability Strategy, the European Interoperability Framework and their future updates. Additionally, the ISA2 Programme shall be in line with the Commission's Digital Single Market Strategy, and support its implementation.
Amendment 113 #
2014/0185(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. In order to avoid duplication and to speed up the establishing of interoperability solutions, results achieved by other relevant Union and Member State initiatives shall be taken into account where appropriate, and good practices shall be communicated and promoted.
Amendment 156 #
2014/0107(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. All planned installations shall be subject to a safety analysis as defined in Annex III which shall cover all safety aspects of the cableway installation and its environment in the context of the design, construction and entry into service and shall make it possible to identify from past experience risks liable to occur during the operation of the cableway installationThe person responsible for the cableway installation, determined by a Member State in accordance with national law, shall carry out a safety analysis of the planned cableway installation or have such safety analysis carried out.
Amendment 157 #
2014/0107(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the safety analysis, the safety reportThe person responsible for the cableway installation, determined by a Member State in accordance with national law, shall submit the safety report, as referred to in Article 8, the EU declaration of conformity and the other documents relating to the conformity of subsystems and safety components as well as the documentation concerning the characteristics of the cableway installation are submitted to the authority or body responsible for approving the cableway installation. The documentation concerning the cableway installation shall also include the necessary conditions, including the restrictions on operation, and full details for servicing supervision, adjustment and maintenance of the cableway installation. A copy of those documents shall be kept at the cableway installation.
Amendment 181 #
2014/0107(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part 2 – point 2.6 – point 2.6.5
Annex II – part 2 – point 2.6 – point 2.6.5
2.6.5. Measures shall be taken to ensure that the effects of a fire in the cableway installation do not endanger the safety of persons being transported and workers.
Amendment 182 #
2014/0107(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part 4 – point 4.2 – point 4.2.3 – point 4.2.3.3
Annex II – part 4 – point 4.2 – point 4.2.3 – point 4.2.3.3
4.2.3.3. In all cableway installations there shall be two or more braking systems, each capable of bringing the cableway installation to a halt, and coordinated in such a way that they automatically replace the active system when its efficiency becomes inadequate. The traction cable's last braking system shall act directly on the driving pulIn order to ensure that passengers feel the braking effort, it must be applied in a safe manner as close as possible to the traction cabley. These provisions do not apply to drag lifts.
Amendment 58 #
2014/0059(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Natural mineral resources in conflict- affected or high risk areas − although holding great potential for development – can be a cause of dispute where their revenues are fuelling the outbreak or continuation of violent conflict, undermining national endeavours towards development, good governance and the rule of law. In addition, illegal extractive activities aggravate environmental pressures. In these areas, breaking the nexus between conflict and illegal exploitation of minerals is critical to peace and stability.
Amendment 74 #
2014/0059(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) On the basis of the Kimberley Process, which established an international certification scheme for rough diamonds, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan, and the Timber Regulation, the Union has proposed a comprehensive set of measures to break the link between the financing of armed groups and the exploitation of natural resources in conflict areas. The Union has been actively engaged in an Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) initiative to advance the responsible sourcing of minerals from conflict regions, which has resulted in a government-backed multi-stakeholder process leading to the adoption of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (OECD Due Diligence Guidance5) including supplements on tin, tantalum and tungsten, and on gold. In May 2011, the OECD Ministerial Council recommended to actively promote the observance of this Guidance. __________________ OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Second Edition, OECD Publishing (OECD (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264185050- en.
Amendment 79 #
2014/0059(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The Commission in its 20088 Communication recognised that securing reliable and undistorted access to raw materials is an important factor for the EU’s competitiveness. The Raw Materials Initiative (RMI) is an integrated strategy aimed at responding to different challenges related to access to non-energy non- agriculture raw materials. The RMI recognises and promotes financial as well as supply chain transparency, and the application of corporate social responsibility standards. As regards funding, the Union supports strengthening the global Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) standard, which seeks to ensure the transparency of payments and income generated by the extractive industries, make that information accessible to civil society and the general public, and promote the proper use of that wealth. __________________ 8The Raw Materials Initiative – meeting our critical needs for growth and jobs in Europe, COM(2008) 699.
Amendment 8 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas there is a need to strengthen the governance of the Single Market within the European Semester as a horizontal priority of the Union’s different policies and to improve the transposition, implementation and enforcement of the rules which govern it;
Amendment 18 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas a stronger focus on the Single Market in the context of the European Semester is necessary in order to better exploit its growth and employment potential, to place enhancement of the Single Market at the heart of the European industrial strategy, to better communicate its positive effects and to allow citizens and businesses to fully benefit from it;
Amendment 73 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Regrets the fact that the lack of national and European investment is impeding the achievement of the priority goals and objectives in the key area of the digital market and recommends devoting a substantial part of the future EUR 300 billion investment plan to targeted and strategic investments in the digital sector;
Amendment 92 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses the need to ensure a level playing field in the Digital Single Market and to support European businesses in the sector, and those whose activities depend in part on the digital sector, from abuse of a dominant position by non- European businesses;
Amendment 93 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Considers improving digital skills in the Union to be an absolute priority;
Amendment 121 #
2014/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Welcomes the fact that in 2014, the third generation of the EU regulation on public procurement was adopted wiadoption in 2014 of directives on public procurement procedures and the award of concession contracts, which modernised public procurement in the European Union; emphasises the a view to simplifying the 2004 regime and overcoming interpretation problems and heterogeneity in concession contractdded value of the directive on the award of concession contracts, which overcomes the problems and heterogeneity in these contracts, ensures legal certainty, flexibility and transparency, and supports the development of economic infrastructure and high-quality public services;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure proper application of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive regarding especially misleading "hidden" internet advertising in the form of comments posted on social networks, forums or blogs, apparently emanating from consumers themselves while they are in reality messages of a commercial or advertising nature directly or indirectly generated or financed by economic operators; insists on the damaging effect of such practices on consumer confidence and competition rules; calls on the Member States to take appropriate measures to further prevent the development of such practices, including by launching information campaigns aimed at warning consumers of these "hidden" forms of advertising, or by encouraging the emergence of forum observers/moderators who are specifically trained and alert to the dangers of "hidden" advertising;
Amendment 20 #
2013/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines that the principle of maximal harmonisation set by the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive implies that national legislation cannot provide for stricter provisions than those foreseen in this Directive; stresses that the EUCJ has interpreted such principle as being incompatible with national laws providing for a general prohibition, without taking into account the specific circumstances of the relevant case, of certain commercial promotions (such as promotional lotteries or sales with bonuses); calls on the Commission to reflect on a legislative proposal dedicated to commercial promotions in order to ensure a high level of consumer protection and avoid further case law preventing Member States from maintaining more protective provisions in this regard;
Amendment 34 #
2013/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the usefulness of the ‘sweeps carried out under the CPC Regulation and calls on the Commission to further develop and strengthen them and broaden their scope; urges the Commission to summarise the data collected and the list of actions taken by the Commission and Member States in the wake of these sweeps and to publish its findings while taking into account the need to ensure the confidentiality of certain sensitive information that are being used in the framework of a judicial procedure at national level; calls on the Commission to report to the European Parliament on its findings and to further propose additional measures if needed in order to improve the functioning of the Internal Market;
Amendment 42 #
2013/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the importance of the guidance document produced by the Commission to assist in application of the Directive; welcomes the Commission s intention to revise this document by 2014; calls on the Commission to continue updating and clarifying this document on a very regular basis in the future; calls on the Member States to take this guidance document into account as far as possible;
Amendment 50 #
2013/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Points to the importance of collective redress mechanisms for consumers; asks the Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal to create an EU-wide coherent collective redress mechanism in the field of consumer protection which would be applicable to cross-border cases; stresses that the EU s approach to collective redress shall prioritise representative actions by bodies duly recognised at national level and be based on the prior consent principle (‘opt-in ); must not give any economic incentive to bring abusive collective actions and shall include appropriate safeguards to avoid unmeritorious claims; underlines that such approach shall prioritise representative actions by bodies duly recognised at national level and be based on the prior consent principle (‘opt-in ), a clear identification of the victims, and the "loser pays" principle (whereby the losing party pays for the costs of the proceedings to prevent the multiplication of unmeritorious claims);
Amendment 35 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) The lawful acquisition of confidential commercial information or know-how cannot justify a subsequent use or disclosure constituting unfair competition contrary to honest industrial or commercial practices. While healthy competition brought about by the lawful use of data, including data generated by reverse engineering, should be encouraged, it is essential to punish any use which is contrary to honest commercial practices.
Amendment 108 #
2013/0402(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) has acquired the trade secret lawfully but uses or discloses it in a manner contrary to honest commercial practices and likely to harm the commercial interests of the trade secret holder and/or the smooth functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 94 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Since travel services may be combined in many different ways, it is appropriate to consider as packages all combinations of travel services that display features which travellers typically associate with packages, notably that separate travel services are bundled together into a single travel product for which the organiser and/or the retailer assumes responsibility for proper performance. In accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union16 , it should make no difference whether travel services are combined before any contact with the traveller or at the request of or according to the selection made by the traveller. The same principles should apply irrespective of whether the booking is made through a high street travel agent or online. __________________ 16 See Judgment in Case C-400/00 Club Tour, Viagens e Turismo SA v. Alberto Carlos Lobo Gonçalves Garrido and Club Med Viagens Ld, ECR 2002, I-04051.
Amendment 95 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the sake of transparency, packages should be distinguished from assisted travel arrangements, where online or high street agents assist travellers in combining travel services leading the traveller to conclude contracts with different providers of travel services, including through linked booking processes in a targeted manner, which do not contain those features and in relation to which it would not be appropriate to apply all obligations applying to packages.
Amendment 97 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) At the same time, assisted travel arrangements should be distinguished from travel services which travellers book independently, often at different times, even for the purpose of the same trip or holiday. Online assisted travel arrangements should also be distinguished from links through which travellers are simply informed about further travel services in a general fashion and not in a targeted manner, for instance where a hotel or an organiser of an event includes on its website a list of all operators offering transport services to its location independently of any booking or if cookies or meta data are used to place on websites advertisements on websitesrelated to the travel destination and/or travel period specified for the first travel service chosen.
Amendment 98 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Particular rules should be laid down for both high street and on-line retailers which assist travellers, on the occasion of a single visit or contact with their own point of sale, in concluding separate contracts with individual service providers and for online retailers which, through linked online booking processes, facilitate the procurement of additional travel services from another trader in a targeted manner which implies a transfer between the traders of data related specifically to the first travel service (including travel destination and travel period), without a transfer of the traveller's personal data, at the latest when the booking of the first service is confirmed by email. These rules would apply for example, where, along withwhile the confirmation of the booking of a first travel service such as a flight or a train journey is sent, or along with the latter, a consumer receives an invitation to book an additional travel service available at the chosen travel destination and /or for the dates specified for the first travel service, for instance hotel accommodation, with a link to the booking site of another service provider or intermediary. While those arrangements do not constitute packages within the meaning of this Directive as there can be no confusion that a single organiser and/or retailer has assumed the responsibility for the travel services, and as no personal data from the traveller has been transferred between the traders, such assisted arrangements constitute an alternative business model that often competes closely with packages.
Amendment 113 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) It should also be clarified that contracts by which a trader entitles the traveller after the conclusion of the contract to choose among a selection of different types of travel services, such as in the case of a package travel gift box, should constitute a package. Moreover, a combination of travel services should be considered as a package where the traveller's name or particularspersonal data needed to conclude the booking transaction are transferred between the traders at the latest when the booking of the first service is confirmed. Particulars by email. Traveller's personal data needed to conclude a booking transaction relate to the traveller's name, address, telephone number, credit card details or other information necessary to obtain a payment. On the other hand, the mere transfer of particularsdata related only to the travel service, such as the travel destination or travel times, without a transfer of the traveller's personal data, should not be sufficient.
Amendment 117 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The main characteristic of package travel is that at least one trader is responsible as an, the organiser fand/or the proper performance of the package as a whole. Therefore, only in cases where another trader is acting as the organiser of a package should a trader, typically a high- street or on-line travel agent, be able to act as a mere retailretailer, is responsible for the proper per for intermediary and not be liable as an organisermance of the package as a whole. Whether a trader is acting as an organiser for a given package should depend on its involvement in the creation of a package as defined under this Directive, and not on the denomination under which it carries out its business. Where two or more traders meet a criterion which makes the combination of travel services a package and where those traders have not informed the traveller which of them is the organiser of the package, all relevant traders should be considered as organisers.
Amendment 118 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In relation to packages, retailers should be responsible together with the organiser for the provision of pre- contractual information. At the same time it should be clarified that they are liable for booking errors in case they are actually involved in the booking process. Retailers should therefore not be liable for booking errors if those result from errors committed by another trader from which are procured additional travel services through linked online booking processes in the context of an assisted travel arrangement based on the mere transfer of targeted information including travel destination and travel period. In this case, the trader providing the additional travel services should be liable for the errors occurring in the booking process of such services. To facilitate communication, in particular in cross- border cases, travellers should have the possibility of contacting the organiser also via the retailer through which they bought the package.
Amendment 124 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Since packages are often purchased a long time before their performance, unforeseen events may occur. Therefore the traveller should, under certain conditions, be entitled to transfer a package to another traveller. In such situations, the organiser should be able to recover his expenses, for instance if a sub-contractor requires a fee for changing the name of the traveller or for cancelling a transport ticket and issuing a new one. Travellers should also have the possibility of cancelling the contract at any time before the start of the package against paying appropriate compensation, as well as the right to terminate the contract without paying compensation where unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances like warfare or a natural disaster will significantly affect the package. Unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances should in particular be deemed to exist where reliable and publicly available reports, such as recommendations issued by Member State authorities, advise against travelling to the place of destination.Does not affect the English version)
Amendment 129 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to ensure consistency, it is appropriate to align the provisions of this Directive with international conventions covering travel services and with the Union legislation on passenger rights. Where the organiser and/or the retailer is liable for failure to perform or improper performance of the services included in the package travel contract, the organiser and/or the retailer should be able to invoke the limitations of the liability of service providers set out in such international conventions as the Montreal Convention of 1999 for the Unification of certain Rules for International Carriage by Air18 , the Convention of 1980 concerning International Carriage by Rail (COTIF)19 and the Athens Convention of 1974 on the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea20 . Where it is impossible, because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances, to ensure the traveller's return to the place of departure, the organiser and/or the retailer's obligation to bear the cost of the travellers' continued stay at the place of destination should be aligned with the Commission's proposal21 aimed to amend Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights22 . __________________ 18 2001/539/EC: Council Decision of 5 April 2001 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (the Montreal Convention) (OJ L 194, 18.07.2001, P. 38). 19 2013/103/EU: Council Decision of 16 June 2011 on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail on the Accession of the European Union to the Convention concerning International Carriage by Rail (COTIF) (OJ L 51, 23.2.2013, p. 1). 20 2012/22/EU: Council Decision of 12 December 2011 concerning the accession of the European Union to the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, with the exception of Articles 10 and 11 thereof (OJ L 8, 12.1.2012, p. 1). 21 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights and Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 on air carrier liability in respect of the carriage of passengers and their baggage by air - COM/2013/130 final. 22 OJ L 46, 17.2.2004, p.1. OJ L 46, 17.2.2004, p.1.
Amendment 130 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to ensure consistency, it is appropriate to align the provisions of this Directive with international conventions covering travel services and with the Union legislation on passenger rights. Where the organiser is liable for failure to perform or improper performance of the services included in the package travel contract, the organiser should be able to invoke the limitations of the liability of service providers set out in such international conventions as the Montreal Convention of 1999 for the Unification of certain Rules for International Carriage by Air18, the Convention of 1980 concerning International Carriage by Rail (COTIF)19 and the Athens Convention of 1974 on the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea20. Where it is impossible, because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances, to ensure the traveller's return to the place of departure, the organiser's obligation to bear the cost of the travellers' continued stay at the place of destination should be aligned with the Commission's proposal21 aimed to amend Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights22. __________________ 18 2001/539/EC: Council Decision of 5 April 2001 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (the Montreal ConventDoes not affect the English version) (OJ L 194, 18.07.2001, p. 38). 19 2013/103/EU: Council Decision of 16 June 2011 on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail on the Accession of the European Union to the Convention concerning International Carriage by Rail (COTIF) (OJ L 51, 23.2.2013, p. 1). 20 2012/22/EU: Council Decision of 12 December 2011 concerning the accession of the European Union to the Protocol of 2002 to the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, with the exception of Articles 10 and 11 thereof (OJ L 8, 12.1.2012, p. 1). 21 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights and Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 on air carrier liability in respect of the carriage of passengers and their baggage by air - COM/2013/130 final. 2246, 17.02.04, p. 1
Amendment 133 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) This Directive should not affect the rights of travellers to present claims both under this Directive and under any other relevant Union legislation, so that travellers will continue to have the possibility to address claims to the organiser and/or the retailer, the carrier or any other liable party, or, as the case may be, to several parties. It should be clarified that they may not cumulate rights under different legal bases if the rights safeguard the same interest or have the same objective. The organiser and/or the retailer's liability is without prejudice to the right to seek redress from third parties, including service providers. Member States should ensure that the organiser and the retailer have appropriate and accessible means of redress against third parties in this regard.
Amendment 137 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Member States should ensure that travellers purchasing a package or an assisted travel arrangement are fully protected against the insolvency of the organiser and/or the retailer in case of a package, of the retailer having facilitated the assisted travel arrangement, or of any of the service providers. Member States in which package organisers and/or retailers, and retailers facilitating assisted travel arrangements are established should ensure that traders offering such combinations of travel services provide security for the refund of all payments made by travellers and for their repatriation in the event of insolvency. While retaining discretion as to the way in which insolvency protection is granted, Member States should ensure that their national insolvency protection schemes are effective and able to guarantee prompt repatriation and the refund of all travellers affected by the insolvency. The required insolvency protection should take into account the actual financial risk of the activities of the organiser, relevant and/or the retailer, or the service provider, including the type of combination of travel services they sell, foreseeable seasonal fluctuations as well as the extent of pre-payments and the way in which these are secured. In accordance with Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market25 , in cases where insolvency protection may be provided in the form of a guarantee or an insurance policy, such security may not be limited to attestations issued by financial operators established in a particular Member State. __________________ 25 OJ L376, 27.12.2006, p. 36.
Amendment 140 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) It is appropriate to protect travellers in situations where an organiser or a retailer arranges the booking of a package, or where a retailer arranges the booking of an assisted travel arrangement and where the organiser or the retailer makes mistakes in the booking process.
Amendment 185 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point 2 – point b – point v
Article 3 – point 2 – point b – point v
(v) purchased from separate traders through linked online booking processes where both the traveller's name or particularspersonal data needed to conclude a booking transaction (including the traveller's name, contact details, and credit card number), and data related specifically to the first travel service (including travel destination and travel period) are transferred between the traders at the latest when the booking of the first service is confirmed by e-mail;
Amendment 195 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point 5 – point b
Article 3 – point 5 – point b
(b) through the procurement of additional travel services from another trader in a targeted manner through linked online booking processes in a targeted manner implying a transfer between the traders of data related specifically to the first travel service only (including travel destination and travel period), without a transfer of the traveller's personal data, at the latest when the booking of the first service is confirmed by email;
Amendment 209 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point 11
Article 3 – point 11
(11) ‘unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances’ means a situation beyond the control of the trader the consequences of which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken;Does not affect the English version)
Amendment 254 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) information that the organiser and/or the retailer is:
Amendment 255 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
Amendment 256 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) information that the organiser is obliged to provide assistance if the traveller is in difficulty in accordance with Article 14;
Amendment 307 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 312 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the organiser is prevented from performing the contract because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances and notifies the traveller of the termination without undue delay before the start of the package.Does not affect the English version)
Amendment 317 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the organiser and/or the retailer is responsible for the performance of the travel services included in the contract, irrespective of whether those services are to be performed by the organiser and/or the retailer or by other service providers.
Amendment 321 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. If any of the services are not performed in accordance with the contract, the organiser and/or the retailer shall remedy the lack of conformity, unless this is disproportionate.
Amendment 326 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. Where a significant proportion of the services cannot be provided as agreed in the contract, the organiser and/or the retailer shall make suitable alternative arrangements, at no extra cost to the traveller, for the continuation of the package, including where the traveller's return to the place of departure is not provided as agreed.
Amendment 328 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. If it is impossible for the organiser and/or the retailer to offer suitable alternative arrangements or the traveller does not accept the alternative arrangements proposed because they are not comparable to what was agreed in the contract, the organiser and/or the retailer shall, insofar as the package includes the carriage of passengers, provide the traveller at no extra cost with equivalent transport to the place of departure or to another place to which the traveller has agreed and shall, where appropriate, compensate the traveller in accordance with Article 12.
Amendment 336 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Article 11 – paragraph 5
5. As long as it is impossible to ensure the traveller'’s timely return because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances, the organiser and/or the retailer shall not bear the cost for the continued stay exceeding EUR 100 per night and three nights per traveller.
Amendment 339 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Article 11 – paragraph 5
5. As long as it is impossible to ensure the traveller's timely return because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances, the organiser and/or the retailer shall not bear the cost for the continued stay exceeding EUR 100 per night and three nights per traveller.
Amendment 343 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 6
Article 11 – paragraph 6
6. The limitation of costs referred to in paragraph 5 shall not apply to persons with reduced mobility, as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air28, and any person accompanying them, pregnant women and unaccompanied children, as well as persons in need of specific medical assistance, provided the organiser hasand/or the retailer has/have been notified of their particular needs at least 48 hours before the start of the package. The organiser and/or the retailer may not invoke unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances to limit the costs referred to in paragraph 5 if the relevant transport provider may not rely on such circumstances under applicable Union legislation. __________________ 28 OJ L 204, 26.07.2006, p. 1.
Amendment 344 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 6
Article 11 – paragraph 6
6. The limitation of costs referred to in paragraph 5 shall not apply to persons with reduced mobility, as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air28 , and any person accompanying them, pregnant women and unaccompanied children, as well as persons in need of specific medical assistance, provided the organiser and/or the retailer has been notified of their particular needs at least 48 hours before the start of the package. The organiser and/or the retailer may not invoke unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances to limit the costs referred to in paragraph 5 if the relevant transport provider may not rely on such circumstances under applicable Union legislation. __________________ 28 OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 1.
Amendment 349 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The traveller shall be entitled to receive compensation from the organiser and/or the retailer for any damage, including non- material damage, which the traveller sustains as a result of any lack of conformity.
Amendment 354 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point a – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point a – introductory part
(a) the organiser and/or the retailer proves that the lack of conformity is:
Amendment 362 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point a – point iii
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point a – point iii
(iii) due to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances orDoes not affect the English version)
Amendment 368 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the traveller fails to inform the organiser and/or the retailer without undue delay of any lack of conformity which the traveller perceives on the spot if that information requirement was clearly and explicitly stated in the contract and is reasonable, taking into account the circumstances of the case.
Amendment 373 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. Insofar as international conventions binding the Union limit the extent of or the conditions under which compensation is to be paid by a provider carrying out a service which is part of a package, the same limitations shall apply to the organiser and/or the retailer. Insofar as international conventions not binding the Union limit compensation to be paid by a service provider, Member States may limit compensation to be paid by the organiser and/or the retailer accordingly. In other cases, the contract may limit compensation to be paid by the organiser and/or the retailer as long as that limitation does not apply to personal injury and damage caused intentionally or with gross negligence and does not amount to less than three times the total price of the package.
Amendment 389 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that organisers and/or retailers in case of a package and retailers facilitating the procurement of assisted travel arrangements established in their territory obtain a security for the effective and prompt refund of all payments made by travellers and, insofar as carriage of passengers is included, for the travellers' effective and prompt repatriation in the event of insolvency.
Amendment 398 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall recognise as meeting the requirements of their national rules transposing Article 15 any insolvency protection obtained by an organiser and/or a retailer in case of a package, or a retailer facilitating the procurement of assisted travel arrangements, under the rules of its Member State of establishment transposing Article 15.
Amendment 402 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall designate central contact points to facilitate the administrative cooperation and supervision of organisers and/or retailers in the case of a package and retailers facilitating the procurement of assisted travel arrangements operating in different Member States. They shall notify the contact details of these contact points to all other Member States and the Commission.
Amendment 406 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. The central contact points shall make available to each other all necessary information on their national insolvency protection schemes and the identity of the body or bodies providing insolvency protection for a particular trader established in their territory. They shall grant each other access to any inventory listing organisers and/or retailers in case of a package, and retailers facilitating the procurement of assisted travel arrangements which are in compliance with their insolvency protection obligations.
Amendment 409 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. If a Member State has doubts about the insolvency protection of an organiser and/or a retailer in case of a package, or of a retailer facilitating the procurement of assisted travel arrangements, which is established in a different Member State and is operating on its territory, it shall seek clarification from the Member State of establishment. Member States shall respond to requests from other Member States at the latest within 15 working days of receiving them.
Amendment 419 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17a Information of the retailer regarding additional travel services booked in the framework of assisted travel arrangements through linked online booking processes Traders providing additional travel services in the framework of assisted travel arrangements as defined in Article 3, paragraph 5, point b shall ensure that the retailer concerned is properly informed of the confirmed booking of additional travel services, which consequently constitute with the first travel service booked an assisted travel arrangement, thereby triggering the liability and obligations of the retailer incumbent on it under this Directive.
Amendment 428 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19
Article 19
Member States shall ensure that an organiser who arranges the booking of a package, or a retailer who has agreed to arrange the booking of a package or assisted travel arrangements or who facilitates the booking of such services, shall be liable for any errors occurring in the booking process in case they are actually involved in the booking process, unless such errors are attributable to the traveller or to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances. In the context of an assisted travel arrangement based on the procurement of additional travel services from another trader in a targeted manner through linked online booking processes as referred to in article 3 (5) (b), the retailer shall not be liable for booking errors resulting from errors committed by that trader. In this case, Member States shall ensure that the trader providing the additional travel services shall be liable for the errors occurring in the booking process of such services.
Amendment 429 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19
Article 19
Amendment 431 #
2013/0246(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20
Article 20
In cases where an organiser or, in accordance with Articles 11, 12, 15 or 18, a retailer pays compensation, grants price reduction or meets the other obligations incumbent on it under this Directive, no provision of this Directive or of national law may be interpreted as restricting itsMember States shall ensure that it has a right to seek redress from any third parties which contributed to the event triggering compensation, price reduction or other obligations.
Amendment 210 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. Proportionate to the possible risks of a product, manufacturers shall, to protect the health and safety of consumers, carry out representative sample testing of products made available on the market chosen under the control of a judicial officer or any qualified person designated by each Member State, investigate complaints and keep a register of complaints, non- conforming products and product recalls, and shall keep distributors informed of any such monitoring.
Amendment 211 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. When the products made available on the market are or have been subject to a decision by the Commission on the basis of article 12 of [Regulation on market surveillance of products], manufacturers, or when appropriate importers, shall, to protect the health and safety of consumers, carry out at least once a year representative sample testing of products made available on the market chosen under the control of a judicial officer or any qualified person designated by each Member State.
Amendment 252 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 9
Article 8 – paragraph 9
9. Manufacturers who consider or have reason to believe that a product which they have placed on the market is not safe or is otherwise not in conformity with this Regulation shall immediately take the corrective action necessary to bring that product into conformity, to withdraw it or recall it, if appropriate. Furthermore, where the product is not safe, manufacturers shall immediately inform the market surveillance authorities of the Member States in which they made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the risk to health and safety and of any corrective action taken and of the results of such corrective action.
Amendment 261 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Importers shall indicate their name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the address at which they can be contacted on the product or, where that is not possible, on its packaging or in a document accompanying the product. They shall ensure that any additional label does not obscure any information on the labelnot obscure any compulsory information or safety-related information provided by the manufacturer.
Amendment 274 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 7
Article 10 – paragraph 7
7. Importers who consider or have reason to believe that a product which they have placed on the market is not safe or is otherwise not in conformity with this Regulation shall immediately take the corrective action necessary to bring that product into conformity, to withdraw it or recall it, if appropriate. Furthermore, where the product is not safe, importers shall immediately inform the market surveillance authorities of the Member States in which they made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the risk to health and safety and of any corrective action taken, and of the results of such corrective action.
Amendment 285 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Before making a product available on the market distributors shall verify that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 8(6), (7) and (8) and Article 10(3) and (4), as applicable. Distributors shall not obscure compulsory information or safety-related information provided by the manufacturer or the importer.
Amendment 298 #
2013/0049(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5
Article 11 – paragraph 5
5. Distributors who consider or have reason to believe that a product which they have made available on the market is not safe or is not in conformity with Article 8(6), (7) and (8) and Article 10(3) and (4), as applicable, shall immediately make sure that the corrective action necessary to bring that product into conformity is taken, to withdraw it or recall it, if appropriate. Furthermore, where the product is not safe, distributors shall immediately inform the manufacturer or importer, as applicable as well as market surveillance authorities of the Member States in which they made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the risk to health and safety and of any corrective action taken and of the results of such corrective action.
Amendment 150 #
2013/0027(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point 8 – point b
Article 3 – point 8 – point b
(b) operator of critical infrastructure that are essential for the maintenance of vital economic and societal activities in the fields of energy, transport, banking, stock exchanges and health, a non exhaustive list of which is set out in Annex II., as far as the network and information systems concerned are directly related to it;
Amendment 175 #
2013/0027(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Competent authorities shall consult the public administrations and market operators concerned before any exchange, within the cooperation network, of sensitive and confidential information regarding the risks and incidents affecting their network and information systems.
Amendment 201 #
2013/0027(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 204 #
2013/0027(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. To evaluate whether an incident has a significant impact on the security of the core services public administrations and market operators provide, the following criteria shall especially be taken into account: (a) the number of users dependent on this core service that are affected by the incident; (b) the intensity of the damage caused to those users; (c) the duration of the incident; (d) the economic and social impact of the incident; (e) the impact on users' personal data, if concerned.
Amendment 163 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes the risks associated with a general prohibition of online gambling services and with excessive restrictions for consumerconsumers having access to illegal gambling services; calls on the Commission and the Member States to weigh, as part of the work of the group of experts on gambling services, the social costs of permitting regulated gambling activities against the harmful effects of consumers resorting to illicit marketegal operators;
Amendment 223 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 264 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to continue to explorInsists on the fact that whatever the way Member States decide to organize and regulate the offer of online gambling services at national level, a high level of consumer protection must be ensured at EU level in this sector; calls on the Commission to propose measures at the EU level to protect consumers, particularly minors and other vulnerable consumerpersons, including formalised cooperation between national regulators, and the introduction of an online trustmark for legal operators;
Amendment 272 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Reaffirms that protecting consumers, notably by preventing underage gambling and safeguarding vulnerable persons, as well as curbing compulsive gambling, for example by introducing online gambling moderators, should be the first and foremost objective of any EU common action in the online gambling sector;
Amendment 354 #
2012/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recommends the introduction of uniform and pan-EuropeanEU common standards for electronic identification and cross border e- verification services; notes that the different registration procedures across the EU undermine regulated operators, and can push consumers as well as for enforcement measures such as the blacklisting and the blocking of illegal websites, definition of safe and traceable payment solutions and blocking measures for transactions in order to ensure that consumers cannot turn into the hands of illegal operators; calls, therefore, on Member States for registration and identification procedures to be streamlined and made more efficient, notably to prevent unidentified users and underage gamblers from accessing online gambling products;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6
Citation 6
Amendment 10 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A
Paragraph A
A. whereas certain petitions have been deposited requesting that the establishment of the European Parliament in more than one place be discontinued; either that the European Parliament should no longer have its seat in Strasbourg or that Parliament’s seat should continue to be located in Strasbourg in accordance with Protocol No 6 annexed to the Treaty on European Union;
Amendment 12 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A – point 1 (new)
Paragraph A – point 1 (new)
(1) whereas, on the basis of Article 341 TFEU, the Protocol on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union forms an integral part of the Treaties and thus of EU primary law, having been ratified, as part of the Treaty of Amsterdam, by all the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional rules;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A – point 2 (new)
Paragraph A – point 2 (new)
(2) having regard to the ruling handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 13 December 2012 in joined Cases C-237/11 and C-238/11 opposing France and Parliament, which annuls Parliament’s decision of 9 March 2011;
Amendment 17 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A b (new)
Paragraph A b (new)
Ab. having regard to the requirements set out in the Treaty, which, following the adoption of the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, has formally laid down for Parliament an arrangement involving a seat in Strasbourg and two other sites in Brussels and Luxembourg;
Amendment 19 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas the seats of some European institutions were chosen on account of their symbolic significance, one such example being Strasbourg, the city which symbolises the process of Franco-German reconciliation which is at the root of the European peace project;
Amendment 21 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas, in accordance with the sole article of Protocol No 6 annexed to the TFEU, the European Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg, the Council has its seat in Brussels, the Commission has its seat in Brussels, the Court of Justice of the European Union has its seat in Luxembourg, the Court of Auditors has its seat in Luxembourg, the Economic and Social Committee has its seat in Brussels, the Committee of the Regions has its seat in Brussels, the European Investment Bank has its seat in Luxembourg, the European Central Bank has its seat in Frankfurt and the European Police Office (Europol) has its seat in The Hague;
Amendment 22 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A e (new)
Paragraph A e (new)
Ae. having regard to Parliament’s Environmental Statement for 2010, issued in May 2011, and in particular pages 68 to 70;
Amendment 23 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A f (new)
Paragraph A f (new)
Af. having regard to the document drawn up by Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘Replies and follow-up to the discharge for 2010’;
Amendment 24 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A g (new)
Paragraph A g (new)
Ag. having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 13 December 2012 in Cases C-237/11 and C-238/11;
Amendment 32 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B c (new)
Paragraph B c (new)
Bc. whereas the city of Strasbourg is associated in people’s minds with the European Parliament, and whereas the seating capacity for visitors is much greater in the Strasbourg than in the Brussels Chamber, which represents an asset for the seat of European democracy;
Amendment 34 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the ECJ has stated that the location of the seat is not to hinder the well-functioning of Parliament; whereas it has further stated that there are disadvantages and costs engendered by the plurality of working locations, but also that any improvement of the current situation requires a Treaty change and, thus, the consent ofresponsibility for remedying this lies neither with Parliament nor with the Court, but, rather, by exercising their exclusive power to determine the seats of the institutions, with the Member States;
Amendment 36 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas on two occasions, in 1997 and 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union pointed out that the fact that Parliament’s seat is in Strasbourg is determined by the TFEU; whereas it has also confirmed Protocol No 6 in clarifying the conditions for the application thereof; whereas it has fully acknowledged the power of Parliament to determine its own internal organisational arrangements, since Parliament may adopt appropriate measures to ensure its proper functioning and proper conduct of its proceedings, but the question of determining its seat does not come within that remit;
Amendment 39 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg was confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 and then incorporated in the Lisbon Treaty in 2009;
Amendment 43 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the structure of Parliament’s calendar (fixed during the Edinburgh Summit in 1992) predates all changes to its rolehas not been called into question, since it was confirmed in Protocol No 6 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon, and the increase in Parliament’s powers arising from the adoption of the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon has therefore been taken into account;
Amendment 46 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas all the countries which have joined the European Union have ratified Protocol No 6;
Amendment 49 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the fact of geographical distance between the official seats of the co- legislative bodies – 435 km – isolates Parliament not only fromreflects the multi- centre principle with regard to the seats of the European institutions and, during part-sessions, the attention of the Council and the Commission, but also ofrom other stakeholders, such as NGOs, civil society organisations and Member State representations, and ofrom one of the world’s largest international journalistic communities, is fully focused on the work of Parliament;
Amendment 53 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C b (new)
Paragraph C b (new)
Cb. whereas the concept of mobility is inherent in the work of Members of the European Parliament to enable them to come closer to European citizens, whereas the Committee on Petitions regularly invites petitioners to comment on their petitions by inviting them to the European Parliament in Brussels and whereas this work of contact with citizens should not be confined to one direction;
Amendment 71 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers, however, that it is time to stop the polemics concerning the cost of the Strasbourg seat; calls therefore for the figures provided by official sources within the European Parliament to be quoted clearly in the annexes to the own- initiative report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, including pages 68-70 of the Environmental Declaration of the European Parliament of May 2011 concerning the ‘environmental impact of the Strasbourg seat’ and page 40 of the document of the European Parliament’s Secretariat entitled ‘REPLIES AND FOLLOW-UP TO THE DISCHARGE FOR 2010’ on the annual cost of the Strasbourg seat;
Amendment 74 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Amendment 75 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Notes the intention of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to draw up a report which will make it possible to recall that the European Parliament has its seat in Strasbourg;
Amendment 86 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 89 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient andConsiders efficiency, cost-effectiveness and the principle of respectful of for the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels andnot to be connected with the place in which Parliament sits, but with its needs; points out that according to figures from the European Parliament’s services, the annual cost of Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg hwas become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputationEUR 51.5 million in 2010, or 0.04% of the annual EU budget, which represents a cost of 10 cents per EU citizen per year, and hence considers the arguments on Parliament’s cost to be exaggerated;
Amendment 90 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
emphasises that the gross cost of holding part-sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and that 80% of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where the part-session is held, be they for equipment, publications or translation, etc.;
Amendment 94 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Respects the historical reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the system of a single seat and three places of work;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Emphasises that European integration necessarily entails mobility and that this applies to all national and European political representatives and officials, and that mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of MEPs, as representatives of the citizens of the European Union;
Amendment 96 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Considers that decentralisation of the legislative authority away from Brussels strengthens its independence;
Amendment 97 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Considers that the choice of the EU institutions’ seats has always been guided by a desire to bring the Union as close to ordinary people as possible and not to concentrate it in one place;
Amendment 98 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Emphasises that almost 95% of the EU budget is intended for investment and hence for the public, adding that the European Union, with such a small and deficit-less operating budget for 500 million inhabitants, stands as an example in these times of crisis;
Amendment 100 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Points to the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its own CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 104 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Considers that the success of the open days held every year at the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, the 100 000 visitors each year outside part-sessions and the 10 000 students from the Euroscola Programme indicate that the European public have in no way rejected the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Emphasises that the Committee’s report was prepared under the ordinary own-initiative procedure and there is thus no obligation to implement the proposals, and further that the matter of the EU institutions’ seats is governed directly by the Treaties and is therefore subject to the political will of the Member States acting unanimously;
Amendment 118 #
2012/2308(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that this own-initiative report must not be used as a means of disregarding the EU Treaties, which provide that the seat of the European Parliament shall be in Strasbourg and that 12 part-sessions per year shall be held there;
Amendment 124 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)
(1) Adds that all new European agencies and institutions should be created in the new Member States;
Amendment 126 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Points out that Croatia, as the 28th Member State of the Union as of 1 July 2013, is bound to seek the siting of a future EU agency or institution on its territory;
Amendment 137 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Points out that the European Union has developed in a polycentric way, with the EU institutions and agencies located, insofar as possible, throughout all the Member States, so as to bring decision making closer to the people and avoid an unwelcome concentration of power;
Amendment 140 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Points out that it is fundamentally important to Europe’s citizens that decisions are taken in more than one place;
Amendment 146 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 161 #
2012/2308(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Asks Parliament’s Legal Service to specify whether such a report on the location of the seats of the EU institutions is lawful;
Amendment 4 #
2012/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas a functioning, effective and barrier-free Single Market fostering job creation and social cohesion based on the concept of a social market economy is needed more than ever to revitalise the European economy, to boost growth and competitiveness and to create jobs;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Single Market has a keyan indispensable role to play in meeting the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;
Amendment 58 #
2012/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas the Commission proposes to target its activities towards specific key areas and instruments; whereas however a stronger focus on a limited number of instruments and actions is necessary in order to achieve tangible improvements in the application of Single Market rules; whereas the digital Single Market, the energy sector and, public procurement and increased mobility for citizens and professionals figure among the most important key areas; whereas such key areas and instruments could be reviewed on an annual basis so that the current developments in the Member States and decision-making processes between the Union's institutions, and in particular the economically relevant areas based on a scientific evaluation for the Single Market are duly reflected and taken into account;
Amendment 10 #
2012/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas e-commerce is an important complement to offline trade, providing opportunities for small companies to grow and offering greater access to goods and services also in remote areas, the countryside and for people with disabilities and reduced mobility;
Amendment 63 #
2012/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to examine the possibilities of simplifying and standardising the VAT rules for cross-border online transactions and of greater EU-wide harmonisation as regards rates and regimes, and to cut red tape with a view to ensuring a simpler, easier, and more efficient system; stresses that digital productonline cultural goods and services such as e-books should be subject to the same VAT rate as the equivalent product in physical format;a reduced rate of VAT, aligned with that applicable to equivalent cultural products offered off line; (It is essential, in order to stimulate this growth-driving sector of the economy, that the VAT rates applied to online cultural goods and services be aligned with those applied to the equivalent cultural goods and services available off line.)
Amendment 100 #
2012/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes greatly the new Commission communication entitled ‘European Strategy for a Better Internet for Children’, and encourages the Commission, Member States and the industry to promote the educational use of new technological developments and to cooperate closely and efficiently in order to deliver a safe internet for children;
Amendment 101 #
2012/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Urges stakeholders to commit to responsible advertising towards minors, in particular by refraining from aggressive and misleading TV and online advertising and by respecting and fully implementing existing codes of conduct and similar initiatives;
Amendment 109 #
2012/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the proposed regulation on electronic identification, authentication and signature; underlines the importance of ensuring EU-wide interoperability, while at the same time ensuring the protection of personal data;
Amendment 194 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) The conformity assessment procedure for class I devices should be carried out, as a general rule, under the sole responsibility of the manufacturers in view of the low level of vulnerability associated with these products. For medical devices in classes IIa, IIb and III, an appropriate level of involvement ofclose monitoring by a notified body should be compulsory, with medical devices in class III requiring explicit prior approval of their design and manufacture before they can be placed on the market.
Amendment 195 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) The conformity assessment procedures should be simplifitrengthened and streamlined whilst the requirements for notified bodies as regards the performance of their assessments should be clearly specified to ensure a level playing field.
Amendment 335 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the manufacturer and, where applicable, the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 24 and Article 11(3) respectively11(3) and whether the product in question contains a UDI, as referred to in Article 24(1)(a).
Amendment 340 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. Distributors who consider or have reason to believe that a device which they have made available on the market is not in conformity with this Regulation shall immediately inform the manufacturer and, where applicable, his authorised representative and the importer and make sure, the importer and the notified body responsible for monitoring the product if it is a class IIa, IIb or III medical device, and the competent national authority. They shall make sure, within the scope of their respective activities, that the necessary corrective action to bring that device into conformity, withdraw or recall it, if appropriate, is taken. Where the device presents a risk, they shall also immediately inform the competent authorities of the Member States in which they made the device available, as well as the notified body responsible for evaluating the device if it is a class IIa, IIb or III product, giving details, in particular, of the non- compliance and of any corrective action taken.
Amendment 538 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. In the light of technical progress and any information which becomes available in the course of the vigilance and market surveillance activities described in Articles 61 to 75, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 898 as regards the following:
Amendment 552 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 11
Article 42 – paragraph 11
11. In the light of technical progress and any information which becomes available in the course of the designation or monitoring of notified bodies set out in Articles 28 to 40, or of the vigilance and market surveillance activities described in Articles 61 to 75, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 898 amending or supplementing the conformity assessment procedures set out in Annexes VIII to XI.
Amendment 554 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
1. Where the conformity assessment procedure requires the involvement of a notified body, the manufacturer may apply to a notified body of his choice, provided that the body is notified for the conformity assessment activities, the conformity assessment procedures and the devices concerned. An application may not be lodged in parallel with more than one notified body for the same conformity assessment activity. The manufacturer shall forward the name of the notified body he has chosen to the competent national authority of the Member State in which he has his head office.
Amendment 555 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. The notified body concerned shall inform the other notified bodies of any manufacturer who withdraws his application prior to the notified body's decision regarding the conformity assessment. It shall also inform all of the competent national bodies without delay.
Amendment 556 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. At all of the stages in the conformity assessment procedure, the notified assessment body shall carry out at least one unannounced inspection at the manufacturer’s production facilities before making a decision on conformity. An unannounced inspection is one is which the manufacturer is given no advance notice of possible inspection dates and times. The notified body shall inform the competent authority of the Member State concerned of the findings of this inspection.
Amendment 566 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – title
Article 44 – title
Amendment 572 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Amendment 579 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Amendment 583 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 4
Article 44 – paragraph 4
Amendment 589 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 44 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Where deemed necessary for the protection of patient safety and public health, the Commission, may determine, by means of implementing acts, specific categories or groups of devices, other than devices of class III, to which paragraphs 1 to 4 shall apply during a predefined period of time. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 88(3).
Amendment 593 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 7
Article 44 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall set up the technical infrastructure for the data- exchange by an electronic means between itself, notified bodies and MDCG for the purposes of this Article.
Amendment 594 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 8
Article 44 – paragraph 8
Amendment 600 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Article 45 – paragraph 1
1. Before issuing a certificate, the notified conformity assessment body shall take into account any findings set out in the clinical investigation report referred to in paragraph 59(4) of this Regulation. The certificates issued by the notified bodies in accordance with Annexes VIII, IX and X shall be in an official Union language determined by the Member State in which the notified body is established or otherwise in an official Union language acceptable to the notified body. The minimum content of the certificates is set out in Annex XII.
Amendment 601 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. During the certificate of conformity’s period of validity, the relevant notified body shall conduct, at least once a year, unannounced inspections at the place of manufacture of the medical device it is responsible for assessing. An unannounced inspection is one is which the manufacturer is given no advance notice of possible inspection dates and times.
Amendment 602 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3
Article 45 – paragraph 3
3. Where a notified body finds that requirements of this Regulation are no longer met by the manufacturer, it shall, taking account of the principle of proportionality, suspend or withdraw the certificate issued or impose any restrictions on it unless compliance with such requirements is ensured by appropriate corrective action taken by the manufacturer within an appropriate deadline set by the notified body. The notified body shall give the reasons for its decision. and shall notify them to the competent authorities of the Member States in which the medical device is manufactured and placed on the market, the Commission and the MDCG.
Amendment 603 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 5
Article 45 – paragraph 5
5. In the light of technical progress, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 898 amending or supplementing the minimum content of the certificates set out in Annex XII.
Amendment 604 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. It shall notify the competent authorities of the Member States affected by the manufacture and placing on the market of the relevant medical device, the Commission and the MDCG.
Amendment 606 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State shall inform the Commission, the notified body responsible for assessing the relevant medical device, the MDCG and the other Member States of any decision to authorise the placing on the market or putting into service of a device in accordance with paragraph 1 where such authorisation is granted for use other than for a single patient.
Amendment 619 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that the persons assessing the application do not have conflicts of interest and that they are independent of the sponsor, the institution of the investigation site(s)are independent of the sponsor and the investigators involved, as well as free of any other undue influence.
Amendment 622 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 7
Article 51 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 898 amending or supplementing, in the light of technical progress and global regulatory developments, the requirements for the documentation to be submitted with the application for the clinical investigation that is laid down in Chapter II of Annex XIV.
Amendment 627 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 898 determining which other information regarding clinical investigations collated and processed in the electronic system shall be publicly accessible to allow interoperability with the EU database for clinical trials on medicinal products for human use set up by Regulation (EU) No […/…]. Article 52(3) and (4) shall apply.
Amendment 682 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 1
Article 69 – paragraph 1
Where the competent authorities of a Member State, based on vigilance data or other information, have sufficient reason to believe that a device presents a risk to the health or safety of patients, users or other persons, they shall carry out an evaluation in relation to the device concerned covering all the requirements laid down in this Regulation that are relevant to the risk presented by the device. The relevant economic operators shall cooperate as necessary with the competent authorities. In connection with that evaluation, the competent authorities shall inform the notified assessment bodies, in the case of class IIa, IIb and III devices, and the other competent authorities of the findings of the evaluation and the measures that are to be taken on the basis of those findings.
Amendment 719 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 751 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 89 – paragraph 1
Article 89 – paragraph 1
1. The power to adopt the delegated acts referred to in Articles 2(2) and (3), 4(5), 8(2), 17(4), 24(7), 25(7), 29(2), 40(2), 41(4), 42(11), 45(5), 51(7), 53(3), 74(4) and 81(6) is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.
Amendment 753 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 89 – paragraph 2
Article 89 – paragraph 2
2. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 2(2) and (3), 4(5), 8(2), 17(4), 24(7), 25(7), 29(2), 40(2), 41(4), 42(11), 45(5), 51(7), 53(3), 74(4) and 81(6) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 754 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 89 – paragraph 3
Article 89 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 2(2) and (3), 4(5), 8(2), 17(4), 24(7), 25(7), 29(2), 40(2), 41(4), 42(11), 45(5), 51(7), 53(3), 74(4) and 81(6) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following itsthe publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
Amendment 812 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 6 – point 3 – point 3.1 – point 3.1.1 – paragraph 2
Annex 6 – point 3 – point 3.1 – point 3.1.1 – paragraph 2
This presupposes the availability within its organisation of sufficient scientific personnel who possess experience, and university degree and the knowledge sufficientrequired to assess the medical functionality and performance of devices for which it has been notified, having regard to the requirements of this Regulation and, in particular, those set out in Annex I.
Amendment 813 #
2012/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 6 – point 3 – point 3.1 – point 3.1.1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Annex 6 – point 3 – point 3.1 – point 3.1.1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
The personnel responsible for carrying out the assessment tasks shall conduct unannounced inspections at least once a year of all premises at which the medical devices coming within their remit are manufactured. An unannounced inspection is one is which the manufacturer is given no advance notice of possible inspection dates and times. The personnel responsible for carrying out the assessment tasks shall notify all the competent authorities of the Member States affected by the manufacture and placing on the market of the medical device of the findings of the annual inspections carried out. Those findings shall be set out in a report. It shall also forward a record of the annual inspections carried out to the relevant national authority responsible.
Amendment 35 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The risk to subject safety in a clinical trial mainly stems from two sources: the investigational medicinal product and the intervention. Many clinical trials, however, pose only a minimal additional risk to subject safety compared to normal clinical practice. This is in particular the case where the investigational medicinal product is covered by a marketing authorisation (i.e. the quality, safety and efficacy has already been assessed in the course of the marketing authorisation procedure) and where the intervention poses only very limited additional risk to the subject compared to normal clinical practice. Those ‘low-interventionminimal-risk clinical trials’ are often of crucial importance to assess standard treatments and diagnoses, thereby optimising the use of medicinal products and thus contributing to a high level of public health. They should be subject to less stringent rules, such as shorter deadlines for approvalGiven that minimal- risk clinical trials have only a very limited and temporary adverse effect – if any – on the subject’s health, they should be subject to less stringent rules, such as shorter deadlines for approval. They should, however, be subject to the vigilance and traceability rules governing normal clinical practice.
Amendment 37 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The authorisation procedure should provide for the possibility to suspend the assessment in order to allow the sponsor to address questions or comments raised during the assessment of the application dossier. The maximum duration of the suspension should reflect whether the clinical trial is a low-intervention clinical trialposes only a low risk or not. Moreover, it should be ensured that, following the end of the suspension, there is always sufficient time for assessing the additional information submitted.
Amendment 44 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The human dignity and right to the integrity of the person are recognized in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, the Charter requires that any intervention in the field of biology and medicine cannot be performed without free and informed consent of the person concerned. Directive 2001/20/EC contained an extensive set of rules for the protection of subjects. These rules should be upheld. Regarding tThe rules concerning the determination of the legal representative of incapacitated persons and minors, those rulee definition of incapacitated persons and vulnerable persons and the resulting provisions diverge in Member States. It should therefore be left to Member States to determine the legal representative of incapacitated persons and minors and, where applicable, to introduce more restrictive provisions at national level.
Amendment 45 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) This Regulation should provide for clear rules concerning informed consent in emergency situations. Such situations relate to cases where for example a patient has suffered a sudden life-threatening medical condition due to multiple traumas, strokes or heart attacks, necessitating immediate medical intervention. For such cases, intervention within an ongoing clinical trial, which has already been approved, may be pertinent. However, in certain circumstances, due to the unconsciousness of the patient and the absence of an immediately available legal representative, it is not possible to obtain informed consent prior to the intervention. The Regulation should therefore set clear rules whereby such patients may be enrolled in the clinical trial under very strict conditions. For example, in cases where the research needs to start without delay and there is reason to expect that the potential benefit to the subject of taking part in the clinical trial outweighs the risks or the subject’s participation entails only a minimal risk, it should be possible for the clinical trial to begin without his or her prior consent. In addition, the said clinical trial should relate directly to the medical condition which causes the impossibility of the patient to give informed consent. Any previously expressed objection by the patient must be respected, and informed consent from the subject or the legal representative should be sought as soon as possible.
Amendment 59 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point a
a) the investigational medicinal products arhave not been granted a marketing authorisedation;
Amendment 60 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point c
Amendment 61 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point d
d) the decision to prescribe the investigational medicinal products is taken together with the decision to include the subject in the clinical studydetermined by the research protocol;
Amendment 62 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – introductory part
3) ‘Low-interventionMinimal-risk clinical trial’ : a clinical trial whichpresents a minimal risk if, given the nature and extent of the intervention, it can be expected to have only a very small and temporary impact - if any - on the subject’s health. A ‘minimal-risk clinical trial’ fulfils all of the following conditions:
Amendment 63 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point a
a) the investigational medicinal products arehave been granted a marketing authorisedation;
Amendment 65 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point b
b) according to the protocol of the clinical trial, the investigational medicinal products are used in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorisation or their use is a standard treatmentin line with normal clinical practice in any of the Member States concerned;
Amendment 70 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Amendment 71 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
8) ‘Auxiliary medicinal product’: a medicinal product used in the context of a clinical trial, but not as an investigational medicinal product;. Auxiliary medicinal products include, in particular, medicinal products used for background treatment, pharmacological agents, rescue medication or medicinal products used to assess end-points in a clinical trial. Auxiliary medicinal products do not include medicaments which are unconnected with the clinical trial and are not pertinent to the trial design.
Amendment 77 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
14) ‘Investigator’: an individual whose training and experience meet the requirements laid down in Article 46 of this Regulation and who is responsible for the conduct of a clinical trial at a clinical trial site;
Amendment 78 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 a (new)
14a. ‘Principal investigator’: an investigator responsible for a team of investigators tasked with the conduct of a clinical trial at the same clinical trial site;
Amendment 79 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 b (new)
14b. ‘Coordinating investigator’: investigator responsible for coordinating a multicentre trial in one or more Member States;
Amendment 80 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In order to allow for independent control as to whether these principles are adhered to, a clinical trial should be subject to prior authorisation, and approval by an ethics committee prior to commencement.
Amendment 80 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 17
17) ‘Incapacitated subject’: a subject who is, for other reasons than the age of legal competence to give informed consent, legallylegally or de facto, incapable of giving informed consent according to the laws of the Member State concerned;
Amendment 81 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 19
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 19
19) '‘Informed consent'’: a process by which a subject voluntarily confirms his or her willingness to participate in a particular trial, after having been duly informed, according to the laws of the Member State concerned, of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the subject'’s decision to participate;
Amendment 84 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The scope of this Regulation is essentially identical to that of Directive 2001/20/EC. Although it is limited to clinical research on medicinal products for human use, it is very wide in that it only excludes clinical studies that do not involve an ‘intervention’ i.e. surveys by medical practitioners without additional intervention. ‘Non-interventional studies’ are post-authorisation safety studies initiated, managed or financed by the marketing authorisation holder. These enable data to be ‘mined’, and are covered by Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use.
Amendment 86 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Directive 2001/20/EC aimed to simplify and harmonise the administrative provisions governing clinical trials in the European Union. However, experience shows that a harmonised approach to the regulation of clinical trials has only been partly achieved. This makes it in particular difficult to perform a clinical trial in several Member States. Scientific development however, suggests that future clinical trials will target more specific patient populations, such as subgroups identified through genomic information. In order to include a sufficient number of patients for such trials it may be necessary to involve many, or all, Member States. The new procedures for the authorisation of clinical trials should stimulate the inclusion of as many member states as possible. Therefore, in order to simplify submission procedures, the multiple submission of largely identical information should be avoided and replaced by the submission of one application dossier through a single submission portal to all the Member States concerned. Given that clinical trials carried out in a single Member State are equally indispensable to European clinical research, the procedure under this regulation should also cover such trials. The application dossier for such clinical trials should also be sent via the single European portal.
Amendment 90 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The timelines for assessing an application dossier for clinical trials should be sufficiently long to assess the file, while ensuring quick access to new, innovative treatments and ensuring that the Union remains an attractive place for conducting clinical trials. Against this background, Directive 2001/20/EC introduced the concept of tacit authorisation. This concept should be maintained in order to ensure that timelines are adhered to. If a Member State concerned and a reporting Member State do not produce the assessment report, the assessment or the decision within the set deadlines, the concept of tacit authorisation should apply automatically. In the event of a public health crisis, Member States should have the possibility to assess and authorise a clinical trial application swiftly. No minimal timelines for approval should therefore be established.
Amendment 95 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Within six calendar days following submission of the application dossier, the proposed reporting Member State shall notify the sponsor through the EU portal of the following:
Amendment 100 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The risk to subject safety in a clinical trial mainly stems from two sources: the investigational medicinal product and the intervention. Many clinical trials, however, pose only a minimal additional risk to subject safety compared to normal clinical practice. This is in particular the case where the investigational medicinal product is covered by a marketing authorisation (i.e. the quality, safety and efficacy has already been assessed in the course of the marketing authorisation procedure) and where the intervention poses only very limited additional risk to the subject compared to normal clinical practice. Those "low-interventionrisk clinical trials" are often of crucial importance to assess standard treatments and diagnoses, thereby optimising the use of medicinal products and thus contributing to a high level of public health. They should be subject to less stringent rules, such as shorter deadlines for approval.
Amendment 100 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Where the proposed reporting Member State has not notified the sponsor within the time period referred to in paragraph 2, the clinical trial applied for shall be considered as falling within the scope of this Regulation, the application shall be considered complete, the clinical trial shall be considered a low-intervention clregarded as posing a minicmal trialsk if this is claimed by the sponsor, and the proposed reporting Member State shall be the reporting Member State.
Amendment 101 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) In case of an urgent situation as well as for rare and ultra-rare diseases which are life-threatening and for which therapeutic options and expertise are limited and geographically spread across the world, Member-States should have the possibility to assess and authorise clinical trial applications in priority.
Amendment 101 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Where the proposed reporting Member State finds that the application is not complete, that the clinical trial applied for does not fall within the scope of this Regulation, or that the clinical trial is not a low-interventionminimal-risk clinical trial while this is claimed by the sponsor, it shall inform the sponsor thereof through the EU portal and shall set a maximum of six days for the sponsor to comment or to complete the application through the EU portal.
Amendment 102 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Where the proposed reporting Member State has not notified the sponsor according to points (a) to (d) of paragraph 2 within three days following receipt of the comments or of the completed application, the application shall be considered complete, the clinical trial shall be considered as falling within the scope of this Regulation, the clinical trial shall be considered as a low-intervention clregarded as posing a minicmal trialsk if this is claimed by the sponsor, and the proposed reporting Member State shall be the reporting Member State.
Amendment 104 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 d
Recital 9 d
(9d) ‘Experimental medicinal product’ means any active ingredient in a pharmaceutical or placebo form tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial, including a medicinal product which is covered by a marketing authorisation but which is used off-label or in accordance with current clinical practice.
Amendment 105 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 e
Recital 9 e
(9e) ‘Auxiliary medicinal product’ means any medicinal product used in the context of a clinical trial but not as an experimental medicinal product. Auxiliary medicinal products include, in particular, medicinal products used for background treatment, pharmacological agents, rescue medication or medicinal products used to assess end-points in a clinical trial. Auxiliary medicinal products do not include medicaments which are unconnected with the clinical trial and are not pertinent to the trial design.
Amendment 106 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 f
Recital 9 f
(9f) All the deadlines set out in this regulation should be based on calendar days. Since the Member States of the European Union have different calendars of public holidays, a procedure based on working days could result in different deadlines for validation, assessment and decisions in one of the Member States concerned.
Amendment 111 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 113 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The authorisation procedure should provide for the possibility to suspend the assessment in order to allow the sponsor to address questions or comments raised during the assessment of the application dossier. The maximum duration of the suspension should reflect whether the clinical trial is a low-intervention or medium-risk clinical trial or not. Moreover, it should be ensured that, following the end of the suspension, there is always sufficient time for assessing the additional information submitted.
Amendment 116 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Whereas most clinical trials are conducted for the assessment of therapies, targeted at large patient populations, and involving a large sample of patient populations, the present regulation should not discriminate against patients suffering from rare and ultra-rare diseases, and should integrate the specificities of low- prevalence conditions into the assessment of a trial.
Amendment 117 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Where the reporting Member State does not submit the assessment report within the time periods stipulated in paragraphs 4, 6 and 7, Part I of the clinical trial shall be considered as accepted by the reporting Member State.
Amendment 119 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) compliance with more restrictive national provisions relating to clinical trials involving vulnerable individuals.
Amendment 120 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where the Member State concerned does not submit the assessment report within the time periods stipulated in paragraphs 2 and 3, Part II shall be considered as accepted by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 121 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. In the event of a Member State refusing authorisation on the basis of Part II, the sponsor may appeal, once only, to the Member State concerned through the European Union portal referred to in Article 77. The sponsor may send additional explanations within seven days. The Member State concerned shall assess for a second time, for its own territory, the aspects referred to in Article 7(1), and shall take account of the additional explanations provided by the sponsor. The Member State concerned shall complete its assessment within seven days from the date on which the additional explanations are received. Where the Member State concerned refuses authorisation or does not provide a conclusion as regards Part II within the seven-day time period, the application shall be considered as definitively refused and the clinical trial shall not take place in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 122 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 123 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where the Member State concerned disagrees with the conclusion of the reporting Member State on the basis of points (a) and (b) of the second subparagraph of paragraph 2, the clinical trial shall not take place in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 124 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The human dignity and right to the integrity of the person are recognized in the Charter of Fundamental rights of the European Union. In particular, the Charter requires that any intervention in the field of biology and medicine cannot be performed without free and informed consent of the person concerned. Directive 2001/20/EC contained an extensive set of rules for the protection of subjects. These rules should be upheld. Regarding tThe rules concerning the determination of the legal representative of incapacitated persons and minors, those rulese definition of incapacitated and vulnerable persons and the provisions resulting from that definition, diverge in Member States. It should therefore be left to Member States to determine the legal representative of incapacitated persons and minors and where necessary to enact rules affording greater protection at national level.
Amendment 126 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) This Regulation should provide for clear rules concerning informed consent in emergency situations. Such situations relate to cases where for example a patient has suffered a sudden life-threatening medical condition due to multiple traumas, strokes or heart attacks, necessitating immediate medical intervention. For such cases, intervention within an ongoing clinical trial, which has already been approved, may be pertinent. However, in certain circumstances, due to the unconsciousness of the patient and the absence of an immediately available legal representative, it is not possible to obtain informed consent prior to the intervention. The Regulation should therefore set clear rules whereby such patients may be enrolled in the clinical trial under very strict conditions. For example, in cases where the research needs to start without delay and there is reason to expect that the potential benefit to the subject of taking part in the clinical trial outweighs the risks of the subject’s participation or entails only a minimal risk, it should be possible for the clinical trial to begin without his or her prior consent. In addition, the said clinical trial should relate directly to the medical condition which causes the impossibility of the patient to give informed consent. Any previously expressed objection by the patient must be respected, and informed consent from the subject or the legal representative should be sought as soon as possible.
Amendment 130 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Where the Member State concerned disagrees with the conclusion of the reporting Member State on the basis of point (a) of the second subparagraph, it shall communicate its disagreement, together with a detailed justification based on scientific and socio-economic arguments, and a summary thereof, through the EU portal to the Commission, to all Member States, and to the sponsor.
Amendment 131 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to allow patients to assess possibilities to participate in a clinical trial, and to allow for effective supervision of a clinical trial by the Member State concerned, the start of the clinical trial, the end of recruitment for the clinical trial and the end of the clinical trial should be notified. In accordance with international standards, the results of the clinical trial should be reported to the competent authorities within onetwo years of the end of the clinical trial.
Amendment 132 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the persons validating and assessing Parts I and II of the application do not have conflicts of interest, are independent of the sponsor, the institution of the trial site and the investigators involved, as well as free of any other undue influence.
Amendment 133 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the assessment is done jointly by a reasonable number of persons who collectively have the necessary qualifications and experienceof Part II is done by a group of people at least half of whom meet the conditions laid down in Article 46 of this Regulation.
Amendment 135 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where the clinical trial concerns other categories of subjects who are considered vulnerable under national law, the application to conduct the clinical trial shall be assessed on the basis of the national law of the Member States concerned.
Amendment 137 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) The conduct of a clinical trial should be adequately monitored by the sponsor in order to ensure the reliability and robustness of the results. Monitoring may also contribute to subject safety, taking into account the characteristics of the clinical trial and respect for fundamental rights of subjects. When establishing the extent of monitoring, the characteristics of the clinical trial should be taken into accountMonitoring should be adapted to the nature of the trial and focus on mitigating the key risks.
Amendment 139 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Amendment 142 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Where the reporting Member State has not notified the sponsor according to points (a) to (c) of paragraph 2 within three days following receipt of the comments or of the completed application, the application shall be considered complete and, where the clinical trial is a low-intervention clinicposes a minimal trialsk, that it will remain a low-interventionminimal-risk clinical trial after its substantial modification.
Amendment 144 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 145 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) compliance with point (a) is permanently observedthe principles referred to in point (a) are observed throughout the study;
Amendment 146 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 147 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the subject or, where the subject is not able to give informed consent, his or her legal representative has had the opportunity, in a prior interview with the investigator or a member of the investigating teamhis/her representative, to understand the objectives, risks and inconveniences of the clinical trial, and the conditions under which it is to be conducted and has also been informed of the right to withdraw from the clinical trial at any time without any resulting detriment;
Amendment 148 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the subject or, where the subject is not able to give informed consent, his or her legal representative has given informed consent;
Amendment 150 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) Without prejudice to Article 28, where the clinical trial poses a minimal risk, informed consent may be given orally, provided that it is duly documented, in accordance with the legislation of the Member State concerned;
Amendment 151 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the incapacitated subject has received adequate information in relation to his or her capacity for understanding regarding the trial, the risks and the benefits from the investigator or his/her representative, in accordance with the legislation of the Member State concerned;
Amendment 152 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) such research relates directly to a life- threatening or debilitating medical condition from which the subjectperson concerned suffers;
Amendment 153 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) there are grounds for expecting that participation in the clinical trial will produce a benefit to the incapacitated subject outweighing the risks or will produce no risk at allonly a minimal risk.
Amendment 154 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) Without prejudice to Article 31(1), where the clinical trial poses a minimal risk and the consent of the second person with parental authority cannot be given within a period consistent with the methodological requirements of the research, and provided that a favourable ethical opinion has been issued, the clinical trial on the minor may proceed on the basis of the consent of the only person present with parental authority.
Amendment 155 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Investigational and auxiliary medicinal products should be appropriately labelled in order to ensure subject safety and the reliability and robustness of data generated in a clinical trial, and in order to allow for the distribution of those products to clinical trial sites throughout the Union. The rules for labelling should be adapted to the risks to subject safety and the reliability and robustness of data generated in a clinical trial. WIn medium- or low-risk trials, where the investigational or auxiliary medicinal product have already been placed on the market as an authorised medicinal product in accordance with Directive 2001/83/EC, as a general rule no additional labelling should be required for open-label trials. Instead of a useless and inappropriate product labelling, and in line with GMP 2009 (Annex 13, Article 27), the participants to such researches could be given a leaflet or card which provides useful information on the trial and be instructed to keep this in their possession at all times. Moreover, there are specific products, such as radiopharmaceuticals used as diagnostic investigational medicinal product, where the general rules on labelling are inappropriate in view of the very controlled setting of the use of radiopharmaceuticals in clinical trials.
Amendment 155 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the informed consent of thetwo legal representatives has been obtainedve given their consent, whereby consent shall represent the minor’s presumed will;
Amendment 156 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) some direct benefit for the groupcategory of patients isconcerned by the trial may be obtained from the clinical trial.
Amendment 157 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 28(1), from points (a) and (b) of Article 30(1) and from points (a) and (b) of Article 31(1), informed consent may be obtained after the start of the clinical trial to continue, referred to in Article 29(1), shall be obtained as soon as possible after the start of the clinical trial and information on the clinical trial mayshall be given after the start of the clinical trial provided that all of the following conditions are fulfilled:
Amendment 158 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In clinical trials with non-authorised investigational medicinal products, or where the interventionith authorised investigational medicinal products used outside the terms of the marketing authorisation in a treatment regimen distinct from the standard of care, or where the diagnostic procedure poses more than an insignificant risk to subject safety, compensation should be ensured for damages successfully claimed in accordance with the applicable laws.
Amendment 159 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) due to the urgency of the situation, caused by a sudden life-threatening or other sudden serious medical condition, it is impossible to obtain prior informed consent from the subject and it is impossible to supply prior information to the subject;
Amendment 160 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) nothe consent of the legal representative is availablecannot be given within a period consistent with the methodological requirements of the research;
Amendment 162 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 164 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the clinical trial poses a minimal risk to, and imposes a minimal burden on, the subjectre are grounds for expecting that participation in the clinical trial will produce a benefit to the subject outweighing the risks or will produce only a minimal risk.
Amendment 165 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. If the subject or, where applicable, his/her legal representative does not give his/her consent for the research to continue, he/she shall be informed that he/she may object to the use of data obtained prior to the denial of consent.
Amendment 166 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) The database should contain all relevant information as regards the clinical trial. No personal data of data subjects participating in a clinical trial should be recorded in the database and allow public dissemination of objective information in order to support European research and to increase knowledge in the field of public health. It should not undermine innovation or competitiveness of European industries. No personal data of data subjects participating in a clinical trial should be recorded in the database, and it should not hamper the protection of commercial interests, including intellectual property, as provided for by Article 4 of Regulation 1049/2001. The information in the database should be public, unless specific reasons require that a piece of information should not be published, in order to protect the right of the individual to private life and the right to the protection of personal data, recognised by Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, or commercially confidential information, as foreseen by Article 4 of Regulation 1049/2001.
Amendment 166 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) regarding incapacitated subjects and minors, the informed consent referred to in paragraph 1 shall be obtained as soon as possible from the legal representative and the information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be given as soon as possible to the subject by the investigator or his/her representative;
Amendment 167 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1530 days from the start of the clinical trial in relation to that Member State.
Amendment 169 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52 a (new)
Recital 52 a (new)
Amendment 169 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1530 days from the end of the recruitment of subjects. In case of re-start of recruitment, paragraph 1 shall apply.
Amendment 171 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1530 days from the end of the clinical trial.
Amendment 174 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) Without prejudice to the national systems for the cost and reimbursement of medical treatments, subjects should not have to pay for investigational medicinal products. For the low-risk trial, and the medium-risk trials (when the treatment regimen represents the standard of care), and when registration is not the initial objective of the investigator-initiated trial, the cost of the investigational medicinal product should be borne by the national healthcare system.
Amendment 181 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation shall apply to all clinical trials conducted in the Union.
Amendment 182 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Safety reporting with regard to auxiliary medicinal products shall be made in accordance with Chapter 3 of Directive 20010/834/ECU.
Amendment 183 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point a
(a) to discover or verify the clinical, pharmacological or othekinetic or pharmacodynamic effects of one or more medicinal products;
Amendment 183 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) whether the clinical trial is a low- interventionminimal- risk clinical trial;
Amendment 184 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point c
(c) to study the abresorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of one or more medicinal products;
Amendment 184 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Investigational medicinal products shall be traceable, stored, destroyed and returned as appropriate and proportionate to ensure subject safety and the reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial, taking into account whether the investigational medicinal product is authorised, and whether the clinical trial is a low-interventionminimal-risk clinical trial.
Amendment 188 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point a
(a) there is no marketing authorisation for the investigational medicinal products are not authorised;
Amendment 192 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point c
Amendment 193 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – point d
(d) the decision to prescribe the investigational medicinal products is taken together with the decision to include the subject in the clinical studydetermined by the research protocol;
Amendment 196 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 90 a (new)
Article 90 a (new)
Article 90a Review of the Regulation As from the entry into force of this Regulation, every five years the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the implementation of the Regulation. The report shall include an assessment of the impact that the Regulation has had on scientific and technological progress, and the measures required in order to maintain the competitiveness of European clinical research.
Amendment 197 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 a (new)
(2a) Medium-risk trial : a clinical trial on investigational medicinal products, which are authorised and fall outside the terms of the marketing authorisation according to the protocol. Their use is either: a) supported by sufficient published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines; b) not supported by sufficient published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines; The additional diagnostic or monitoring procedures do not pose more than minimal additional risk or burden to the safety of the subjects compared to normal clinical practice in any Member State concerned.
Amendment 198 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – introductory part
(3) ‘Low-intervention clinical trial’: arisk clinical trial’: a clinical trial presents a low risk if, given the nature and extent of the intervention, it can be expected to have only a very small and temporary impact – if any – on the subject’s health. A low-risk clinical trial whichshall fulfils all of the following conditions: (The amendment whereby the term ‘low- intervention clinical trial’ is replaced by ‘low-risk clinical trial’ applies to the entire text. If it is adopted, the change will have to be made throughout the text.)
Amendment 198 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 2 – point 9
Annex I – part 2 – point 9
9. In the case of a resubmission, the cover letter shall highlight the changes as compared to the previous submissiongrounds on which the original application was rejected and the changes as compared to the original version of the protocol.
Amendment 200 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – introductory part
(3) ‘Low-interventionrisk clinical trial’: a clinical trial which fulfils all of the following conditions: (Horizontal amendment applying throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes.)
Amendment 200 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 16 – point 61
Annex I – part 16 – point 61
Amendment 201 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point a
(a) the investigational medicinal products are authorised; and tested in accordance with their marketing authorisation.
Amendment 202 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point a
(a) there is marketing authorisation for the investigational medicinal products are authorised;
Amendment 206 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point b
Amendment 208 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point b
(b) according to the protocol of the clinical trial, the investigational medicinal products are used in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorisation or their use is a standard treatmentin line with usual clinical practice in any of the Member States concerned;
Amendment 213 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 4
(4) ‘Non-interventional study’: a clinical study other than a clinical trial, in which the medicinal product or products are prescribed in the usual way in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorisation. The assignment of the subject to a particular therapeutic strategy is not decided in advance by a research protocol, it falls within usual practice, and the decision to prescribe the medicinal product is clearly dissociated from the decision to include the patient in the study. The patients must not be subject to any additional diagnostic or monitoring procedures, and epidemiological methods are used to analyse the data gathered;
Amendment 217 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 6
(6) 'Norm‘Usual clinical practice'’: the treatment regime typically followed to treat, prevent, or diagnose a disease or a disorder; (The amendment whereby the term ‘normal clinical practice’ is replaced by ‘usual clinical practice’ applies to the entire text. If it is adopted, the change will have to be made throughout the text.)
Amendment 227 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
(14) ‘Investigator’: an individual physical person who is trained or has experience to a level equivalent to the stipulations of Article 46 of this Regulation and who is responsible for the conduct of a clinical trial at a clinical trial site;
Amendment 228 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 a (new)
(14a) ‘Principal investigator’: the investigator responsible for a team of investigators conducting a clinical trial at a single site;
Amendment 229 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14 b (new)
(14b) ‘Coordinating investigator’: an investigator responsible for the coordination of a clinical trial conducted at several centres in one or more of the Member States concerned;
Amendment 232 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 17
(17) ‘Incapacitated subject’: a subject who is, for other reasons than the age of legal competence to give informed consent, legally legally or de facto incapable of giving informed consent according to the laws of the Member State concerned;
Amendment 234 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 19
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 19
(19) '‘Informed consent'’: a process by which a subject voluntarily confirms his or her willingness to participate in a particular trial, after having been duly informed, in accordance with the law of the Member State in question, of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the subject'’s decision to participate;
Amendment 238 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 22
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 22
(22) ‘Start of the clinical trial’: the first act of recruitment of a potential subject, unless defined differently in the protocol;Does not affect English version.)
Amendment 239 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 29
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 29
(29) ‘Serious adverse event’: any untoward medical occurrence, or other event deemed serious by the investigator in the context of the trial, that at any dose requires inpatient hospitalisation or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly or birth defect, is life-threatening or results in death;
Amendment 246 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
– the data generated in the clinical trial are goingcan be expected to be reliable and robust.
Amendment 257 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. In order to obtain an authorisation, the sponsor shall submit an application dossier to the intended Member States concerned through the portal referred to in Article 77 (hereinafter '‘EU portal'’). At this stage the application dossier shall not be accessible to the public on the EU portal. It shall be made public only on completion of the Part I assessment referred to in Article 6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 260 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The sponsor shall propose one of the Member States concerned as reporting Member StateMember States concerned shall determine which state shall be the reporting Member State according to an established procedure based on objective criteria which are set by the Commission.
Amendment 262 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The sponsor shall propose one of the Member States concerned as reporting Member State. The Member States concerned shall be free to choose one of their number as the reporting Member State.
Amendment 266 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
If the sponsor submits an application dossier to just one of the Member States concerned, that Member State shall automatically be designated as the reporting Member State.
Amendment 267 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Within six calendar days following submission of the application dossier, the proposed reporting Member State shall notify the sponsor through the EU portal of the following:
Amendment 271 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) whether the clinical trial is a low- interventionmedium- risk or low-risk clinical trial, where claimed by the sponsor.
Amendment 273 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Where the proposed reporting Member State has not notified the sponsor within the time period referred to in paragraph 2, the clinical trial applied for shall be considered as falling within the scope of this Regulation, the application shall be considered complete, the clinical trial shall be considered a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial if this is claimed by the sponsor, and the proposed reporting Member State shall be the reporting Member State.
Amendment 277 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Where the proposed reporting Member State finds that the application is not complete, that the clinical trial applied for does not fall within the scope of this Regulation, or that the clinical trial is not a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial while this is claimed by the sponsor, it shall inform the sponsor thereof through the EU portal and shall set a maximum of six days for the sponsor to comment or to complete the application through the EU portal.
Amendment 282 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Where the proposed reporting Member State has not notified the sponsor according to points (a) to (d) of paragraph 2 within three days following receipt of the comments or of the completed application, the application shall be considered complete, the clinical trial shall be considered as falling within the scope of this Regulation, the clinical trial shall be considered as a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial if this is claimed by the sponsor, and the proposed reporting Member State shall be the reporting Member State.
Amendment 283 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. For the purposes of this Chapter, the date on which the sponsor is notified in accordance with paragraph 2 shall be the validationadmissibility date of the application. Where the sponsor is not notified, the validationadmissibility date shall be the last day of the time periods referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. (The amendment substituting ‘admissibility date’ for ‘validation date’ applies to the entire text. If it is adopted, the change will have to be made throughout the text.)
Amendment 287 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Any of the Member States concerned shall be free to select those aspects of Parts I and II to be assessed by an ethics committee.
Amendment 293 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i – indent 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i – indent 3
– the reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial, taking account of statistical approaches, design of the trial and, methodology (including sample size and randomisation, comparator and endpoints); and the prevalence of the condition, especially for rare diseases (which affect no more than five persons per 10 000), and ultra-rare diseases (which meet a prevalence threshold of no more than one affected person per 50 000).
Amendment 297 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i – indent 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i – indent 3
– the reliability and robustness of the data generated inexpected from the clinical trial, taking account of statistical approaches, design of the trial and methodology (including sample size and randomisation, comparator and endpoints);
Amendment 300 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii – indent 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii – indent 4 a (new)
- the life-threatening and debilitating effects of certain diseases, such as some rare and ultra-rare diseases for which there are limited existing treatment options;
Amendment 306 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The reporting Member State shall submit Part I of the assessment report, including its conclusion, to the sponsor and to the other Member States concerned, via the EU portal referred to in Article 77 of this Regulation, within the following time periods:
Amendment 312 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) within 10 days from the validation date for low-intervention clinical trialrisk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines;
Amendment 315 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) within 25 days from the validation date for clinical trials other than low- intervention clinical trialsrisk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines ;
Amendment 319 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
For the purposes of this Chapter, the assessment date shall be the date on which the assessment report is submitted to the sponsor and to the other Member States concerned. As of that date, the assessment report shall be accessible on the EU portal.
Amendment 321 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. Until the assessment date, any Member State concerned may communicate to the reporting Member State any considerations relevant to the application. The reporting Member State shall take those considerations duly into account and shall document them in the assessment report. If the assessment report of the reporting Member State deviates from the considerations of the Member States concerned, it shall state the reasons for this deviation in the assessment report.
Amendment 323 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
6. The reporting Member State, and only the reporting Member State, may, between the validation date and the assessment date, request additional explanations from the sponsor, taking into account the considerations that it identifies, as well as considerations raised by the other Member States concerned, as referred to in paragraph 5.
Amendment 325 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
For the purpose of obtaining those additional explanations, the reporting Member State may suspend the time period referred to in paragraph 4 for a maximum of 10 days for low-intervention clinical trials and for a maximum of 20 days for trials other than low-intervention clinical trialrisk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or or standard treatment guidelines and for a maximum of 20 days for trials other than low-risk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines.
Amendment 326 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
For the purpose of obtaining those additional explanations, the reporting Member State may suspend the relevant time period referred to in paragraph 4 for a maximum of 10 days for low-intervention clinical trials and for a maximum of 20 days for trials other than low-intervention clinical trials. The reporting Member State shall inform the sponsor, via the EU portal, of the suspension of the time period.
Amendment 329 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Where the reporting Member State does not submit the assessment report within the time periods stipulated in paragraphs 4, 6 and 7, Part I of the clinical trial shall be considered as accepted by the reporting Member State.
Amendment 331 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The assessments of Parts I and II shall be conducted simultaneously. Each Member State concerned shall assess, for its own territory, the application with respect to the following aspects:
Amendment 338 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) compliance with more restrictive national provisions relating to clinical trials involving vulnerable individuals.
Amendment 342 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The Member State concerned shall inform the sponsor of the suspension of the deadline via the EU portal.
Amendment 343 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Where, in response to a request from the Member State concerned, the sponsor does not provide additional explanations within the time period set by the Member State in accordance with the first subparagraph, the application for a clinical trial which is being assessed shall be considered as withdrawn. The withdrawal shall apply only with respect to the Member State concerned.
Amendment 345 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where the Member State concerned does not submit the assessment report within the time periods stipulated in paragraphs 2 and 3, Part II shall be deemed to have been accepted by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 347 #
Amendment 348 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Each Member State concerned shall notify the sponsor through the EU Portal as to whetherof its final decision to authorise the clinical trial is, to authorised, whether it is authorised it subject to conditions, or whetherto refuse authorisation is refused.
Amendment 357 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Where the Member State concerned disagrees with the conclusion of the reporting Member State on the basis of point (a) of the second subparagraph, it shall communicate its disagreement, together with a detailed justification based on scientific and socio-economic arguments, and a summary thereof, through the EU portal to the Commission, to all Member States, and to the sponsor.
Amendment 360 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where the Member State concerned disagrees with the conclusion of the reporting Member State on the basis of points (a) and (b) of the second subparagraph of paragraph 2, the clinical trial shall not take place in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 362 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In the event of a Member State refusing authorisation on the basis of Part II, the sponsor may appeal, once only, to the Member State concerned through the EU portal referred to in Article 77. The sponsor may send additional explanations within seven days. The Member State concerned shall assess for a second time, for its own territory, the aspects referred to in Article 7(1), and shall take account of the additional explanations provided by the sponsor. The Member State concerned shall complete its assessment within seven days from the date on which the additional explanations are received. Where the Member State concerned refuses authorisation or fails to provide a conclusion as regards Part II within the seven-day time period, the application shall be deemed to have been definitively refused and the clinical trial shall not take place in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 367 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – title
Article 9 – title
Persons assessing Parts I and II of the application file
Amendment 368 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the persons validating and assessing Parts I and II of the application do not have conflicts of interest, are independent of the sponsor, the institution of the trial site and the investigators involved, as well as free of any other undue influence.
Amendment 373 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the assessment is done jointly by a reasonable number of persons who collectively have the necessary qualifications and experienceof Part II is done by a group of people at least half of whom meet the conditions laid down in Article 46 of this Regulation.
Amendment 383 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where the clinical trial concerns other categories of subjects who are considered vulnerable under national law, the application to conduct the clinical trial shall be assessed on the basis of the national law of the Member States concerned.
Amendment 388 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph -1 (new)
The assessments of Parts I and II shall be conducted simultaneously.
Amendment 391 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11a Clinical trial applications shall be prioritized by Member States to improve, where possible, the defined timelines when the clinical trial is related to a condition that is a rare or ultra-rare disease and, as such, is subject to significant administrative burden due to the extremely small patient populations. Rare and ultra-rare disease are defined as severe, debilitating and often life- threatening diseases which affect fewer than 5 persons per 10 000 or fewer than one person 50 000 in the Union respectively.
Amendment 393 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13
Article 13
Amendment 395 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The application may be submitted only after the notification date of the initial authorisation decision in any Member State.
Amendment 397 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) 25 days from the date of submission of the application referred to in paragraph 1 for low-intervention clinical trialsrisk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines ;
Amendment 398 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) 35 days from the date of submission of the application referred to in paragraph 1 for clinical trials other than low- intervention clinical trials; risk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published and/or standard treatment guidelines;
Amendment 402 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
For the purpose of obtaining those additional explanations, the reporting Member State may suspend the relevant time period referred to in paragraph 3 for a maximum of 10 days for low-intervention clinical trials and for a maximum of 20 days for trials other than low-intervention clinical trialsrisk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines, and for a maximum of 20 days for trials other than low-risk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines guidance .
Amendment 403 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Where, upon receipt of the additional explanations, the remaining time period for notifying the decision referred to in paragraph 4 is less than three days in the case of low-intervention clinical trials, and less than five days for other than low- intervention clinical trialrisk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines, and less than five days for other than low-risk clinical trials and medium-risk clinical trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines, it shall be extended to three and five days respectively.
Amendment 408 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 11
Article 14 – paragraph 11
11. A sponsor shall not submit an application in accordance with this Article where a procedure referred to in Chapter III as regards that clinical trial, and relating to an aspect covered by Part I of the assessment report, is pending.
Amendment 409 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15
Article 15
A substantial modification may only be implemented if it has been approved in accordance with the procedure set out in this Chapter, and if it has been approved by an independent ethics committee before its implementation.
Amendment 413 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) where the clinical trial is a low- interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial, whether it will remain a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial after its substantial modification.
Amendment 415 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Where the reporting Member State has not notified the sponsor within the time period referred to in paragraph 2, the substantial modification applied for shall be considered as concerning an aspect covered by Part I of the assessment report, the application shall be considered as complete and, where the clinical trial is a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial, it shall be considered as remaining a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial after its substantial modification.
Amendment 417 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Where the reporting Member State finds that the application does not concern an aspect covered by Part I of the assessment report, that the application is not complete, or that the clinical trial will no longer be a low-interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial after the substantial modification, contrary to what the sponsor claims, it shall inform the sponsor thereof through the EU portal and shall set a maximum of six days for the sponsor to comment or to complete the application through the EU portal.
Amendment 444 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 26 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
As regards clinical trials conducted in a single Member State, the application file may be drawn up in one of official languages of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 445 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
Article 26 – subparagraph 1 b (new)
In the event of the enlargement of the Union to include another Member State, subparagraph 3 of this article shall apply.
Amendment 448 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 449 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) compliance with point (a) is permanently observedthe principles referred to in point (a) are observed throughout the study;
Amendment 450 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 453 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the subject or, where the subject is not able to give informed consent, his or her legal representative has had the opportunity, in a prior interview with the investigator or a member of the investigating teamhis/her representative, to understand the objectives, risks and inconveniences of the clinical trial, and the conditions under which it is to be conducted and has also been informed of the right to withdraw from the clinical trial at any time without any resulting detriment;
Amendment 455 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the subject or, where the subject is not able to give informed consent, his or her legal representative has given informed consent;
Amendment 458 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. Any subject may, without any resulting liability or detriment, withdraw from the clinical trial at any time by revoking without any justification his or her informed consent. The withdrawal of consent shall not affect the activities carried out based on consent before its withdrawal.
Amendment 460 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. Any subject or his legal representative may, without any resulting detriment, withdraw from the clinical trial at any time by revoking his or her informed consent. The withdrawal of consent shall not affect the activities carried out based on consent before its withdrawal.
Amendment 463 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Informed consent shall be written, dated and signed and given freely by the subject or his or her legal representative after having been ducomprehensively and comprehensibly informed of the nature, significance, implications and risks of the clinical trial, and after having received the corresponding information in writing. It shall be appropriately documented. Where the subject is unable to write, oral consent in the presence of at least one impartial witness may be given in exceptional cases. The subject or his or her legal representative shall be provided with a copy of the document by which informed consent has been given.
Amendment 465 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Informed consent shall be written, dated and signed and given freely by the subject or his or her legal representative after having been duly informed of the nature, significance, implications and risks of the clinical trial. It shall be appropriately documented. Where the subject is unable to write, oral consent in the presence of at least one impartial witness, who is independent of the investigator, may be given in exceptional cases. The subject or his or her legal representative shall be provided with a copy of the document by which informed consent has been given.
Amendment 466 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Without prejudice to Article 28, where the clinical trial poses a minimal risk, informed consent may be given orally, provided that it is duly documented, in accordance with the legislation of the Member State concerned;
Amendment 469 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When the subject gives his/her consent, he/she shall also be informed that a summary of the results of the clinical trial, as referred to in Article 34(3)(2a), will be published on the EU database.
Amendment 473 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 475 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the incapacitated subject has received adequate information in relation to his or her capacity for understanding regarding the trial, the risks and the benefits from the investigator or his/her representative, in accordance with the legislation of the Member State concerned; ;
Amendment 479 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) such research relates directly to a life- threatening or debilitating medical condition from which the subjectperson concerned suffers;
Amendment 480 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) there are grounds for expecting that participation in the clinical trial will produce a benefit to the incapacitated subject outweighing the risks or will produce no risk at allonly a minimal risk.
Amendment 481 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) the Ethics Committee, with expertise in the relevant disease and the patient population concerned, or after taking advice in clinical, ethical and psychosocial questions in the field of the relevant disease and patient population concerned, has endorsed the protocol;
Amendment 484 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the informed consent of the legal representative or representatives has been obtained, whereby consent shall represent the minor’s presumed will;
Amendment 487 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the minor has received all relevant information in a way adapted to his or her age and maturity, from professionalsa medical doctor (either the investigator or member of the trial team) trained or experienced in working with children, regarding the trial, the risks and the benefits;
Amendment 492 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 493 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) some direct benefit for the groupcategory of patients isconcerned by the trial may be obtained from the clinical trial.
Amendment 496 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h b (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h b (new)
(hb) the corresponding scientific guidelines of the Agency have been followed;
Amendment 498 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h d (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point h d (new)
(hd) the Ethics Committee, with paediatric expertise or after taking advice in clinical, ethical and psychosocial problems in the field of paediatrics, has endorsed the protocol;
Amendment 500 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Without prejudice to Article 31(1), where the clinical trial poses a minimal risk and the consent of the second person with parental authority cannot be given within a period consistent with the methodological requirements of the research, and provided that a favourable ethical opinion has been issued, the clinical trial on the minor may proceed on the basis of the consent of the only person present with parental authority.
Amendment 502 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. If during a clinical trial the minor reaches the age of majority as defined in the legislation of the Member State concerned, his/her express informed consent shall be obtained before the trial may continue.
Amendment 505 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 28(1), from points (a) and (b) of Article 30(1) and from points (a) and (b) of Article 31(1), informed consent may be obtained after the start of the clinical trial to continue, referred to in Article 29(1), shall be obtained as soon as possible after the start of the clinical trial and information on the clinical trial mayshall be given after the start of the clinical trial provided that all of the following conditions are fulfilled:
Amendment 506 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) due to the urgency of the situation, caused by a sudden life-threatening or other sudden serious medical condition, it is impossible to obtain prior informed consent from the subject and it is impossible to supply prior information to the subject;
Amendment 508 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) nothe consent of the legal representative is availablecannot be given within a period consistent with the methodological requirements of the research;
Amendment 510 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 511 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the clinical trial poses a minimal risk to, and imposes a minimal burden on, the subjectre are grounds for expecting that participation in the clinical trial will produce a benefit to the subject outweighing the risks or will produce only a minimal risk.
Amendment 514 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) regarding incapacitated subjects and minors, the informed consent referred to in paragraph 1 shall be obtained as soon as possible from the legal representative and the information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be given as soon as possible to the subject by the investigator or his/her representative;
Amendment 515 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Without prejudice to paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article, national law relating to incapacitated and/or vulnerable persons, and measures taken thereunder, shall be complied with.
Amendment 516 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. If the subject or, where applicable, his or her legal representative does not give his or her consent for the research to continue, he or she shall be informed that he or she may object to the use of data obtained prior to the denial of consent.
Amendment 518 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1530 days from the start of the clinical trial in relation to that Member State.
Amendment 521 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 15 30 days from the end of the recruitment of subjects. In case of re-start of recruitment, paragraph 1 shall apply.
Amendment 523 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – title
Article 34 – title
End of the clinical trial, early termination of the clinical trial and submission of results
Amendment 526 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
That notification shall be made within 1530 days from the end of the clinical trial in relation to that Member State.
Amendment 527 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Within onetwo years from the end of a clinical trial, the sponsor shall submit to the EU database a summary of the results of the clinical trial. The end of the clinical trial shall be considered to be the end of the period during which the last subject included in the clinical trial is subject to monitoring.
Amendment 534 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The summary of the results of the clinical trial referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph shall be published by the Commission on the EU database and shall be accessible to the public. The summary shall cover all the points referred to in Annex III of this Regulation. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 85 for the purpose of modifying the component elements of the summary.
Amendment 535 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
However, where, for scientific reasons, it is not possible to submit a summary of the results within onetwo years, the summary of results shall be submitted as soon as it is available. In this case, the protocol shall specify when the results are going to be submitted, together with an explanation.
Amendment 537 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 543 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. For the purpose of this Regulation, if a suspended or temporarily halted clinical trial is not restarted, the date of the decision of the sponsor not to restart the clinical trial, extended to include the period during which the trial subjects are subject to monitoring under the terms of the protocol, shall be considered as the end of the clinical trial. In the case of early termination, the date of the early termination shall be considered as the date of the end of the clinical trial.
Amendment 545 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 85 in order to amend Annex IIIa with the objective to adapt them to scientific or global regulatory developments.
Amendment 546 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
The European Medicines Agency established by Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 (hereinafter, the "Agency") shall set up and maintain an electronic database for the reporting provided for in Articles 38, 39 and 3941.
Amendment 549 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. The investigator shall immediately report serious adverse events to the sponsor unless the protocol provides, for certain adverse events, that no reporting is required. The investigator shall record all serious adverse events. Where necessary, the investigator shall send a follow-up report to the sponsor.(Does not affect English version.)
Amendment 551 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. The investigator shall immediately report serious adverse events to the sponsor as soon as possible and without unnecessary delay unless the protocol provides, for certain adverse events, that no reporting is required. The investigator shall record all serious adverse events. Where necessary, the investigator shall send a follow-up report to the sponsor.
Amendment 552 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 37 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the case of low-risk clinical trials and clinical trials involving a moderate level of risk which use treatment strategies supported by published data or based on customary recommended practice, the protocol may stipulate that the normal rules on vigilance should apply.
Amendment 555 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. The sponsor shall report electronically and without delayin the time limits specified in points 2.4 and 2.5 of Annex III to the electronic database referred to in Article 36 all relevant information about suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions to investigational medicinal products insofar as the suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction occurred in a clinical trial conducted by the sponsor, or occurred in a clinical trial related to the sponsor.
Amendment 556 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. The sponsor shall report electronically and without delay to the electronic database referred to in Article 36 all relevant information about suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions to investigational and auxiliary medicinal products insofar as the suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction occurred in a clinical trial conducted by the sponsor, or occurred in a clinical trial related to the sponsor.
Amendment 561 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 1
1. Regarding non-authorised investigational medicinal products other than placebo, and authorised investigational medicinal products which, according to the protocol, are not used in accordance withThe sponsor shall submit annually by electronic means to the Agency a report on the safety of each investigational medicinal product - or of all the investigational medicinal products – used in a clinical trial for which it is the sponsor if the clinical trial involves authorised medicinal products being tested in accordance with treatment strategies which were not envisaged under the terms of their marketing authorisation, the sponsor shall submit annually by electronic means to the Agency a report on the safety of each investigational medicinal product used in a and which are not supported by data or recommendations and if the clinical trial for winvolves a hicgh it is the sponsorlevel of risk.
Amendment 562 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 1
1. Regarding non-authorised investigational medicinal products other than placebo, and authorised investigational medicinal products which, according to the protocol, are not used in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorisationFor clinical trials other than low-risk and medium-risk trials using treatment regimens supported by published evidence and/or standard treatment guidelines, the sponsor shall submit annually by electronic means to the Agency a report on the safety of each investigational medicinal product used in a clinical trial for which it is the sponsor.
Amendment 568 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency shall, by electronic means, forward to the relevant Member States the information reported in accordance with Article 38, 39 and 3941.
Amendment 569 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall cooperate in assessing the information reported in accordance with Articles 38, 39 and 3941.
Amendment 571 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – title
Article 41 – title
Article 39 Annual reporting by the sponsor to the marketing authorisation holderAgency
Amendment 572 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
1. Regarding authorised medicinal products which, according to the protocol, are used in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorisation, the sponsor shall inform annually the marketing authorisation holderAgency of all suspected serious adverse reactions.
Amendment 575 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43
Article 43
Safety reporting with regard to auxiliary medicinal products shall be made in accordance with Chapter 3 of Directive 2001/83/EC as amended by Directive 2012/ 84/EU).
Amendment 578 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – title
Article 45 – title
Amendment 579 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The sponsor shall adequately monitor the conduct of a clinical trial. The extent and nature of the monitoring shall be determined by the sponsor on the basis of all characteristics of the clinical trial, including risk assessment covering all the risk determinants of the clinical trial (risk to subject rights, risk to subject safety and integrity, risk to data quality and robustness of results). The risk assessment shall determine the quality management and trial monitoring, taking into account the following characteristics:
Amendment 581 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) whether the clinical trial is a low- interventionmedium- risk or low- risk clinical trial;
Amendment 582 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the degree of deviation of the interventiondiagnostic procedures from normal clinical practice.
Amendment 583 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Other individuals involved in conducting and monitoring a clinical trial shall be suitably qualified by education, training and experience to perform their tasks.
Amendment 585 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – title
Article 48 – title
Amendment 586 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Investigational medicinal products shall be traceable, stored, destroyed and returned as appropriate and proportionate to ensure subject safety and the reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial, taking into account whether the investigational medicinal product is authorised, and whether the clinical trial is a low-interventionclinical trial is a medium-risk or low- risk clinical trial.
Amendment 587 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Investigational medicinal products shall be received, traceable, stored, administered, destroyed and returned as appropriate and proportionate to ensure subject safety and the reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial, taking into account whether the investigational medicinal product is authorised, and whether the clinical trial is a low- intervention clinical trial.
Amendment 588 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
These operations shall be carried out by persons legally authorised in the Member State to carry out the operations in question and, particularly where they are carried out in hospitals, medical centres or clinics, by pharmacists or other persons legally authorised in the Member State concerned to carry out the operations in question.
Amendment 589 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The relevant information regarding the traceability, storage, administration, destruction and return of medicinal products referred to in paragraph 1 shall be contained in the application dossier.
Amendment 595 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The content of the investigator brochure shall be adapted for low risk and for medium-risk trials (see Annex I, part 5, point 20).
Amendment 596 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. For authorised medicinal products which, according to the protocol, are used in accordance with the terms of the marketing authorisation, the approved summary of product characteristics may be the reference document.
Amendment 599 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1
Article 54 – paragraph 1
The sponsor andor the investigator shall keep a clinical trial master file.
Amendment 600 #
2012/0192(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2
Article 54 – paragraph 2
The content of the clinical trial master file shall allow verification of the conduct of a clinical trial, taking account of all characteristics of the clinical trial, including whether the clinical trial is a low- interventionmedium-risk or low-risk clinical trial.
Amendment 21 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 43 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Amendment 50 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Amendment 54 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 56 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 60 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
– Vehicles of category M1, N1 and O2: four years after the date on which the vehicle was first registered, then two years and thereafter annuallyand thereafter every two years;
Amendment 107 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Amendment 131 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Amendment 184 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 197 #
2012/0184(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
– Vehicles of category M1, N1 and O2: four years after the date on which the vehicle was first registered, then and every two years and thereafter annually;
Amendment 17 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the access of third-country goods and services to the Union’s internal market in public procurement and concessions and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union goods and services to the public procurement markets and to the concessions of third countries (Text with EEA relevance)
Amendment 20 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Within the context of the World Trade Organisation and throughwithin the framework of its bilateral relations, the Union advocatesupports an ambitious opening of international opening of the public procurement and concessions markets of the Union and of its tradinge partners, in a spirit of reciprocity and mutual benefit.
Amendment 23 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Many third countries are reluctant to open their public procurement markets and their concessions to international competition, or to open those markets further than what they have already done. As a result, Union economic operators face restrictive procurement and concessions practices in many of the trading partners of the Union. Those restrictive procurement practices result in the loss of substantial trading opportunities.
Amendment 25 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In accordance with Article 207 TFEU the common commercial policy in the field of public procurement and concessions is to be based on uniform principles.
Amendment 26 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In the interest of legal certainty for Union and third-country economic operators and contracting authorities/entities, the international market access commitments undertaken by the Union vis-à-vis third countries in the field of public procurement and concessions should be reflected in the legal order of the EU, thereby ensuring effective application thereof. The Commission should issue guidance on the application of the existing international market access commitments of the European Union. This guidance should be updated on a regular basis and provide easy to use information.
Amendment 28 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The objectives of improving the access of EUnion economic operators to the public procurement markets and the concessions of certain third countries protected by restrictive procurement measures and preserving equal conditions of competition within the European Single Market require that the treatment of third- country goodsupplies and services not covered by the international commitments of the Union be harmonised throughout the European Union.
Amendment 30 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The Commission should assess whether to approve that contracting authorities/entities within the meaning of Directives [2004/17/EC, 2004/18/EC and Directive [….] of the European Parliament and the Council of [….]….on the award of concession contracts] exclude, for contractprocedures for the award of contracts or concessions with an estimated value equal or above EUR 5.000.000 from procedures for the award of contracts goods and services not covered by the international commitments undertaken by the European Union.
Amendment 32 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) For the sake of transparency, contracting authorities/entities intending to make use of their power in accordance with this Regulation to exclude tenders comprising goods and/or services originating outside the European Union, in which the value of the non-covered goods or services exceeds 50 % of the total value of these goods or services from procedures for the award of contracts or concessions should inform economic operators thereof in the contract notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Amendment 34 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) For contracts and concessions with an estimated value equal or above EUR 5.000.000 the Commission should approve the intended exclusion if the international agreement concerning market access in the field of public procurement or concessions between the Union and the country where the goods and/or services originate contains, for the goods and/or services for which the exclusion is proposed, explicit market access reservations taken by the Union. Where such an agreement does not exist, the Commission should approve the exclusion where the third country maintains restrictive procurement measuremeasures in the field of procurement or the award of concessions leading to a lack of substantial reciprocity in market opening between the Union and the third country concerned. A lack of substantial reciprocity should be presumed where restrictive procurement measuremeasures in the field of procurement or the award of concessions result in serious and recurring discriminations of EU economic operators, goods and services.
Amendment 36 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) When assessing whether a lack of substantial reciprocity exists, the Commission should examine to what degree the laws on public procurement lawand concessions of the country concerned ensure transparency in line with international standards in the field of public procurement and concessions and preclude any discrimination against Union goods, services and economic operators. In addition, it should examine to what degree public authorities and/or individual procuring entities maintain or adopt discriminatory practices against Union goods, services and economic operators.
Amendment 38 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The Commission should be able to prevent the possible negative impact of an intended exclusion on on-going trade negotiations with the country concerned. Therefore, the Commission may, where a country is engaging in substantive negotiations with the Union concerning market access in the field of public procurement or concessions and the Commission considers that there is a reasonable prospect of removing the restrictive procurement or concessions practices in the near future, it should be able to adopt an implementing act providing that goods and services from that country should not be excluded from procedures for the award of contracts for a period of one year.
Amendment 39 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In view of the fact that the access of third country goods and services to the public procurement market of the Union and to its concessions falls within the scope of the common commercial policy, Member States or their contracting authorities/entities should not be able to restrict the access of third country goods or services to their tendering procedures by any other measure than the ones provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 41 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The Commission should be able, on its own initiative or at the application of interested parties or a Member State, to initiate at any time an external procurement investigation into restrictive procurement and concessions practices allegedly maintained by a third country. In particular it shall take into account the fact that the Commission has approved a number of intended exclusions concerning a third country pursuant to Article 6(2) of this Regulation. Such investigative procedures should be without prejudice to Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation.
Amendment 42 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Where the Commission has, on the basis of information available to it, reason to believe that a third country has adopted or maintains a restrictive procurement or concessions practice, it should be able to start an investigation. If the existence of a restrictive procurement practice in a third country is confirmed the Commission should invite the country concerned to enter into consultations with a view to improving the tendering opportunities for economic operators, goods and services in public procurement in that country.
Amendment 43 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Such measures may entail the mandatory exclusion of certain third- country goods and services from public procurement procedures or procedures for the award of concessions in the European Union, or may subject tenders made up of goods or services originating in that country to a mandatory price penalty. To avoid circumvention of these measures, it may also be necessary to exclude certain foreign-controlled or owned juridical persons established in the European Union, that are not engaged in substantive business operations such that it has a direct and effective link with the economy of a Member State concerned. Appropriate measures should not be disproportionate to the restrictive procurement practices to which they respond.
Amendment 44 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to reflect in the legal order of the European Union the international market access commitments undertaken in the field of public procurement and concessions after the adoption of this Regulation, the Commission should be empowered to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union amendments to the list of international agreements annexed to this Regulation. It is of particular importance that the Commission should carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 45 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) In accordance with the principle of proportionality, it is necessary and appropriate for achievement of the basic objective of establishing a common external policy in the field of public procurement and concessions to lay down rules on the treatment of goods and services not covered by the international commitments of the European Union. This Regulation on the access of third-country economic operators, goods and services does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objectives pursued, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union,
Amendment 46 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down rules on the access of third-country goods and services to the award of contracts and concessions for the execution of works or a work, the supply of goods and the provision of services, depending on the kind of contract in question, by Union contracting authorities/entities, and establishes procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union goods and services to the public procurement markets and the concessions of third countries.
Amendment 49 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
This Regulation shall apply to the award of contracts where the goods or services are procured for governmental purposes and to the award of concessions for services provided for governmental purposes and not with a view to commercial resale or with a view to use in the production of goods or in the provision of services for commercial sale.
Amendment 50 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
(-a) 'economic operator' means any natural or legal person or public entity or group of such persons and/or entities, including temporary associations of undertakings, which offers the execution of works and/or a work, the supply of products or the provision of services on the market;
Amendment 52 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) ‘covered goods or services’ means a good or service originating in a country with which the Union has concluded an international agreement in the field of public procurement and concessions including market access commitments and in respect of which the relevant agreement applies. Annex I to this Regulation contains a list of relevant agreements; (This amendment applies to the whole of the legislative text (addition of the reference to concessions whenever public procurement is mentioned); adoption of the regulation will entail technical changes throughout the text).
Amendment 53 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) ‘lack of substantial reciprocity’ means the existence of restrictive measures in the field of procurement or the award of concessions resulting in serious and recurring discrimination against EU economic operators, goods and services. This lack of substantial reciprocity may result, for example, in: (a) a lack of international commitment on the part of the third country regarding procurement and concessions to ensure transparency and prohibit any kind of discrimination against EU economic operators, goods or services; (b) laws or regulations – whether or not concerning public procurement or concessions – adopted by the third country which lead, deliberately or otherwise, to a lack of transparency or to discrimination against EU economic operators, goods or services; (c) the adoption or implementation of discriminatory practices by public authorities or individual procuring entities in the third country aimed at EU economic operators, goods or services.
Amendment 61 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) a ‘mandatory price penalty’ shall refer to an obligation for contracting entities to increase, subject to certain exceptions, the price of services and/or goods originating in certain third countries that have been offered in contract award procedures or concession award procedures. (This amendment applies to the whole of the legislative text (addition of the reference to ‘concession award procedures’ whenever there is mention of ‘contract award procedures’, in the singular or the plural); adoption of the regulation will entail technical changes throughout the text).
Amendment 64 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
When awarding contracts for the execution of works and/or a work, the supply of goods or the provision of services, or when awarding concessions for the execution of work or the provision of services, contracting authorities/entities shall treat covered goods and services equally to goods and services originating in the European Union.
Amendment 80 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4 – point b
(b) a description of the object of the contract; or concession; (This amendment applies to the whole of the legislative text (addition of the term ‘concession’ to the term ‘contract’, in the singular or the plural); adoption of the regulation will entail technical changes throughout the text).
Amendment 90 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) where an agreement referred to in point (a) does not exist and the third country maintains restrictive procurement or concession award measures leading to a lack of substantial reciprocity in market opening between the Union and the third country concerned. (This amendment applies to the whole of the legislative text (addition of ‘concession award’ whenever there is a reference to ‘procurement’); adoption of the regulation will entail technical changes throughout the text).
Amendment 93 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 97 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. When assessing whether a lack of substantial reciprocity as defined in Article 2(1)(ga) exists, the Commission shall examine the following:
Amendment 99 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) to what degree public procurement laws of the country concernedlaws or regulatory measures of the country concerned on public procurement or concessions ensure transparency in line with international standards in the field of public procurement and preclude any discrimination against Union goods, services and economic operators;
Amendment 100 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point a a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point a a (new)
(aa) to what degree the laws or regulatory measures of the country concerned, other than those referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, lead, deliberately or otherwise, to a lack of transparency or to discrimination against EU economic operators, goods and services;
Amendment 126 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Amendment 50 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Member States have been confronted to a steady rise in pharmaceutical expenditure over the last decades, leading to the adoption of increasingly innovative and complex policies to manage the consumption of medicines in the framework of their public health insurance systems. In particular, Member States’ authorities have implemented a broad range of measures to control the prescription of medicines, to regulate their prices or to establish the conditions of their public funding. Such measures mainly aim at promoting public health by ensuring the availability of adequate supplies of medicinal products at reasonable costs, while ensuring the financial stability of public health insurance systems. These measures should also aim to promote research and development of new medicinal products and to recognise medical innovation.
Amendment 70 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The quality, safety and efficacy of medicinal products, including the bioequivalence of generic medicinal products with the reference product, are ascertained in the framework of marketing authorisation procedures. In the framework of pricing and reimbursement procedures, Member States should therefore not re- assess the elements on which the marketing authorisation is based, including the quality, safety, efficacy or bioequivalence of the medicinal product. Similarly, in the case of orphan drugs, Member states shall not re-assess the criteria of the orphan designation.
Amendment 85 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. This Directive may not call into question granted as per the procedure referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2001/83/EC.
Amendment 105 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that a decision on the price which may be charged for the medicinal product concerned is adopted and communicated to the applicant within 690 days of the receipt of an application submitted, in accordance with the requirements laid down in the Member State concerned, by the holder of a marketing authorisation. However, with respect to medicines for which Member States use health technology assessment as part of their decision-making process, the time-limit shall be 90 days. With respect to generic medicinal products, that time limit shall be 145 days, provided that the price of the reference medicinal product has been approved by the competent authorities. Member States shall consider basing their decision on the price which may be charged for a medicinal produce on a health technology assessment.
Amendment 116 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. If the information supporting the application is inadequate, the competent authorities shall forthwith notify the applicant of thewhat detailed additional information is required and take their final decision within 690 days of receipt of this additional information. However, with respect to medicines for which Member States use health technology assessment as part of their decision-making process, the time-limit shall be 90 days. With respect to generic medicinal products, that time limit shall be in all events 145 days, provided that the price of the reference medicinal product has been approved by the competent authorities. Member States shall not request any additional information which is not explicitly required under national legislation or administrative guidelines.
Amendment 134 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that a decision on an application submitted in accordance with the requirements laid down in the Member State concerned, by a marketing authorisation holder to increase the price of a medicinal product is adopted and communicated to the applicant within 690 days of its receipt.
Amendment 140 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
In case of an exceptional number of applications, the time limit set out in this paragraph may be extended once only for a further 690 days. The applicant shall be notified of such an extension before the expiry of the time limit set out in this paragraph.
Amendment 149 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The applicant shall furnish the competent authorities with adequate information, including details of those events intervening since the price of the medicinal product was last determined which in his opinion justify the price increase requested. If the information supporting the application is inadequate, the competent authorities shall forthwith notify the applicant of thewhat detailed additional information is required and take their final decision within 690 days of receipt of this additional information. Member States shall not request any additional information which is not explicitly required under national legislation or administrative guidelines.
Amendment 163 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that a reasoned decision on an application referred to in paragraph 2 is adopted and communicated to the applicant within 690 days of the receipt of the application. If the information supporting the application is inadequate, the competent authorities shall forthwith notify the applicant of thewhat detailed additional information is required and take their final decision within 690 days of receipt of this additional information. If the derogation is granted, the competent authorities shall forthwith publish an announcement of the price increase allowed.
Amendment 170 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
If there isn case of an exceptional number of applications, the relevant time limit set out in this paragraph 3 may be extended once only for a further 690 days. The applicant shall be notified of such extension before the expiry of the time limit set out in paragraph 3.
Amendment 191 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that a decision on an application to include a medicinal product in the scope of the public health insurance system, submitted by the marketing authorisation holder in accordance with the requirements laid down in the Member State concerned, is adopted and communicated to the applicant within 690 days of its receipt. However, with respect to medicines for which Member States use health technology assessment as part of their decision- making process, the time-limit shall be 90 days. With respect to generic medicinal products, that time limit shall be 145 days, provided that the reference medicinal product has already been included in the public health insurance system. Member States shall consider basing their decision on an application to include a medicinal product in the scope of the national health insurance system on a health technology assessment.
Amendment 199 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. If the information supporting the application is inadequate, the competent authorities shall forthwith notify the applicant of thewhat detailed additional information is required and take their final decision within 690 days of receipt of this additional information. However, with respect to medicines for which Member States use health technology assessment as part of their decision-making process, the time-limit shall be 90 days. With respect to generic medicinal products, that time limit shall be 145 days, provided that the reference medicinal product has already been included in the public health insurance system. Member States shall not request any additional information which is not explicitly required under national legislation or administrative guidelines.
Amendment 208 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. Irrespective of the organisation of their internal procedures, Member States shall ensure that the overall period of time taken by the inclusion procedure set out in paragraph 5 of this Article and the price approval procedure set out in Article 3 does not exceed 120 days. However, with respect to the medicinal products for which Member States use health technology assessment as part of their decision-making process, the time limit shall not exceed 180 days. With respect to generic medicinal products, that time limit shall not exceed 390 days, provided that the reference medicinal product has already been included in the public health insurance system. Those time-limits may be extended in accordance with paragraph 5 of this Article or Article 3(5).
Amendment 238 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If a decision-making process involving negotiations between the requesting laboratory and the competent authority is required, the time limits laid down in Articles 3, 4, 5 and 7 shall be suspended until the competent authority has received the requesting laboratory’s response to its proposals.
Amendment 245 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13
Article 13
In the framework of pricing and reimbursement decisions, Member States shall not re-assess the elements on which the marketing authorisation is based, including the quality, safety, efficacy or bioequivalence of the medicinal product or the criteria for orphan designation.
Amendment 258 #
2012/0035(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15
Article 15
Where a Member State intends to adopt or amendrecast substantively any measure falling within the scope of this Directive, it shall give interested parties the opportunity to comment on the draft measure within a reasonable period. The competent authorities shall publish the rules applicable to consultations. The results of consultations shall be made publicly available, with the exception of confidential information in accordance with Union and national legislation regarding business confidentiality.
Amendment 135 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) A personal data breach may, if not addressed in an adequate and timely manner, result in substantial economic loss and social harm, including identity fraud, to the individual concerned. Therefore, as soon as the controller becomes aware that such a breach which may significantly adversely affect the protection of the personal data or the privacy of the data subject concerned has occurred, the controller should notify the breach to the supervisory authority without undue delay and, where feasible, within 24 hours. Where this cannot achieved within 24 hours, an explanation of the reasons for the delay should accompany the notification. The individuals whose personal data could be adversely affected by the breach should be notified without undue delay in order to allow them to take the necessary precautions. A breach should be considered as significantly adversely affecting the personal data or privacy of a data subject where it could result in, for example, identity theft or fraud, physical harm, significant humiliation or damage to reputation. The notification should describe the nature of the personal data breach as well as recommendations as well as recommendations for the individual concerned to mitigate potential adverse effects. Notifications to data subjects should be made as soon as reasonably feasible, and in close cooperation with the supervisory authority and respecting guidance provided by it or other relevant authorities (e.g. law enforcement authorities). For example, the chance for data subjects to mitigate an immediate risk of harm would call for a prompt notification of data subjects whereas the need to implement appropriate measures against continuing or similar data breaches may justify a longer delay.
Amendment 149 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
da) which have been rendered anonymous within the meaning of Article 4(2a);
Amendment 159 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) 'data subject' means an identified natural person or a natural person who can be identified, directly or indirectly, by means reasonably likely to be used by the controller or by any other natural or legal person, in particular by reference to an identification number, location data, onliner an identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that person;
Amendment 167 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
(2a) ‘data rendered anonymous’ means data relating to an identified natural person or a natural person who can be identified and which have been modified in such a way that this data subject cannot be identified;
Amendment 359 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. IWhen the casepersonal data breach is likely to have a serious adverse effect on the protection of athe personal data breachor privacy of the data subject, the controller shall without undue delay and, where feasible, not later than 24 hours after having become aware of it, notify the personal data breach to the supervisory authority. The notification to the supervisory authority shall be accompanied by a reasoned justification in cases where it is not made within 24 hours.
Amendment 365 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. When the personal data breach is likely to have a serious adversely a effect on the protection of the personal data or privacy of the data subject, the controller shall, after the notification referred to in Article 31, communicate the personal data breach to the data subject without undue delay.
Amendment 664 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) which were collected prior to the entry into force of this Regulation, as referred to in Article 91;
Amendment 665 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)
(ab) which began prior to the entry into force of this Regulation, as referred to in Article 91;
Amendment 2975 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 81 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 81 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) reasons of public interest in the area of public health, such as protecting against serious cross-border threats to health or ensuring high standards of quality and safety, inter alia for medicinal products or medical devices, and if the processing is carried out by a person bound by a confidentiality obligation; or
Amendment 3061 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the information processed cannot be linked to an identified or identifiable person.
Amendment 3082 #
2012/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the data subject has given consent, subject to the conditions laid down in Article 7; or
Amendment 4 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
(A) Whereas promoting consumers' rights and their protection are core values for developing European Union policiesand reinforcing the Single Market, and for meeting the Europe 2020 goals;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
(C) Whereas vulnerable consumers arethe widely used concept of vulnerable consumers is based on the notion of vulnerability as endogenous, and targets a heterogeneous group comprised of persons who are considered as such because of their mental, physical or psychological disability, their age, their credulity or their education, or persons made vulnerable by their social anage or credulity; whereas the concept of vulnerable consumers should also include consumers in a situation of vulnerability, meaning consumers who are placed financial situation who require special protection a state of temporary powerlessness resulting from a gap between their individual state and characteristics on the one hand, a specific strategy on the part of the authorities,nd their external environment on the other hand, taking into account criteria such as education, social and financial situation, access to Internet, etc.;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the strategy for the rights of vulnerable consumers must focus on effectively protecting consumers and preventing vulnerabilityreinforcing their rights and ensuring that the latter are effectively safeguarded and enforced, as well as providing consumers with all necessary means to ensure that they can take the appropriate decisions and be assertive, irrespective of the instrument used;
Amendment 29 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Asks the Commission and encourages the Member States to maintain constant and close observation of social and consumer behaviour that may place certain groups or individuals in vulnerable situations in order to prevent such behaviour, and to put an end to vulnerability, when it occurs, through specific protection measures;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the European Commission and the Member States to collaborate on the adoption of a broad and coherent political and legislative strategy against vulnerability, taking into account the diversity and complexity of all situations involved;
Amendment 37 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the European Commission and the Council to consider the reinforcement of the rights of vulnerable consumers as a key priority in the framework of the ongoing review of the proposal for a Regulation on a consumer programme 2014-2020, and of the upcoming publication of the Consumer Agenda;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Calls on the European Commission to include the dimension of consumers' vulnerability in the work of the Consumer Scoreboard, for instance by breaking down data by age, education level, or socioeconomic factors to have a clearer overview of the needs of vulnerable consumers;
Amendment 40 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business- to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market focuses insufficiently on the problem of vulnerability, limiting itself to from the perspective of consumers' economic interest,
Amendment 45 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 46 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 52 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. RegretConsiders that the efforts of the European Commission are centred principally on promoting consumer empowerment; although the Commission's concern that European consumers be better informed about their options and their rights is laudable, and all action in this regard contributereinforcement of vulnerable consumers' rights does not only entail a development in the legal corpus and effective enforcement of their rights, but also a strengthening of their capacity to take optimum decisions by themselves; strongly supports therefore the European Commission's efforts to a promorte efficient internal market, this focus is clearly insufficient to protect vulnerable consumers, who require specific attenconsumer empowerment through the provision of easily accessible and understandable information, and consumer education;
Amendment 62 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls therefore on the European Commission and the Member States to further promote and develop existing initiatives (such as Dolceta, ECC-Net, etc.) while ensuring consistency between the latter to improve consumers' information and education;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that, in the case of contractual relations, the consumer frequently is the weaker party in such relations; when said party to said contracts is in a vulnerable situation, providers must be involved in the protection of said party, and the authorities and administrations mustCalls on businesses to promote and develop self-regulatory initiatives to reinforce the protection of vulnerable consumers' rights and ensure better information and understanding of the latter; calls on competent national authorities to provide incentives to such involvementin this regard;
Amendment 77 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Asks the European Commission and the Member States to ensure that the regulation of safety standards and conditions for certain products, especialffectively thosake intended for use by consumers in vulnerable situations, consider not only the foreseen use but also the foreseeable use, and that quality requirements and protection measures be emphasisedo account the need to ensure adequate protection of vulnerable consumers;
Amendment 97 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Deplores that advertising for food with high fat, salt and sugar content is aimed at children and young people, who increasingly sufferUnderlines that children and young people, who increasingly suffer the consequences of sedentariness and obesity, are more sensitive to advertising for food with high fat, salt and sugar content; welcomes self-regulatory initiatives launched by businesses to limit children and young people's exposure to food advertising (such as the consequences of sedentariness and obesity; calls on the actors involved to educate and inform minorses launched in the framework of the European Commission's Platform for Action on Diet, Physical Activity and Health), and calls on all stakeholders to effectively educate and inform children and young people about the importance of a balanced diet;
Amendment 108 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Voices its concern about the impact on vulnerable consumers of the routine use of online behavioural advertising and the development of intrusive online advertising practices, especially through the use of social networks; calls again the European Commission to conduct a detailed analysis of the impact of misleading and aggressive advertising on vulnerable consumers, in particular children and adolescents, by the end of 2012;
Amendment 113 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that in spite of the existence of legislation on the subject, the lack of enforcement of said legislation means that travellers often find themselves in vulnerable situations, especially in case of cancellation or delay of their trip, which is exacerbated when the consumer suffers from a disability; encouragescalls on the European Commission and the Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure better information regarding passengers' rights and transparency in fares;
Amendment 119 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Deplores that the digitalisation of services and the added cost that the management thereof poses for brick-and- mortar offices and stores may mean that senior consumers, who are the ones primarily affected by the digital dividInsists on the necessity to ensure that all consumers benefit from e-commerce, cannotd to take advantage of the benefits of online commerce and are also impacted by the ‘poverty premium’, paying more for the same productsinto account especially the needs of vulnerable consumers in all measures intended to close the digital divide;
Amendment 127 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that the liberalisation of the main supply markets, i can gbeneral, has not resulted in a general lowering offit consumers if the latter are properly informed, able to compare prices, and chas in fact resulted in added difficulty for the majority of citizens in knowing the best price, changing providers and understandnge providers; calls on the European Commission, the Member States and businesses to ensure better transparency ing the items billeis regard;
Amendment 136 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. CallInsists on the European Commission and the Member States to consider establishing free-of-charge mechanisms for alternative dispute resolution that can be activated automatically when aneed to ensure that the proposal for a Directive on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and the proposal for a Regulation on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes currently under review must enable vulnerable consumers to have effective access to free of charge alternative dispute resolution; calls on the European Commission to think about appropriate mechanisms to ensure that vulnerable consumer is involvs' need,s asre well as for collective actionstaken into account in the framework of the potential setting up of a collective redress scheme at EU level;
Amendment 141 #
2011/2272(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 4 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
- having regard to the Oviedo Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, and the additional protocol thereto on transplantation of organs and tissues of human origin,
Amendment 7 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas public awareness and opinthe dissemination of clear, fair, scientifically based and conclusive medical information play a very important role in gaining public support and increasing tissues and cells donation rates;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas the removal of tissues and cells for the benefit of recipients may only be carried out under two conditions: it must be done with a medical or scientific and therapeutic aim, and all the elements removed must be donated without any payment being made;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas the removal of tissue and cells must be subject to the following principles: anonymity (except in the case of removal from a living person for a relative), non-remuneration, consent, the obligation to share organs for transplant fairly among patients, and health safety for donors and recipients;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas a healthcare intervention may only be carried out after the person concernedtissues and cells may only be removed if the donor has given prior free and informed consent to iin writing to it; whereas this consent may be withdrawn at any time, and with no particular requirement as to format;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the use of tissues and cells for application in the human body carries a risk of disease transmission and other potential adverse effects inof disease to recipients. That risk can be reduced by careful donor selection, testan evaluation of potential donors prior to procurement based on a risk/benefit analysis, testing and monitoring of each donation and the application of procedures to procure tissues and cells in accordance with rules and processes established and updated according to the best available scientific advice;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Amendment 28 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that donation should be voluntary and unpaid, and take place in clearly defined legal and ethical contextsmay only be carried out for medical or scientific and therapeutic purposes; that it is voluntary, anonymous (except in the case of procurement from a living person for a relative) and unpaid, and must be governed by protective legal and ethical rules which respect the integrity of the human person and are clearly defined;
Amendment 30 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Endorses measures aimed at protectingCalls on Member States to adopt protective measures for living donors and ensuringto guarantee that donation is made altruistically and voluntarily and considers the principle of altruism to be of fundamental importance, not merely because of the beneficial effect on the quality and safety of the donated cells and tissues, but also because it implies solidarity with the plight of othersanonymous (except in the case of procurement from a living person for a relative), voluntary, freely agreed to, informed and not remunerated;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Points out that no payment, irrespective of the form it takes, may be given to a person who agrees to the removal of parts of his body or the collection of its products, and that the costs relating to such removal or collection are the sole responsibility of the health establishment responsible for conducting the removal or collection;
Amendment 36 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on Member States to define the conditions under which financialair and proportionate compensation may be granted, bearing in mind that compensation is strictly limited to conditions making good the expenses incurred in donating an organ, such as travel expenses, loss of earnings or medical costs, and thereby prohibiting any financial incentives or disadvantages for a potential donor;
Amendment 42 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 44 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on Member States to ensure that living donors are selected on the basis of an evaluation of their health and medical history, including a psychological evaluation if deemed necessary, based on a risk-benefit analysis, by qualified orand trained and competent professionals;
Amendment 45 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on Member States to take measures to protect minors and adults under guardianship with regard to the removal of tissues and cells;
Amendment 46 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Amendment 47 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the principles of transparency isand safety are key to achieving a high level of public support for donation; encourages Member States to work towards creating a transparent donation system which upholds patient safety and increases traceability, which is particularly important when considering the donation of gameteis safe for donors and recipients;
Amendment 49 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls, in this light, on Member States to step up their public information and awareness-raising campaigns to promote the donation of tissues and cells and to ensure the provision of adequatemedical information and data in order tothat is clear, fair, scientifically based and conclusive and data enableing the public to make informed choices;
Amendment 54 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the legal and ethical problems posed by the existence of websites permitting people to sell or purchase gametes online; calls on Member States to consider regulating this area to prevent the possible emergence of such an online black market;
Amendment 56 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on Member States to make a concerted effort to participate in thestep up exchanges of bestgood practices in, particularly with regards to dealing with shortages in the supply of tissues and cells and on how to bestthe supply of tissues and cells, the protection of the quality of tissues and cells while they are being transported, raiseing awareness of donating tissues and cellsand training health staff;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recognises the significant scientific advances made in the cord blood field and the potential uses of cord blood to treat, which is a very promising therapeutic alternative in the treatment of many diseases, including children’s illnesses;
Amendment 67 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Underlines the importance of mothers donating cord blood and tissue at birth either into public or private non-profit- making banks to help treat illnesses and further research in the field;
Amendment 70 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Points out that this donation must be subject to consent from the mother that is free, informed and given in writing, and that this consent may be withdrawn at any time prior to the donation, with no particular requirement as to format;
Amendment 74 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on Member States to raise awareness of public and privatethe existence and value of public and private non-profit-making cord blood banking through information campaigns that may take place, for example, during antenatal classes;
Amendment 83 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Proposes that Member States consider adopting and enforcing common operational and ethical standards for both public and private non-profit-making cord blood banks, such as those proposed by non-profit organisations such as the International Netcord Foundation and the Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (FACT);
Amendment 86 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Calls on Member States to provide a territorial network of maternity centres authorised to carry out this procurement to guarantee cord blood supply in all population centres;
Amendment 89 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 f (new)
Paragraph 17 f (new)
17f. Highlights the legal and ethical questions raised by the autologous use of cord blood cells, namely the storage by banks of cord blood cells from newborn babies in exchange for payment, with a view to later therapeutic use on the child in the event of an illness; calls, therefore, for a ban on all autologous donation;
Amendment 91 #
2011/2193(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Encourages public and privMember States’ cord blood banks to collaborate more closely in order to increase the availability of and exchange of national, European and international cord blood and tissue samples;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2181(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Firmly emphasises that corporate management and remuneration policies must be sound and responsible and comply with the principles of wage parity and equal treatment of women and men, in accordance with the EU provisions in force; calls on the Commission to bring forward measures to ensure a more balanced representation of women on boards of directors, with the aim of achieving at least 40% representation of each gender by 2020;
Amendment 11 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need to facilitate mobility within the single market and to cut red tape for citizens in their everyday life; underlines the fact that access to online procedures and information could reduce bureaucracy and costs, increase government efficiency and considerably improve people’s relations with all levels of administration, as well as business environment in the EU;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Insists on the fact that the promotion of eGovernment and the development of secured e-services for SMEs must be considered as one of the key priorities in the establishment of a competitive digital single market, in accordance with the Small Business Act and the "Think Small First" principle;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continuously inform citizens about the existing EU portals such as SOLVIT and Your Europe as the current lack of information delays further development of business environment and consumer protection, especially in the cross-border area;
Amendment 16 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Insists on the need to further develop secure and effective e-services such as electronic identification and authentification and e-business applications such as electronic invoicing within the Single Market; welcomes therefore the Commission’s initiative on ensuring the mutual recognition of e- authentification and e-identification across the EU and the revision of the Directive on Electronic Signatures in accordance with the Commission’s Communication on the Single Market Act; calls on the Commission to come forward with a proposal for harmonising e-invoicing in the European Union;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2178(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regrets that the Commission’s action plan does not give more attention to fields such as the contribution of administrations to fostering public debate; points out the need to improve public participation in the political process; underline the importance of supporting every kind of policy aimed at enhancing basic ICT literacy; insists on the need to provide adequate and clear information on e-services to both citizens and businesses;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
9 Ca. Whereas groups of people who are particularly vulnerable because of their mental, physical or psychological infirmity, age of credulity - such as children, teenagers, the elderly - or made vulnerable by their social and financial situation (such as those with excessive debts) - need special protection;
Amendment 24 #
2011/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the internal market must not be allowEU needs to grow at the expense of the conditions for the working population, and the EU needs to ensure that labour rights always take priority overuarantee adequate protection of labour rights while ensuring the free movement of services within the Internal Market,
Amendment 48 #
2011/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the numerous challenges facing the Consumer Agenda: making sure private consumption becomes more sustainable, reducing, including the reduction of levels of inequality between consumers, reducempowering consumers', exposure to hazardous chemicals and products and protecting children from advertisingncouraging sustainable consumption, and ensuring the effective enforcement of consumers' rights;
Amendment 54 #
2011/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Calls on the Commission to ensure special protection for groups of consumers who are particularly vulnerable because of their mental, physical or psychological infirmity, age or credulity, or made vulnerable by their social and financial situation;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need to ensure a more consumer-oriented balanceat consumers must be properly informed and made aware of the rights and obligations when it comes to iInternet use and the protection of intellectual property rights;
Amendment 103 #
2011/2149(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 1 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that top priority must be given to a preventive approach when promoting health and safety at work and that this approach must be firmly rooted both in the EU strategy and in the national strategies, when promoting health and safety at work, the EU and the Member States must give priority to a preventive approach and enable all workers fully to reconcile work and private life;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the EU and the Member States to develop a European programme for the monitoring of occupational hazards (in particular musculoskeletal and psychosocial problems), based on health indicators, definitions and epidemiological tools common to the 27 Member States; stresses the need for an integrated approach to monitoring, taking into account both the career paths of current employees and the state of health of those who have retired;
Amendment 5 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Reminds that the workplace is to be considered as a privileged platform to support the EU and Member States' prevention strategies, addressing both communicable or non-communicable diseases, and that employers, workers organisation and other social partners have a great role to play in promoting healthy lifestyles and health literacy among the working population
Amendment 7 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that work-related accidents are more frequent amongst certain categories of workers than others – e.g. young, older and migrant workers, and those with precarious jobs (including fixed-term contracts and temporary or part-time jobs) – are more frequently exposed to occupational hazards; calls therefore on the Commission and Member States to adopt more specific preventive measures for these target groups;
Amendment 14 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points out that the main aims of the Community strategy for 2007-2012 include both guaranteeing the proper implementation of EU legislation and improving and simplifying existing legislation, inter alia through the implementation of non-binding instruments; also notes that, under Article 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the EU enjoys only shared competence with the Member States in the fields of employment and public health, and that in its 2007 communication the Commission emphasises the development and implementation of national strategies; stresses, therefore, the need to adapt EU legislation to social changes in a coherent manner and to avoid legislating unnecessarily at EU level;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the framework directive on health and safety at work ( 89/391/EEC) is already over 20 years old but has yet to see any substantial amendments, so itand therefore needs to be adapted to the new challenges posed by the changes in the working environment and developments in healthcare management, such as the increase in mental health problems; and musculoskeletal disorders, in order to focus on targeted employment policies supporting employee's workability, health and well-being
Amendment 19 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the framework directive on health and safety at work (89/391/EEC) is already over 20 years old but has yet to see any substantial amendments, so it needs to be adapted to the new challenges posed by changes in the working environment, such as the increase in mental health problemnew occupational hazards, such as musculoskeletal problems, mental health problems and other psychosocial hazards;
Amendment 29 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets that the European framework agreement on harassment and violence at work (2007) is not binding and for this reason calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a directive on the prevention of violence at worke fact that there is no single common definition of moral harassment at the European level; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop effective national strategies for combating violence at work which are based on a definition of moral harassment common to the 27 Member States;
Amendment 33 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the incidence of physicalmen and womental stress factors differs between men and women and these factors result in different pressures, complaints and work-related illnesse are affected to differing degrees by occupational hazards, be these psychosocial or physical (including musculoskeletal problems); also points out that precarious employment contracts, in particular temporary or part-time jobs, may be linked to increased physical and psychosocial occupational hazards; for this reason, urges the Member States to mainstream gender aspectstake account, in their national strategies, of the gender dimension and the hazards associated with different types of employment contract;
Amendment 37 #
2011/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Points out that in its 2007 communication the Commission stated that one of its aims was to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the implementation of EU legislation and of their risk prevention policies; stresses, therefore, the need to support European SMEs and protect them from any unwarranted or inappropriate penalties, especially during the current recession;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the Commission’s intention to encourage the use of alternative means of dispute resolution that are accessible, swift, effective and cheap and apt to enable the establishment of quality and trust-based commercial relations;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Agrees with the Commission that appropriate access to reparation in the internal market requires both the possibility of easy recourse to ADR and the existence of an effective system for collective claims, the twoboth of them being complementary and not mutually exclusive; insists on the fact that collective redress must be considered as a last resort instrument and that the use of ADR mechanisms must be strongly encouraged to settle a dispute;
Amendment 30 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. PointsStresses that one of the main obstacles to the use of ADR mechanisms in the EU is the lack of even development of such systems throughout the EU, both in geographical and in sectoral terms; points, therefore, to the importance of rectifying any existing shortcomings with regard to the geographical coverage of ADR in Europe; deplores the major sectoral deficiencies that persist in most Member States, when sector-by-sector coverage would enable the involvement of people who understand the way in which a given sector works;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Proposes that the Commission’s proposal on the use of ADR should include a single European charter be drawn up containing the guidelines to be followed in relation to ADR systems established in Europe, these being the following:
Amendment 73 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that it is crucial to raise consumer awareness of the existence of ADR prior to the initiation of a consumer dispute; insists on the necessity to reinforce the sense of responsibility of businesses and business organisations in this regard; considers that businesses and businesses federations have a duty to inform consumers on available ADR mechanisms; proposes that this ‘upstream’ information should include a reference in all contractual documents drawn up by professionals to the possibility of recourse to ADR, along with contact details and referral procedures for the relevant ADR systems;
Amendment 74 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that it is crucial to raise consumer awareness of the existence and benefits of ADR prior to the initiation of a consumer dispute; proposes that this ‘upstream’ information should include a reference in all contractual documents drawn up by professionals to the possibility of recourse to ADR, along with contact details and referral procedures for the relevant ADR systems;
Amendment 78 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. PAcknowledges that one of the main obstacles to the use of ADR systems is the reluctance of businesses to engage in such mechanisms; proposes that chambers of commerce and other professional bodies be required to inform enterprises of the existence of ADR and of the potential benefits of its use, not least in terms of: pre-empting lawsuits; corporate image; and, lastly, the possibilities offered by ADR, unlike an arbitration or court ruling, for the re-establishment of trust-based commercial relations between the parties;
Amendment 82 #
2011/2117(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recommends, as a potential incentive for enterprises, that a quality label for mediation be introduced in relation to mediation in consumer disputes, which would be associated with guidelines recognising best practices; stresses that the Commission should ensure that the label is properly used and enforced.
Amendment 1 #
2011/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission and the Council to continue implementation of the European external market access strategy with a view to removing non-tariff trade barriers; calls on the Commission to maintain a strong stance in defending European interests against unfair trade in application of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements, and in removing all obstacles to trade, including when justified through the suspension of concessions or other obligations as provided by article 22.2 of the World Trade Organization's Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the proposal contained in the Single Market Act aiming to promote regulatory convergence and the wider adoption of EU and international standards, especially in order to avoid social and environmental dumping; hopes that the structured regulatory dialogues established in this field with some of its partners will produce practical results as regards the mutual recognition, convergence and development of rules and standards;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that the public procurement procedures of our principal partners are not as open as those of the European Union; strongly supports the Commission's work to revise EU legislation on public procurement, in particular as specified in the Communication on the Single Market Act of 13 April 2011 the introduction of legislation clarifying the provisions on access by third-country businesses to European public procurement procedures, both to ensure that, on the basis of the principle of reciprocity, the conditions governing these procedures are fair, and to strengthen the EU's position when negotiating access for European businesses to third-country public procurement procedures; calls on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal by the end of 2011 at the latest;
Amendment 2 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas consumers affected by a legal infringement that wish to pursue a court case in order to obtain redress on an individual basis often face significant barriers in terms of accessibility, effectiveness and affordability due to sometimes high litigation costs, potential psychological costs, complex and lengthy procedures, and lack of information on the available means of redress,
Amendment 4 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas individual lawsuits are often notmay not constitute an effective means to stop unlawful practices or to obtain compensation, as consumers are reluctant to initiate private lawsuits, in particular if the individual loss is small in comparison to the costs,
Amendment 8 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas, according to the Special Eurobarometer survey on Access to Justice in the EU-15 of October 2004, one out of five consumers, and one out of two consumers, will not go to court for disputes amounting to less than 1000 euros and 200 euros respectively,
Amendment 10 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, according to the Flash Eurobarometer on 'Consumer attitudes towards cross-border trade and consumer protection' of March 2011, 79 % of European consumers state that they would be more willing to defend their rights in court if they could join a collective action,
Amendment 18 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. Whereas sixteen Member States have so far introduced collective redress mechanisms in their legal system, with wide differences in terms of scope, procedural characteristics (legal standing, categories of victims, type of procedure (opt-in/opt-out), financing or role played by alternative dispute resolution mechanisms in parallel to judicial redress) and effectiveness, creating a true legal patchwork at EU level,
Amendment 21 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the integration of European markets and the consequent increase in cross-border activities highlight the need for a coherent EU-wide approach to address the numerous mass detriment cases where consumers are left empty handed as the procedures for the collective claim of compensatory relief which have been introduced in a number of Member States do not provide for cross- border solutions,
Amendment 27 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that, as a consequence of the weaknesses of the current redress and enforcement framework in the EU, a significant the existing legal framework at EU level to put an end to infringements and encourage cooperation between competent national authorities suffers from several shortcomings; calls on the Commission to further reinforce and increase the effectiveness of Directive 98/27/EC on injunctions for the proportection of consumers and SMEs who have suffered damage do not obtain redress, and continued illegal practices cause significant aggregate loss to society' interests and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws, in order to ensure appropriate public enforcement of consumers' rights in the EU; insists nonetheless on the fact that neither Directive 98/27/EC nor Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 allow for consumers to be compensated for the damage suffered;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that, given the diversity of existing national systems, the lack of a consistelegal certainty approach to collective redress at EU levelnd coherence throughout the EU may undermine the enjoyment of rights by both citizens and businesses, and gives rise to uneven enforcement of such rights;
Amendment 38 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that this situation leads to a significant discrimination in access to justice to the detriment of the internal market as consumers and businesses are being treated differently according to their place of residence;
Amendment 41 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes that, according to a study carried out for DG SANCO by Civil Consulting in 2008 ('Evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of collective redress mechanisms in the EU'), none of the existing collective redress mechanisms within the EU have generated disproportionate economic consequences on the businesses concerned;
Amendment 42 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Amendment 47 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that numerous previous consultations have allowedInsists on the added value of an EU action for the identification of the relevant gaps in the existing regulatory framework, thus providing adequate evidence of the need for an EU action in the field of collective redress to remedy the current shortcomingsfinition of a common framework in the field of collective redress given the shortcomings and lack of effectiveness of existing EU legal instruments, the diversity of situations at national level, and the risk of abuses entailed by the potential evolution and reforms of existing national collective redress systems and/or the introduction of collective redress systems in Member States where such instruments do not yet exist;
Amendment 51 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls therefore on the Commission to submit a proposal, including possibly a legislative initiative, establishing a set of common principles and safeguards for a collective redress mechanism applicable to both national and cross-border cases, while taking due account of the EU legal tradition and the legal orders of the 27 Member States, and in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality provided for in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises that early settlement of disputes should be encouraged where possible, and court litigation should be viewed as the last resortthe use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (ADR) must be strongly encouraged and that court litigation must be viewed as the last resort; underlines that ADR mechanisms and collective redress are complementary and not mutually exclusive, and that the introduction of collective redress will most probably boost the effectiveness of ADR schemes by acting as a "judicial threat" ;
Amendment 71 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that a European approach to collective redress shouldmust not give any economic incentive to bring abusive collective actions, and should provide for strong and effective safeguards to avoid unmeritorious claims and disproportionate costs for businesses, particularly in this period of financial crisis;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that an effective collective redress system should be capable of delivering legally certain, fair and adequate outcomes within a reasonable timeframe, while respecting the rights of all parties involved; considers that the EU approach to collective redress should include the possibility to appeal the Court's decision within a specific timeframe;
Amendment 76 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that features which encourage a litigation culture such as punitive damages, contingency fees, the absence of limitations as regards standing, and excessive damagesird- party financing, the lack of control over representative entities standing in court, the opt-out principle, the possibility for lawyers to canvass potential victims, and the discovery procedure for bringing evidence to court are not compatible with the European legal tradition and should be avoidmust be rejected;
Amendment 78 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses that, in order to ensure the efficiency of the system and to avoid potential abuses, the EU approach to collective redress should only include representative action by entities duly recognised at national level (public authorities, such as the Ombudsmen or consumer organisations); calls on the Commission to define a common set of criteria that consumer organisations must fulfil in order to be able to stand in court to avoid forum-shopping; stresses that national competent authorities should be responsible for checking that consumer organisations comply with such criteria;
Amendment 79 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. Insists on the need to build the European approach to collective redress on the opt-in principle, whereby victims are clearly identified and take part in the procedure only if they expressly indicated their wish to do so, in order to avoid potential abuses;
Amendment 82 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. StressesInsists on the fact that, in the efficiency of collective redress requires a representative entity (e.g. Ombudsmen, consumer or trade associcase of cross-border disputes, the representative entity (public authority or authorised consumer organisations) toshould be able to stand forrepresent victims from other Member States, whereas ao joined the collective repdresentative entity could be also allowed to represent victims in judicial or out-of-court proceedingss procedure, and should likewise be able to stand for victims joining a collective redress procedure in another Member State;
Amendment 95 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the judgecourt should also determine howensure that the compensation is to be organisfairly distributed and check if funding arrangements are fair; stresses that court control mechanisms and proportionality requirements would protect defendants against abuse of the system;
Amendment 98 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Insists on the need to respect the loser pays principle according to which the losing party pays for the costs of the proceedings in order to avoid the proliferation of unmeritorious claims;
Amendment 99 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that the provision of information about collective actions plays a major role in the accessibility and the effectiveness of the procedure as consumers need to be aware that they have been the victims of the same illegal practice and that there is a collective action launched, including in another Member State; calls on Member States to put in place efficient mechanisms ensuring that a maximum of victims are informed and made aware of their rights and obligations, in particular when those are domiciled in several Member States;
Amendment 110 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Affirms that, in order to make collective actions practically possible, Member States should ensure that adequate funding mechanisms are made available; stresses that public authorities should refuse to allocate resources to unmeritorious claims; suggests to the Commission to work on the possibility of creating a fund financed by a certain percentage of the fines imposed by public authorities to sanction practices infringing upon EU competition law; proposes that such fund could then be used to finance collective redress procedures when the representative entity cannot afford to bring the case to court;
Amendment 112 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Considers that, in any event, compensations cannot be used to finance collective redress procedures since only the damage actually suffered by the claimants must be compensated;
Amendment 113 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Insists on the necessity to avoid third-party funding in order to prevent abuses and the creation of a "litigation market";
Amendment 116 #
2011/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 21 #
2011/2082(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that, as a result of the complexity of rules and administrative constraints, businesses often see the current VAT system as an obstacle to the completion of the internal market; notes that the current VAT arrangements for intra-EU trade tend to reflect negatively on SMEs; calls on the European Commission to give some thought to harmonising the rules on VAT bases and strengthening administrative cooperation among competent national authorities.
Amendment 46 #
2011/2082(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the European Commission to revise Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax in order to amend the arrangements for cultural goods and services distributed online by introducing a reduced rate of VAT, as is already the case for cultural goods provided in ‘paper version’, in order to promote the development of the booming digital sector;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that public procurement rules have become overly complex and too detailed, leading to costly and burdensome administrative procedures; recommends simplification as far as possible, with clarifications where necessary; points out that the increased use of information technology will also play a major role in reducing administration and costs, and that European initiatives on e-procurement should therefore be aligned with the reform of the procurement rules; stresses, in this context, the need of developing a standardised system for e-signature;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines that the introduction of new rules for public procurement markets below the EU thresholds should be avoided as it may jeopardize legal certainty established at national level;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines the need to ensure reciprocity and equal access to public procurement markets in the EU and in third countries in order to guarantee fair and effective competition;
Amendment 69 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Warmly welcomes therefore the Commission's intention, as specified in the Communication on the Single Market Act of 13 April 2011, to propose an EU legal instrument defining the terms for access of third-countries' businesses to EU public procurement markets to create an actual level-playing field; calls on the Commission to submit a proposal by the end of 2011 at the latest; underlines that this instrument should provide for appropriate solutions to the problems associated with extraordinary low bids, which distort procurement and penalise companies from EU Member States;
Amendment 80 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that, in order to develop the full potential of public procurement, the criterion of the lowest price should be removed, and that in principle there should be only one option for the award of contracts: the most economically advantageous tender – including the entire life-cycle costs of the relevant goods, services or works – should be chosentaken into account along with the criterion of the lowest price, and choice should be left to public authorities to decide which criterion should apply eventually;
Amendment 111 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that increased awareness of the environmental and climate impact of products and activities means that the possibility for public authorities to favour local suppliers should be considered, and the extent to which internal market rules allow this examinConsiders that enabling public authorities to favour local suppliers to take into account environmental concerns is not necessarily fair, and that including the entire life-cycle costs of the relevant goods, services or works should be privileged;
Amendment 125 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. ESupports the development of the 'how to buy' and 'what to buy' areas in the field of EU public procurement in order to integrate the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy especially in the social, environmental and innovation fields to further promote and support EU competitiveness; emphasises however that any extension of the EU procurement rules into the 'how to buy' and ‘what to buy’ areas would represent a significant change to the current regime which should be carefully assessed; doubts that this would contribute to simplifying and streamlining, but fears rather that it would lead to more complicated rules with many exemptions which would be difficult to administer in practice; underlines therefore that instruments allowing for flexibility and capacity to adapt to specific cases should be privileged;
Amendment 165 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. CriticiseRegrets the Green Paper's failure to mention the shortcomings, the lack of expertise and knowledge about procurement; stresses the importance of promoting professionalism on the part of both contracting authorities and market operators; recommends setting up a network of centres of excellence within the existing national frameworks to promote exchange of information and good practices between Member States; encourages also umbrella organisations, both at national and EU-level, to take shared responsibility in making relevant information available and to facilitate exchange of information between their members throughout Europe;
Amendment 181 #
2011/2048(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Encourages SMEs to make use of joint procurement and pooling of contracts, in respect of competition rules, which would allow them to make economies of scale in areas such as logistics and transport; encourages public authorities to be flexible when considering these modern and voluntary forms of arrangements;
Amendment 2 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, though the core principles of the 1995/46/EC Directive remain valid, globalisation and rapid technological developments have brought new challenges in terms of personal data protection as a result of enhanced online activity, including e-commerce, e-health, e- government, the increasing use of social networks, the development of online behavioural advertising, or cloud computing,
Amendment 5 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Amendment 11 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the data protection dimension of the internal market to be clarified and enhanced through uniformfull harmonisation of Member States'’ legislation andccording to the highest data protection standards in order to increased legal certainty, with excessive restrictions and further organisational costs being avoided, and administrative burdens reduced, especially for SMEsreduce administrative burden and costs, avoid the risk of "forum shopping" between more or less stringent Member States' national legislation, and ensure a level playing field for all economic operators and data controllers ;
Amendment 20 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises the need for a coherent application, comprehensive and effective enforcement of data protection rules, taking into account the impact of new technologies on individuals' rights, while ensuring free circulation of personal data to facilitate the smooth functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 27 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 35 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the need for awareness-raising and educational activities on data protection to ensure that the rules on consent are implemented in a uniform wacitizens are properly informed about their rights and obligations regarding the use of their personal data, the protection of their privacy, and the tools at their disposal to put an end to any situation undermining their privacy, especially in the online environmentsphere;
Amendment 41 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to clarify and harmonise rules on free and informed consent, especially in the online environment;
Amendment 42 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to clarify the rules related to applicable law in the field of personal data protection, as it has become increasingly difficult to determine interested parties' responsibilities given the globalisation of exchanges; underlines that it is necessary to ensure legal certainty for data controllers and avoid loopholes in the protection of personal data provided by Directive 95/46/EC;
Amendment 43 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Amendment 47 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for a revision and simplification of the current personal data breach notification system with a view to making data processing by all data controllers less cumbersome and expensive, and to put an end to diverging national requirements in this field;
Amendment 52 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Insists on the need to promote the use of Privacy Enhancing Technologies and to implement the principle of Privacy by Design to ensure that privacy issues are included in future technological developments;
Amendment 53 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Commission to propose a legislative framework for data protection issues related to cloud computing that would apply to all interested parties, including telecom operators and non telecom operators, while ensuring the development of cloud computing;
Amendment 65 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment of self-regulatory initiatives as tools for better enforcement of data protection rules.onsiders that the development and promotion of self-regulatory initiatives can improve the current framework for data protection, though they cannot in any case take the place of legislative measures, especially in terms of enforcement; calls on the Commission and the Member States to encourage such initiatives;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Supports the creation of an EU certification scheme for websites that comply with EU data protection legislation, modelled on the European Privacy Seal or EuroPriSe (a voluntary trans-European label certifying the compliance of IT-based products or services with EU data protection legislation) that would be applicable throughout all the EU and replace the diversity of existing private certification schemes and labels that are often only locally recognized; considers that this should include a thorough impact assessment prior to its adoption;
Amendment 72 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Supports the setting-up of common and clear criteria at EU level to carry out audits in the field of privacy and data protection;
Amendment 74 #
2011/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Calls on the Commission to maintain the current exemptions and derogations provided by Article 9 of Directive 95/46/EC from certain data protection rules for journalistic purposes to safeguard free and independent media in the EU, and for the purpose of artistic or literary expression to support creativity;
Amendment 27 #
2011/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Member States to carry out a comparison of minimum training requirements and organise more regular exchanges between themselves, and also between the competent authorities, with a view to bringing minimum training requirements more closely into line;
Amendment 51 #
2011/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Member States and the competent authorities, with the support of the Commission, to institute studies with a view to establishing a European Competences, Qualifications and Occupations taxonomy in order to ascertain whether formal qualifications, and occupations, correspond to the same skills and qualifications in the various Member States and to develop a European analytical tool;
Amendment 75 #
2011/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the call from stakeholders to place greater emphasis on continuous professional development (CPD) and on the need to assess it; calls for the Commission to clarify the definition of CPD and include provisions requiring professionals to demonstrate that their skills are up to date as part of the recognition process; encourages competent authorities to provide information on CPD during the recognition process and to exchange best practices in this area;
Amendment 107 #
2011/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that article 53 of Directive 2005/36/EC related to language requirements must be clarified, as there is ongoing controversy over the interpretation of this provision among the Commission, the ECJ, and the Member States; calls on the Commission and Member States to revise the language requirements regime for the healthcare professions by providing competent authorities with the necessary flexibility to ascertain and, if necessary, test the language skills of professionals as part of the recognition process(both informal and technical language) of professionals on a proportionate and non-discriminatory basis as part of the recognition process before granting access to the profession;
Amendment 124 #
2011/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 23 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Calls on the Commission to reflect on the setting-up of a 28th regime of educational training specifying the minimum requirements that would be applicable on top of national requirements for each profession concerned, in cooperation with Member States and interested stakeholders, in order to further facilitate professionals’ mobility across the EU;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Article 122 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 2 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
Citation 1 b (new)
- having regard to Article 222 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (the solidarity clause) which lays down that ‘the Union and the Member States shall act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is the object of a terrorist attack or victim of a natural or man-made disaster’,
Amendment 3 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 c (new)
Citation 1 c (new)
- having regard to Article 23 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 4 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 d (new)
Citation 1 d (new)
- having regard to the 1994 Oslo Guidelines on the use of foreign military and civil defence assets in disaster relief,
Amendment 7 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union and its Member States are faced with seven major risks: earthquakes and tsunamis; fires, including forest fires; flooding and landslides; industrial and nuclear accidents; terrorist attacks; natural disasters; and major pandemics; whereas there has been a dramatic increase in the number and severity of these natural and man-made disasters affecting the Union and its citizens, as well as other countries and regions around the world, as tragically demonstrated by the recent severe catastrophe in Japan which was hit by a combination of earthquake, tsunami and nuclear catastrophe, with a corresponding increase in the loss of life and in economic, social and environmental damage and damage to cultural heritage,
Amendment 11 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the recent tragedies, notably the Haiti earthquake and the Pakistan floods, have demonstrated that the main tools available to the EU for responding to disasters (humanitarian aid and the EU Civil Protection Mechanism) proved to be working well for what they were designed for and given the circumstances, but whereas there is scopea vital need for improvement in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, coherenceordination and visibility of the EU assistance as a whole,
Amendment 14 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas, moreover, during a number of crises, particularly the tsunami of 26 December 2004, many questions were raised about the lack of systematic scenarios or protocols at European level for responding to these seven major risks and the inadequate visibility of Europe's action in relation to the overall effort,
Amendment 21 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas immediate coordination, coherence and communication within the EU and with international actors is crucial, duplicating efforts and overlaps must be avoidedwhereas the current European coordination on the ground of several teams with differing chains of command inevitably leads to duplicating efforts and overlaps and proves costly in terms of human resources, coordination and efficiency; and twhe right type of aid must reach affected populations quicklyreas, given the context of the economic and financial crisis, the European Union must develop a protection system based on the sharing and rationalisation of existing resources without any increase in overall expenditure,
Amendment 28 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas an integrated European all- hazards approach aimed at responding to crises at all stages of their life cycle is the most effective strategy to deal with disasters; whereas this approach should linking disaster prevention (including mitigation and risk reduction), preparedness, response and recovery is the most effective strategy to deal with disasters,
Amendment 38 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the need to rationalise and simplify the functioning of the current European disaster response and to optimise resources available for common benefit, whilst encouraging all Member States to contribute and thus guarantee European solidarity; considers, accordingly, that the EU’s reaction capacity should form part of an integrated multi-risk approach based on ‘bottom-up’ delegated management, on the voluntary sector and on Member States’ specialisations in one or more risk areas;
Amendment 52 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Further calls for the EU’s disaster reaction capacity to make use of Europe’s outermost regions and overseas territories which can form bases for facilitating logistics operations and for pre- positioning its resources in every ocean;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Re-affirms theEmphasises that the European disaster response system should respect of the principle of double subsidiarity concerning the capability of the Member States to use their own assets, especially in any case of conflicting national needsvis-à-vis the Member States and the United Nations, i.e. that it should respect the national and regional competences of each Member State on the one hand, and the coordinating role played by the United Nations in disaster relief operations on the other; points out that this strategy should live up to the expectations of the United Nations, which see clear value added in creating a European pole with a response capability;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers advance planning and the preparation of operations by developing reference scenarios, mapping Member States’ assets potentially available for deployment in EU disaster relief operations and contingency planning as key elements of an enhanced EU disaster response and essential for rapid deployment and immediate appropriate response to each emergency; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement these measures immediately and without prejudice to other actions; calls, finally, on the Commission to launch a feasibility study on the merits of setting up, allocating European research budget funding to, and naming European reference laboratories to combat bioterrorism and identify victims;
Amendment 84 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Amendment 86 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. CallsAsks that the existing relief systems coordinated by the United Nations be taken into account, whilst calling for improved, strengthened, more cost- effective and well-coordinated transport for all in-kind assistance to disaster sites, in particular through streamlined simplified procedures, an increased co-financing rate and the introduction of new ways of allowing access to additional transport capacities, possibly through framework contracts; considers that the complementary use of military resources should be systematically envisaged and analysed in future scenarios and protocols;
Amendment 90 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for a comprehensive communications strategy, involving all EU institutions and Member States, that will improve the overall visibility of the European actions; in the eyes of European citizens and the rest of the world; considers that this strategy should seek to simplify and standardise communication methods and tools; proposes to this end the establishment, for example, of a standard dress code and logo for all European staff, and the appointment of a single spokesperson responsible for communications on the emergency response;
Amendment 92 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to develop a clear information and prevention system for all European citizens when they travel; proposes, to this end, that European passports bear the numbers of the crisis units in each of the Member States and a reference to Article 23 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which lays down that ‘every citizen of the Union shall, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which he is a national is not represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular authorities of any Member State (...)’.
Amendment 96 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls for efforts to communicate the pan-European emergency call number ‘112’ more effectively to European citizens and third-country nationals in the EU, particularly by making use of the written and audiovisual media and public notices, so that all citizens can use it automatically to report any disaster that occurs on the territory of the EU;
Amendment 97 #
2011/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for regular training for all experts involved to enhance the interoperability of different assets, as well as for further research and analysis of potential or identified gaponsiders that the dedicated training of European staff and experts in disaster response would make it possible, through ‘common core’ training and specialised modules, to develop awareness of common European working methods and response procedures;
Amendment 21 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the end product, a European Contract Law, must be properly thought through and subjected to an in-depth impact assessment prior to being amended, if necessary, and formally adopted by the European legislator if this process is to enjoy efficiency as well as political legitimacy and support,
Amendment 24 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the open debate on the Green Paper and urges the relevant Commission departments to carry out a thorough analysis of the outcome of this consultation process; calls on the European Commission to provide an in-depth impact assessment of all proposed options, taking into consideration especially an evaluation of the actual needs of the economic actors, the cost incurred as well as the added value of each option;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Highlights the economic importance of SMEs and craft manufacturing businesses in the European economy; insists, therefore, on the need to ensure that the 'think small first' principle promoted by the 'Small Business Act' is well implemented and considered as a priority in the debate over EU initiatives related to contract law;
Amendment 33 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the development of an optional European Clegal instrument of contract Llaw could do muchat EU level ("28th regime") could be considered in order to improve the functioning of the internal market, and that the European Parliament and the Council should have final responsibility for determining its legal form and scope; underlines however that such an option must be first carefully assessed in order to ensure that it will bring added value to both businesses and consumers, and to define and clarify the potential interactions with the existing EU legislation;
Amendment 42 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view that a European Cif such an optional legal instrument of contract Llaw is set up at EU level, it should constitutes an additional, alternative, separate system governing cross-border contracts, although the that consumers and businesses could choose instead of the applicable national legislation; Member States shcould be given the option of applying it to contracts concluded under their domestic law as well;
Amendment 46 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that a common European CConsiders that EU initiatives related to contract Llaw would makemust have a two-fold objective: efficiency of the internal market more efficient without affecting Member States' national systems of contract law, and a high level of consumer protection;
Amendment 87 #
2011/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that the supreme test of the effectiveness of any final instrument is the guarantee of the protection of consumers and the well-functioning of the internal market itself; invites the Commission to consider how best to encourage businessmen and consumers to make use of the new law voluntarily; emphasises the need to include rules on the provision of appropriate information concerning its existence and the way it works to all potential interested parties and stakeholders (including national courts).
Amendment 39 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In view of theThere has been a significant increase in the numbers and severity of natural and man-made disasters in recent years and in a situation where f. Future disasters are likely to be more extreme and more complex with far reaching and longer-term consequences, resulting, in particular, from climate change and potential interaction between several natural and technological hazards, an integrated approach to disaster management is increasingly important. There is, therefore, an urgent need to leave behind the system of ad hoc coordination and move towards an efficient European disaster management mechanism based on an integrated approach. The Union shouldmust support, coordinate and supplement actions of Member States in the field of civil protection with a view to improving the effectiveness of systems for preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters.
Amendment 41 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The protection to be ensured under the Union Civil Protection Mechanism should cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all natural and man-made disasters, including acts ofearthquakes and tsunamis, fires and forest fires, floods and landslides, terrorismt acts and technological, radiological and environmentindustrial and radiological accidents, marine pollution and acute health emergencies (pandemics), occurring inside or outside the Union. Civil protection and other emergency assistance may be required in all of these disasters to complement the response capabilities of the affected country.
Amendment 42 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Under Article 222 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European Union and its Member States are bound to act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is the object of a terrorist attack or victim of a natural or man-made disaster.
Amendment 48 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The Mechanism should include a general, integrated policy framework for Union disaster risk prevention actions aimed at achieving a high level of protection and resilience against, and response to, disasters by preventing or reducing their effects and by fostering a culture of prevention. Risk management plans are essential to ensure an integrated approach to disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and response actions. Therefore, the Mechanism should include a general framework for their communication and implementation.
Amendment 52 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) By contributing to the further development of detection and early warning systems, the Union should assist Member States in minimising the lead time to respond to disasters and to alert Union citizens. These systems should take into account and build upon existing and future information and telecommunications sources and systems.
Amendment 53 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The Mechanism should include a general policy framework aimed at continuously improving the level of preparedness of civil protection systems, personnel and citizens within the Union. This includes training programmes and an emergency management training network, at Union and Member State level, on disaster prevention, preparedness, and response as called for in the Council Conclusions of 14 November 2008 on European disaster management training arrangements. This network could be developed and supervised by a European training institute for civil protection and humanitarian action.
Amendment 54 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) The European Civil Protection Mechanism should, moreover, be based on the principle of specialising Member States in the management of one or more risks.
Amendment 55 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The Mechanism should make it possible to mobilise and facilitate coordination of assistance interventions. The reinforced cooperation should be based on a Union structure consisting of an emergency response centre, a European emergency response capacity in the form of a voluntary pool of pre-committed capacities from the Member States, trained emergency management experts, a common emergency communication and information system managed by the Commission and contact points in the Member States. It should provide a framework for collecting validated emergency information, for disseminating that information to the Member States and for sharing lessons learnt from interventions.
Amendment 56 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) The EU’s outermost regions and overseas countries and territories are important assets in the Union’s response to disasters. These territories, countries and regions give the EU a presence in terms of territory and population throughout the entire world, and should be support bases to facilitate the pre- positioning of logistics and resources.
Amendment 58 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 14 b (new)
Recital 14 b (new)
Amendment 60 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) With respect to disaster response assistance interventions outside the Union, the Mechanism should facilitate and support actions undertaken by the Member States and the Union as a whole in order to promote consistency in international civil protection work. The United Nations, where present, has an overall coordinating role for relief operations in third countries. Assistance provided under the Mechanism should be coordinated with the United Nations and other relevant international actors, particularly humanitarian NGOs, with a view to maximiseing the use of available resources and avoid any unnecessary duplication of effort. Enhanced coordination of civil protection assistance through the Mechanism is a prerequisite to supporting the overall coordination effort and ensuring a comprehensive Union contribution to the overall relief effort. In major disasters where assistance is provided under both the Mechanism and Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid, the Commission shall ensure the effectiveness, coherence and complementarities of the overall Union response, as well as due consideration for and involvement of humanitarian NGOs, respecting the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid.
Amendment 61 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The availability of adequate means of transport needs to be improved to support the development of a rapid response capability at the Union level. The Union should support and supplement the efforts of Member States by facilitating the pooling of transport resources of Member States and contributing, where necessary, to the financing of additional means of transport subject to certain criteria. In the event of a disaster outside the territory of the EU, the question of the availability of means of transport should take account of existing systems (UN, NATO and Member States).
Amendment 71 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The protection to be ensured by the Mechanism shall cover primarily people, but also the environment and property, including cultural heritage, against all natural and man-made disasters, including acts ofearthquakes and tsunamis, fires and forest fires, floods and landslides, terrorismt acts, technological, radiological or environmentindustrial and radiological accidents, marine pollution and acute health emergencies(pandemics), occurring inside or outside the Union.
Amendment 84 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. This Decision shall take into account the assets and special needs of isolated, outermost and other regions or islands of the Union as well as the overseas countries and territories that are associated with it in the case of a disaster.
Amendment 93 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
2. Progress towards the achievement of the specific objectives set out in paragraph 1 shall be assessed through common indicators that cover inter alia:
Amendment 100 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – point 1
Article 4 – point 1
1. "disaster" means any situatioudden, brutal event of natural or man-made origin, which has or may have an adverse impact on people, the environment or property;
Amendment 104 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – point 2
Article 4 – point 2
2. "major disaster" means any situation,udden, brutal event of natural or man-made origin, and which has or may have an adverse impact or disastrous consequences on people, the environment or property and which may result in a call for assistance under the Mechanism;
Amendment 154 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) assist Member States in prepositioning emergency response assets and capacities in logistical hubs inside the Union, as well as in the outermost regions and overseas countries and territories, which are essential support bases around the world;
Amendment 159 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – point g
Article 7 – point g
Amendment 257 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 28 – title
Article 28 – title
Third countries’ and overseas countries’ and territories’ participation and international organisations
Amendment 258 #
2011/0461(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point - a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point - a (new)
(- a) The overseas countries and territories listed in Annex II of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Amendment 175 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Electronic means of information and communication can greatly simplify the publication of contracts and increase the efficiency and transparency of procurement processes covered by this Directive. They should become the standard means of communication and information exchange in procurement procedures. The use of electronic means also leads to time savings. As a result, provision should be made for reducing the minimum periods where electronic means are used, subject, however, to the condition that they are compatible with the specific mode of transmission envisaged at Union level. Moreover, electronic means of information and communication including adequate functionalities can enable contracting authorities to prevent, detect and correct errors that occur during procurement procedures.
Amendment 182 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Electronic means of communication are particularly well suited to support centralised purchasing practices and tools because of the possibility they offer to re- use and automatically process data and to minimise information and transaction costs. The use of such electronic means of communication should therefore, as a first step, be rendered compulsory for central purchasing bodies, while also facilitating converging practices across the Union. This should be followed by a general obligation to use electronic means of communication in all procurement procedures after a transition period of two years. So as to ensure continued legal certainty, these provisions shall not affect existing arrangements at national level for publishing information on public procurement contracts involving amounts below the thresholds set in this Directive.
Amendment 332 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the contracting authority exercises over the legal person concerned a control which is similar to that which it exercises over its own departments, i.e. it exercises a decisive influence over both strategic objectives and significant decisions of the controlled legal person. With a view to determining whether such control is being exercised, account may also be taken of factors such as the level of representation on administrative, management or supervisory bodies, specifications relating thereto in the articles of association or the ownership arrangements;
Amendment 333 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) at least 90 % of the activitiesverage total turnover of that legal person areis generated by means of activities carried out for the controlling contracting authority or for other legal persons controlled by that contracting authority;
Amendment 351 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 359 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the contracting authorities exercise jointly over the legal person a control which is similar to that which they exercise over their own departments, i.e. they exercise a decisive influence over both strategic objectives and significant decisions of the controlled legal person. With a view to determining whether such control is being exercised, account may also be taken of factors such as the level of representation on administrative, management or supervisory bodies, specifications relating thereto in the articles of association or the ownership arrangements;
Amendment 363 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) at least 90 % of the activitiesverage total turnover of that legal person areis generated by means of activities carried out for the controlling contracting authorities or other legal persons controlled by the same contracting authorities;
Amendment 382 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) the agreement establishes a genuine co- operation between the participating contracting authorities aimed at carrying out jointly their public service tasks and involving mutual rights and obligations of the parties;Does not affect English version.)
Amendment 387 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) This Directive shall not apply to agreements concluded between several contracting authorities or groupings of contracting authorities which make provision, in the context of the internal organisation of a Member State, for the transfer of powers between the parties with a view to the performance of a public service task. There shall be no private participation in any of the contracting authorities involved.
Amendment 413 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of this Article, "affiliated undertaking" means any undertaking the annual accounts of which aArticle 21 notwithstanding and provided that the conditions in paragraphs 2 and 4 are met, this Directive shall not apply to contracts awarded: (a) by a contracting entity to an affiliated undertaking, or (b) by a joint venture, consolidated with those of the contracting entity in accordancemprised exclusively of a number of contracting entities for the purpose of carrying out activities within the requirements of the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC40. meaning of Articles 5 to 11, to an undertaking which is affiliated with one of those contracting entities.
Amendment 415 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. InFor the capurposes of entities not subject to that Directive, "affiliated undertaking" shall meanthis Article, "affiliated undertaking" means: (a) any undertaking the annual accounts of which are consolidated with those of the contracting entity in accordance with the requirements of the Seventh Council Directive 83/349/EEC; or (b) any undertaking that meets any of the following conditions: (i) any undertaking that: (a)which may be, directly or indirectly, subject to a dominant influence by the contracting entity within the meaning of point (5) of Article 2 and Article 4(1) of this Directive; (b)ii) an undertaking which may exercise a dominant influence over the contracting entity; (c)iii) an undertaking which, in common with the contracting entity, is subject to the dominant influence of another undertaking by virtue of ownership, financial participation, or the rules which govern it. The notion of dominant influence is defined in Article 4(1) of this Directive.
Amendment 416 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 417 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 418 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 419 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Amendment 421 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Paragraph 31 shall apply:
Amendment 423 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) to service contracts provided that at least 80% of the average total turnover of the affiliated undertaking with respect to services in general, taking into account all services provided by that undertaking, for the preceding three years derives from the provision of services to the contracting entity with which it is affiliated, or to the contracting entity which is itself subject to the dominant influence of another undertakings with which ithe contractual partner is affiliated;
Amendment 425 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) to supply contracts provided that at least 80% of the average total turnover of the affiliated undertaking with respect to supplies in general, taking into account all supplies provided by that undertaking, for the preceding three years derives from the provision of those supplies to the contracting entity with which it is affiliated, or to the contracting entity which is itself subject to the dominant influence of another undertakings with which ithe contractual partner is affiliated;
Amendment 427 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) to works contracts provided that at least 80% of the average total turnover of the affiliated undertaking with respect to works in general, taking into account all works provided by that undertaking, for the preceding three years derives from the provision of works to the contracting entity with which it is affiliated, or to the contracting entity which is itself subject to the dominant influence of another undertakings with which ithe contractual partner is affiliated.
Amendment 429 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 458 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. Unless otherwise provided in this Directive or in the national law concerning access to information, and without prejudice to the obligations relating to the advertising of awarded contracts and to the information to candidates and tenderers set out in Articles 64 and 69 of this directive, the contracting entity shall not disclose information forwarded to it by economic operators which they have designated as confidential, including, but not limited to, technical or trade secrets and the confidential aspects of tenders, in particular technical or trade secrets and the confidential aspects of tenders. Non-compliance with this obligation shall render the contracting entity liable.
Amendment 488 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) unduly influence the decision-making process of the contracting entity via illicit means or obtain confidential information that may confer upon them undue advantages in the procurement procedure;
Amendment 587 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Such measures shall include the communication to the other candidates and tenderers of any relevant information exchangedprovided by the contracting entity in the context of or resulting from the involvement of the candidate or tenderer in the preparation of the procurement procedure and the fixing of adequate time limits for the receipt of tenders. The candidate or tenderer concerned shall only be excluded from the procedure where there are no other means to ensure compliance with the duty to observe the principle of equal treatment.
Amendment 603 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 54 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 54 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) in terms of performance or functional requirements, including environmental and safety characteristics, provided that the parameters are sufficiently precise to allow tenderers to determine the subject-matter of the contract and to allow contracting entities to award the contract;
Amendment 609 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 54 – paragraph 4
Article 54 – paragraph 4
4. Unless justified by the subject-matter of the contract, technical specifications shall not refer to a specific make or source, or to a particular process, or to trade marks, patents, types or a specific origin or production with the effect of favouring or eliminating certain undertakings or certain products. Such reference shall be permitted on an exceptional basis,: (a) where a sufficiently precise and intelligible description of the subject- matter of the contract pursuant to paragraph 3 is not possible. Such reference shall be accompanied by the words ‘'or equivalent’. '; (b) where this is warranted by the contract and the reference relates to the production or process location on European Union territory.
Amendment 626 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Contracting entities requiring a specific label shall accept all equivalent labels that fulfil the requirements of the label indicated by the contracting entities. For products that do not bear the label, contracting entities shall also accept a technical dossier of the manufacturer or other appropriate means of proof. In requiring a specific label, the contracting entity shall not seek to discriminate against tenderers in the procurement procedure.
Amendment 700 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 76 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 76 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to national laws, regulations or administrative provisions on the remuneration of certain services, the criteriaon on which contracting entauthorities shall base the award of public contracts shall be one of the following:the most economically advantageous tender.
Amendment 715 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 76 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 76 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 719 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 76 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 76 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The most economically advantageous tender referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1) from the point of view of the contracting entity shall be identified on the basis of criteria linked to the subject-matter of the contract in question. Those criteria may include, in addition to the price or costs, other criteria linked to the subject-matter of the contract in question. Costs shall be assessed using a cost- effectiveness approach, such as a life- cycle costing approach, under the conditions set out in Article 77. Price shall be the decisive award criterion in the case of highly standardised products and services. Other criteria may include:
Amendment 723 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 76 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 76 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 745 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 76 – paragraph 3
Article 76 – paragraph 3
Amendment 805 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 79 – paragraph 5
Article 79 – paragraph 5
5. When submitting a tender, tenderers must provide a declaration on their honour attesting that they have not received for the purposes of their tender State aid which would be incompatible with Article 107 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, or which would be incompatible with the aforementioned Article if the State granting that aid were an EU Member State, and furnish any substantiating documents requested by the contracting entity. Where a contracting entity establishes that a tender is abnormally low because the tenderer has obtained State aid, the tender may be rejected on that ground alone only after consultation with the tenderer where the latter is unable to prove, within a sufficient time limit fixed by the contracting entity, that the aid in question was compatible with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107 of the Treaty. Where the contracting entity rejects a tender in thoese circumstances, it shall inform the Commission thereof. of that fact. If it is established that the selected tenderer has received unlawful State aid, the call-for-tender procedure shall be cancelled.
Amendment 851 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – introductory part and (-a) and (-aa) (new)
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – introductory part and (-a) and (-aa) (new)
2. A modification of a contract during its term shall be considered substantial within the meaning of paragraph 1, where it renders the contract substantially different from the one initially concluded. In any case, without prejudice to paragraph 3 and 4, a modification shall be considered substantial where one of the following conditions is met: (-a) the modification changes the nature of the contract; (-aa) the modification entails the replacement of the contractual partner;
Amendment 852 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 853 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 855 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 82 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 858 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 82 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 859 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 82 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 873 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 4
Article 82 – paragraph 4
4. Where the value of a modification can be expressed in monetary terms, the modification shall not be considered to be substantial within the meaning of paragraph 1, where its value does not exceed the thresholds set out in Article 12 and where it is below 5 % of the updated price of the initial contract, provided that the modification does not alter the overall nature of the contract. Where several successive modifications are made, the value shall be assessed on the basis of the cumulative value of the successive modifications.
Amendment 879 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 82 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 82 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Contracting entities shall not have recourse tomay not invoke the provisions of this article concerning modifications of the contract in the following cases:
Amendment 885 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the exceptions provided for in Article 21 cease to apply following a private participation in the legal person awarded the contract pursuant to Article 21(4);
Amendment 936 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 93 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States shall appoint a single independent body responsible forensure the oversight and coordination of implementation activities (hereinafter ‘the oversight body’). Member States shall inform the Commission of their designation.
Amendment 937 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 93 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
3. The oversight bodycompetent authorities shall be responsible for the following tasks:
Amendment 942 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 93 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 943 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 93 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Without prejudice to the general procedures and working methods established by the Commission for its communications and contacts with Member States, the oversight bodycompetent authorities shall act as a specific contact point for the Commission when it monitors the application of Union law and the implementation of the budget from the Union on the basis of Article 17 of the Treaty on the European Union and Article 317 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall report to the Commission any violation of this Directive in procurement procedures for the award of contracts directly or indirectly funded by the Union.
Amendment 944 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 93 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 945 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 93 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 946 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 5
Article 93 – paragraph 5
5. The investigation and enforcement activities carried out by the oversight bodycompetent authorities to ensure that contracting entities’ decisions comply with this Directive and the general principles of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union shall not replace or prejudge the institutional role of the Commission as guardian of the Treaty. When the Commission decides to refer the treatment of an individual case, it shall also retain the right to intervene in accordance with the powers conferred to it by the Treaty.
Amendment 948 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 93 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Contracting authorities shall transmit to the national oversight bodycompetent authorities the full text of all concluded contracts with a value equal to or greater than
Amendment 950 #
2011/0439(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 93 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 93 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
7. Without prejudice to the national law concerning access to information, and in accordance with national and EU legislation on data protection, the oversight bodycompetent authorities shall, upon written request, give unrestricted and full direct access, free of charge, to the concluded contracts referred to in paragraph 6. Access to certain parts of the contracts may be refused where their disclosure would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the public interest, would harm the legitimate commercial interests of economic operators, public or private, or might prejudice fair competition between them.
Amendment 211 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) There is considerable legal uncertainty as to how far cooperation between public authorities should be covered by public procurement rules. The relevant case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union is interpreted divergently between Member States and even between contracting authorities. It is therefore necessary to clarify in what cases contracts concluded between contracting authorities are not subject to the application of public procurement rules. Such clarification should be guided by the principles set out in the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice. The sole fact that both parties to an agreement are themselves contracting authorities does not as such rule out the application of procurement rules. However, tThe application of public procurement rules shouldmust not interfere with the freedomright of public authorities to decide freely how to organise the way they carry out their public service tasks. Contracts awarded to controlled entities or cooperation for the joint execution of the public service tasks of the participating contracting authorities should therefore be exempted from the application of the rules if the conditions set out in this directive are fulfilled. This directive should aim to ensure that any exempted public-public cooperation does not cause a distortion of competition in relation to private economic operators. Neither should the participation of a contracting authority as a tenderer in a procedure for the award of a public contract cause any distortion of competition.
Amendment 216 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Cooperation between local public authorities, or between local public authorities and groups composed exclusively of local public authorities, with a view to jointly carrying out public service tasks in the public interest, as part of the internal organisation of Member States, should be exempted from the application of the rules laid down in this Directive. Similarly, transfers of powers relating to public service tasks involving a global transfer of responsibility between local public authorities, or between local public authorities and groups composed exclusively of local public authorities, as part of the internal organisation of Member States, should be exempted from the rules laid down in this Directive.
Amendment 233 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Electronic means of information and communication can greatly simplify the publication of contracts and increase the efficiency and transparency of procurement processes under this directive. They should become the standard means of communication and information exchange in procurement procedures. The use of electronic means also leads to time savings. As a result, provision should be made for reducing the minimum periods where electronic means are used, subject, however, to the condition that they are compatible with the specific mode of transmission envisaged at Union level. Moreover, electronic means of information and communication including adequate functionalities can enable contracting authorities to prevent, detect and correct errors that occur during procurement procedures.
Amendment 241 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Electronic means of communication are particularly well suited to support centralised purchasing practices and tools because of the possibility they offer to re- use and automatically process data and to minimise information and transaction costs. The use of such electronic means of communication should therefore, as a first step, be rendered compulsory for central purchasing bodies, while also facilitating converging practices across the Union. This should be followed by a general obligation to use electronic means of communication in all procurement procedures after a transition period of two years. So as to ensure continued legal certainty, these provisions shall not affect existing arrangements at national level for publishing information on public procurement contracts for amounts below the thresholds set in this directive.
Amendment 418 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the acquisition, development, production or co-production of programme material and related preparatory services intended for audiovisual media services, that are awarded by broadcasters, or contracts for broadcasting time that are awarded to audiovisual media service providers; media services being defined as including all transmission and distribution using any form of electronic network;
Amendment 451 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 457 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the contracting authority exercises over the legal person concerned a control which is similarequivalent to that which it exercises over its own departments, i.e. it exercises a decisive influence over both strategic objectives and significant decisions of the controlled legal person. With a view to determining whether such control is being exercised, account may also be taken of factors such as the level of representation on administrative, management or supervisory bodies, the relevant provisions of the articles of association or the ownership arrangements.
Amendment 465 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) at least 90 % of the activitiesverage total turnover of that legal person areis generated by means of activities carried out for the controlling contracting authority or for other legal persons controlled by that contracting authority;
Amendment 485 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 505 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the contracting authorities exercise jointly over the legal person a control which is similarequivalent to that which they exercise over their own departments, i.e. they exercise a decisive influence over both strategic objectives and significant decisions of the controlled legal person. With a view to determining whether such control is being exercised, account may also be taken of factors such as the level of representation on administrative, management or supervisory bodies, specifications relating thereto in the articles of association or the ownership arrangements;
Amendment 513 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) at least 90 % of the activitiesverage total turnover of that legal person areis generated by means of activities carried out for the controlling contracting authorities or other legal persons controlled by the same contracting authorities;
Amendment 533 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) the controlled legal person does not pursue any interests which are distinct fromin conflict with that of the public authorities affiliated to it;
Amendment 543 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 4 – point a
Amendment 572 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. This Directive shall not apply to agreements concluded between several contracting authorities or groupings of contracting authorities which make provision, in the context of the internal organisation of a Member State, for the transfer of powers between the parties with a view to the performance of a public service task. There shall be no private participation in any of the contracting authorities involved.
Amendment 608 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Unless otherwise provided in this Directive or in the national law concerning access to information, and without prejudice to the obligations relating to the advertising of awarded contracts and to the information to candidates and tenderers set out in Articles 48 and 53 of this Directive, the contracting authority shall not disclose information forwarded to it by economic operators which they have designated as confidential, including, but not limited to, technical or trade secrets and the confidential aspects of tenders, in particular technical or trade secrets and the confidential aspects of tenders. Non-compliance with this obligation shall render the contracting authority liable.
Amendment 628 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The notion of conflict of interests shall at least cover any situation where the categories of persons referred to in paragraph 2 have, directly or indirectly, a privatecommon interest in the outcome of the procurement procedure, which may be perceived to impair the impartial and objective performance of their duties.
Amendment 631 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
For the purposes of this Article, ‘private "common interests’' means any family, emotional life, economic, political or other shared interestseconomic interest or family ties, shared with the candidates or the tenderers, including conflicting professional interests.
Amendment 647 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) unduly influence the decision-making process of the contracting authority by illicit means or obtain confidential information that may confer upon them undue advantages in the procurement procedure;
Amendment 893 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Such measures shall include the communication to the other candidates and tenderers of any relevant information exchangedsupplied by the contracting authority in the context of or resulting from the involvement of the candidate or tenderer in the preparation of the procurement procedure and the fixing of adequate time limits for the receipt of tenders. The candidate or tenderer concerned shall only be excluded from the procedure where there are no other means to ensure compliance with the duty to observe the principle of equal treatment.
Amendment 925 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 4
Article 40 – paragraph 4
4. Unless justified by the subject-matter of the contract, technical specifications shall not refer to a specific make or source, or a particular process, or to trade marks, patents, types or a specific origin or production with the effect of favouring or eliminating certain undertakings or certain products. Such reference shall be permitted on an exceptional basis,: (a) where a sufficiently precise and intelligible description of the subject- matter of the contract pursuant to paragraph 3 is not possible. Such reference shall be accompanied by the words "‘or equivalent"’; (b) where this is warranted by the contract and the reference relates to the production or process location on European Union territory.
Amendment 964 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
In requiring a specific label, the contracting authority shall not seek to discriminate against tenderers in a procurement procedure.
Amendment 991 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Public contracts may be subdivided into homogenous or heterogeneous lots. For contracts with a value equal to or greater than the thresholds provided for in Article 4 but not less than EUR 500 000, determined in accordance with Article 5, where the contracting authority does not deem it appropriate to split into lots, it shall provide in the contract notice or in the invitation to confirm interest a specific explanation of its reasonan explanation of its reasons for its decision to subdivide or not to subdivide into lots.
Amendment 1123 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
1. Without prejudice to national laws, regulations or administrative provisions concerning the remuneration of certain services, the criteriaon on which contracting authorities shall base the award of public contracts shall be one of the following:the most economically advantageous tender.
Amendment 1128 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1135 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1145 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1152 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 66 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The most economically advantageous tender referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 from the point of view of the contracting authority shall be identified on the basis of criteria linked to the subject-matter of the public contract in question. Those criteria shallmay include, in addition to the price or costs referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1, other criteria linked to the subject-matter of the public contract in question, such as. Costs shall be assessed using a cost- effectiveness approach, such as a life- cycle costing approach, under the conditions set out in Article 67. Price shall be the decisive award criterion in the case of highly standardised products and services. Other criteria may include:
Amendment 1196 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 3
Article 66 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1299 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 69 a (new)
Article 69 a (new)
Article 69a Tenders comprising products originating in third countries 1. This Article shall apply to tenders covering products originating in third countries with which the Union has not concluded, whether multilaterally or bilaterally, an agreement ensuring comparable and effective access for Union undertakings to the markets of those third countries. It shall be without prejudice to the obligations of the Union or its Member States in respect of third countries. 2. Any tender submitted for the award of a supply contract may be rejected where the proportion of the products originating in third countries, as determined in accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code[1], exceeds 50 % of the total value of the products constituting the tender. For the purposes of this Article, software used in telecommunications network equipment shall be regarded as products. 3. Subject to the second subparagraph, where two or more tenders are equivalent in the light of the contract award criteria defined in Article 66, preference shall be given to those tenders which may not be rejected pursuant to paragraph 2. The prices of those tenders shall be considered equivalent for the purposes of this Article, if the price difference does not exceed 3 %. However, a tender shall not be preferred to another pursuant to the first subparagraph where its acceptance would oblige the contracting entity to acquire equipment having technical characteristics different from those of existing equipment, resulting in incompatibility, technical difficulties in operation and maintenance, or disproportionate costs. 4. For the purposes of this Article, those third countries to which the benefit of the provisions of this Directive has been extended by a Council Decision in accordance with paragraph 1 shall not be taken into account for determining the proportion, referred to in paragraph 2, of products originating in third countries. 5. The Commission shall submit an annual report to the European Parliament and to the Council, commencing in the second half of the first year following the entry into force of this Directive, on progress made in multilateral or bilateral negotiations regarding access for Union undertakings to the markets of third countries in the fields covered by this Directive, on any result which such negotiations may have achieved, and on the implementation in practice of all the agreements which have been concluded. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may amend the provisions of this Article in the light of such developments. [1] OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, p. 1.
Amendment 1302 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 69 b (new)
Article 69 b (new)
Article 69b Relations with third countries as regards works, supplies and service contracts 1. Member States shall inform the Commission of any general difficulties, in law or in fact, encountered and reported by their undertakings in securing the award of service contracts in third countries. 2. The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council before 31 December 2014, and periodically thereafter, on the opening up of service contracts in third countries and on progress in negotiations with these countries on this subject, particularly within the framework of the WTO. 3. The Commission shall endeavour, by approaching the third country concerned, to remedy any situation whereby it finds, on the basis either of the reports referred to in paragraph 2 or of other information, that, in the context of the award of service contracts, a third country: (a) does not grant Union undertakings effective access comparable to that granted by the Union to undertakings from that country; or (b) does not grant Union undertakings national treatment or the same competitive opportunities as are available to national undertakings; or (c) grants undertakings from other third countries more favourable treatment than Union undertakings. 4. Member States shall inform the Commission of any difficulties, in law or in fact, encountered and reported by their undertakings and which are due to the non-observance of the international social and environmental law provisions listed in Annex XI when these undertakings have tried to secure the award of contracts in third countries. 5. In the circumstances referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4, the Commission may at any time propose that the Council decide to suspend or restrict, over a period to be laid down in the decision, the award of service contracts to: (a) undertakings governed by the law of the third country in question; (b) undertakings affiliated to the undertakings specified in point (a) and having their registered office in the Union but having no direct and effective link with the economy of a Member State; (c) undertakings submitting tenders which have as their subject-matter services originating in the third country in question. The Council shall act, by qualified majority, as soon as possible. The Commission may propose these measures on its own initiative or at the request of a Member State. 6. This Article shall be without prejudice to the commitments of the Union in relation to third countries ensuing from international agreements on public procurement, particularly within the framework of the WTO.
Amendment 1352 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 2 – points -a and -a a (new)
Article 72 – paragraph 2 – points -a and -a a (new)
(-a) it alters the nature of the contract; (-a a) it entails replacement of the contractual partner;
Amendment 1355 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 72 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1357 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 72 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1365 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 4
Article 72 – paragraph 4
4. Where the value of a modification can be expressed in monetary terms, the modification shall not be considered to be substantial within the meaning of paragraph 1, where its value does not exceed the thresholds set out in Article 4 and where it is below 5 % of the updated price of the initial contract, provided that the modification does not alter the overall nature of the contract. Where several successive modifications are made, the value shall be assessed on the basis of the cumulative value of the successive modifications.
Amendment 1373 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 72 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) any increase in price is not higher than 50 % of the updated value of the original contract.
Amendment 1375 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 72 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Contracting authorities shall not have recourse tomay not invoke the provisions of this article concerning modifications of the contract in the following cases:
Amendment 1379 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the exceptions provided for in Article 11 cease to apply following a private participation in the legal person awarded the contract pursuant to Article 11(4);
Amendment 1466 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 84 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States shall appoint a single independent body responsible forensure the oversight and coordination of implementation activities (hereinafter 'the oversight body'). Member States shall inform the Commission of their designation.
Amendment 1474 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 84 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
3. The oversight bodycompetent authorities shall be responsible for the following tasks:
Amendment 1488 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 84 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1490 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Without prejudice to the general procedures and working methods established by the Commission for its communications and contacts with Member States, the oversight bodycompetent authorities shall act as a specific contact point for the Commission when it monitors the application of Union law and the implementation of the budget from the Union on the basis of Article 17 of the Treaty on the European Union and Article 317 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall report to the Commission any violation of this Directive in procurement procedures for the award of contracts directly or indirectly funded by the Union.
Amendment 1491 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1492 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1493 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 5
Article 84 – paragraph 5
5. The investigation and enforcement activities carried out by the oversight bodycompetent authorities to ensure that contracting authorities’ decisions comply with this Directive and the principles of the Treaty shall not replace or prejudge the institutional role of the Commission as guardian of the Treaty. When the Commission decides to refer the treatment of an individual case pursuant to paragraph 4, it shall also retain the right to intervene in accordance with the powers conferred to it by the Treaty.
Amendment 1495 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 84 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Contracting authorities shall transmit to the national oversight bodycompetent authorities the full text of all concluded contracts with a a value equal to or greater than
Amendment 1502 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 84 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
7. Without prejudice to the national law concerning access to information, and in accordance with national and EU legislation on data protection, the oversight bodycompetent authorities shall, upon written request, give unrestricted and full direct access, free of charge, to the concluded contracts referred to in paragraph 6. Access to certain parts of the contracts may be refused where their disclosure would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the public interest, would harm the legitimate commercial interests of economic operators, public or private, or might prejudice fair competition between them.
Amendment 1504 #
2011/0438(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 84 – paragraph 8
Article 84 – paragraph 8
8. A summary of all the activities carried out by the oversight bodycompetent authorities in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 7 shall be included in the annual report referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 305 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) It is appropriate to exclude from the scope of this Directive certain services concessions awarded to an economic operator which is itself a contracting authority or a contracting entity on the basis of an exclusive right which that operator enjoysenjoys an exclusive right under published national law, regulation or administrative act and which has been granted in accordance with the Treaty and Union sectoral legislation, since such exclusive right makes it impossible to follow a competitive procedure for the award. The concessions referred to are those concerning the management of networks infrastructure related to the activities set out in aAnnex III, since such exclusive right makes it impossible to follow a competitive procedure for the awardor those concerning an activity set out in Annex III which, when this Directive is adopted, is the subject of a nationally regulated tariff laid down in law or regulation. By way of derogation and without prejudice to the legal consequences of the general exclusion from the scope of this Directive, concessions as defined concerning the management of network infrastructure related to the activities set out in Annex III, or those concerning article 8 (1)n activity set out in Annex III which, when this Directive is adopted, is the subject of a nationally regulated tariff, should be subject to the obligation to publish a concession award notice in view of ensuring basic transparency unless the conditions of such transparency are provided for in sectoral legislation.
Amendment 311 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) It is appropriate to exclude from the scope of this Directive concessions relating to gambling activities involving a financial risk through investing a sum of money in games of chance (lotteries, betting), run at national level by a single body, which, in accordance with the Treaties, has been awarded exclusive rights by one or more Member States pursuant to applicable and published national laws, regulations or administrative provisions. That exclusion is justified by the granting of exclusive rights to a single body at national level, making a competitive procedure inapplicable, as well as by the need to retain the possibility for Member States to regulate the gambling sector at national level in view of their obligations in terms of protecting public and social order.
Amendment 314 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) It is appropriate to exclude certain service and works concessions awarded to an undertakings affiliated to contracting entities, with or without private participation, and having as itstheir principal activity the provision of such services or works to the group of which it isthey are part, rather than offering them on the market. It is also appropriate to exclude certain service and works concessions awarded by a contracting entity to a joint venture which is formed by a number of contracting entities for the purpose of carrying out activities covered by this Directive and of which that entity is part. However, it is appropriate to ensure that this exclusion does not give rise to distortions of competition to the benefit of the undertakings or joint ventures that are affiliated with the contracting entities; it is appropriate to provide a suitable set of rules, in particular as regards the maximum limits within which the undertakings may obtain a part of their turnover from the market and above which they would lose the possibility of being awarded concessions without calls for competition, the composition of joint ventures and the stability of links between those joint ventures and the contracting entities of which they are composed.
Amendment 336 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In the light of the results of the evaluation conducted by the Commission on the reform of public procurement rules it is appropriate to exclude from the full application of this Directive only those services which have a limited cross-border dimension, namely the so-called services to the person such as certain social, health and educational services. These services are provided within a particular context that varies widely amongst Member States, due to different cultural traditions. A specific regime should therefore be established for concession for these services which takes into account the fact that they are newly regulated. An obligation to publish a prior information notice and a concession award notice ofor any concession with a value equal to or greater than the thresholds established in this Directive is an adequate way to provide information on business opportunities to potential tenderers as well as on the number and type of contracts awarded to all interested parties. Furthermore, Member States should put in place appropriate measures with reference to the award of concession contracts for these services aimed at ensuringensure compliance with the principles of transparency and equal treatment of economic operators while allowing contracting authorities and contracting entitieswhile allowing the grantor to take into account the specificities of the services in question. Member States should ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entitiesthe grantor may take into account the need to ensure quality, continuity, accessibility, availability and comprehensiveness of the services, the specific needs of different categories of users, the involvement and empowerment of users and innovationinnovation and, in accordance with Protocol 26 to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a high level of quality, safety and affordability, equal treatment and the promotion of universal access and of users’ rights.
Amendment 340 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) This Directive is without prejudice to the freedom of national, regional and local authorities, in compliance with the Treaties, to define services of general economic interest. It is also without prejudice to the power of national, regional and local authorities to provide, commission and finance services of general economic interest in accordance with Article 14 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Protocol 26 annexed to that Treaty.
Amendment 345 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) The procedure for awarding concession contracts should comprise several stages, including the publication of a concession notice allowing the grantor wishing to award a concession to make known its intention; the presentation by interested economic operators of their application in response to that notice; verification of the conditions of participation for candidates; the submission of a tender by the candidates; the grantor's right to negotiate with the tenderer on the basis of objective award criteria; the decision on the award by the grantor of the concession contract to the concessionaire and the publication of an award notice. Intermediate stages must be possible, including the selection of certain candidates authorised to submit a tender and the sending of an invitation to tender to the candidates thus selected. The grantor should also be able to approach economic operators who have not responded to the concession notice. In addition, and subject to compliance with the principles of transparency and non- discrimination, it must be possible to reverse the order of certain stages, including, for example, analysing submitted tenders before verifying compliance with the selection criteria. Subject to compliance with the provisions of this Directive, the grantor should be allowed considerable flexibility to define the procedure leading to the choice of concessionaire, the only two mandatory stages being the publication of a concession notice at the beginning of the procedure, except where this is not required under this Directive, and the publication of an award notice at the end of the procedure. This freedom should be balanced against a requirement for transparency and equal treatment of candidates and tenderers.
Amendment 363 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Concessions should not be awarded to economic operators that have participated in a criminal organisation or have been found guilty of corruption, fraud to the detriment of the Union’s financial interests or money laundering. Non-payment of taxes or social security contributions should also be sanctioned by mandatory exclusion at the level of the Union. Furthermore, contracting authorities and contracting entitieFurthermore, grantors should be given the possibility to exclude candidates or tenderers for serious violations of Union or national law aimed at the protection of public interests compatible with the Treaty or, where the economic operator has shown significant or persistent deficiencies in the performance of a prior concession or concessions of a similar nature with the same contractgrantor, or where an economic operator, or its parent company, are established ing au thority or contracting entityird country which, in the award of concession contracts, applies restrictive measures against economic operators established in the European Union, where such measures lead to serious and persistent discrimination against economic operators established in the European Union.
Amendment 366 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) It is necessary to clarify the conditions under which modifications of a concession during its execution require a new award procedure, taking into account the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Any concession in progress may be modified by means of a supplementary agreement, subject to the provisions of this Directive. A new award procedure is required in, however, in the case of material changes to the initial concession, demonstrating the intention of the parties to renegotiate essential terms or conditions of that concession. This is notably the case if the amended conditions would have had an influence on the outcome of the procedure, had they been part of the initial procedure. An exceptional and temporary extension of the term of the concession strictly aimed at ensuring the continuity of the provision of the service pending the award of a new concession should not normally qualify as a material change to the initial concession.
Amendment 368 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) It is necessary to clarify the conditions under which modifications of a concession during its execution require a new award procedure, taking into account the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Any concession in force may be modified by means of a supplementary agreement. A new award procedure is required in, however, in the case of material changes to the initial concession, demonstrating the intention of the parties to renegotiate essential terms or conditions of that concession. This is notably the case if the amended conditions would have had an influence on the outcome of the procedure, had they been part of the initial procedure. An exceptional and temporary extension of the term of the concession strictly aimed at ensuring the continuity of the provision of the service pending the award of a new concession should not normally qualify as a material change to the initial concession. Nevertheless, where a contract has reached its term the grantor and the concessionaire shall refrain from extensions for purposes of investments not essential to the performance of the concession and which would be implemented solely with a view to extending the duration thereof.
Amendment 403 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) a 'public (a) a 'works concession' means a contract for pecuniary interest concluded in writing between one or more economic operators any means of which one or more contracting authorities or entities awards the execution of works to one or more economic operators, where the consideration for that award cone or more contracting authorities and having as their object the executisists either solely in the right to exploit the works that are the subject of the contract or in that right together with payment; (b) a ‘services concession’ means a contract for pecuniary interest concluded in writing by means of which one or more contracting authorities or entities award the management of a service to one of wr more economic operatorks, where the consideration for the the works to be carried out consists either solely in the right to exploit the works that are the subject of the contract or in that right together with payment. at award consists either solely in the right to exploit the service that is the subject of the contract or in that right together with payment; The right to exploit the works or services referred to in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph shall imply the transfer to the concessionaire of the substantial economic risk in exploiting these works or services, defined as the risk of exposure to the vagaries of the market. The concessionaire shall be deemed to assume the substantial operating risk where, under normal conditions of exploitation, it is not guaranteed to recoup the investments made or the costs incurred in operating the works or the services which are the subject of the concession.
Amendment 455 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The calculation of the estimated value of a concession shall be based on the total amount payable, net of VAT, as estimated by the contracting authority or the contracting entity, including any form of option and any extension of the duration of the concessionits aggregate turnover net of tax, over the duration of the contract, as estimated by the grantor, to which shall be added any public investment subsidies received by the concessionaire. This estimate shall be valid at the moment the concession notice is sent or, in cases where such notice is not provided for, at the moment the grantor commences the concession award procedure. Where the value is modified following negotiations during the award procedure, the valid estimate shall be that indicated when the contract is signed.
Amendment 486 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall not apply to services concessions awarded by a contracting authority or by a contracting entity to an economic operator which is a contracting entity or an association of thereofconcerning the management of network infrastructure related to the activities set out in Annex III or to services concessions for an activity set out in Annex III which, when this Directive is adopted, are the subject of a nationally regulated tariff laid down in law or regulation where such concessions are awarded to an economic operator, on the basis of an exclusive right that economic operatothe latter enjoys pursuant to applicable and published national law, regulation or administrative provision, and which has been granted in accordance with the Treaty and in application of Union sectoral legislation concerning the management of networks infrastructure related to the activities set out in annex III. . By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, where sectoral legislation referred to in the first subparagraph does not provide for sector-specific transparency obligations, the requirements of Article 27 (1) and (3) shall apply.
Amendment 510 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) gambling activities involving a financial risk through investing a sum of money in games of chance (lotteries, betting), run at national level by a single body, which, in accordance with the Treaties, has been awarded exclusive rights by one or more Member States pursuant to applicable and published national laws, regulations or administrative provisions;
Amendment 684 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The duration of the concessions shall be limited to the time estimated to be necessary for the concessionaire to recoup the investments made in operating the works or services toge. The grantor shall estimate the duration on the basis of the works or services requested. When the cost of investments must be met by the concessionaire, the duration of a concession shall reflect the nature and amount of the investments involved and may not, under these circumstances, exceed the normal amortisation period. If the concessionaire is not required to make investments, the duration of the concession shall reflect the amount of time deemed necessary to meet the objectives set in the contract, in particular as regards the provision of the service in question. 2. The normal amortisation period shall correspond to the time that concessionaires could reasonably be expected to take to recoup their withinvestment costs and secure a reasonable return on invested capital.
Amendment 754 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph 5(a), a tender shall be considered not to be suitable where: it is completely irrelevant to the concession, being incapable of meeting the grantor's needs as specified in the concession documents.
Amendment 755 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
Amendment 756 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
Amendment 757 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 758 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 791 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – title
Article 36 – title
Selection of and qualitative assessment of candidates and tenderers and grounds for exclusion
Amendment 792 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 36 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. The grantor shall provide: (a) in the concession notice, a description of the concession and of the conditions of participation; (b) in the concession notice, in the invitation to submit a tender or in the concession documents, a description of the award criteria.
Amendment 809 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 36 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The grantor may limit the number of candidates or tenderers to an appropriate level, on condition that this is done in a transparent manner and on the basis of objective criteria. The number of candidates or tenderers invited must be sufficient to ensure genuine competition.
Amendment 810 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 36 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. In accordance with Article 38a, the grantor may hold negotiations with candidates and tenderers. It shall provide for appropriate recording of the main stages of the procedure using the means it judges appropriate, subject to compliance with Article 24(1) of this Directive.
Amendment 839 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 36 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the economic operator or its parent company are established in a third country which, in the award of concession contracts, applies restrictive measures against economic operators established in the European Union, where such measures lead to serious and persistent discrimination against economic operators established in the European Union.
Amendment 904 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 42 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 42 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Provided the overall nature of the concession remains the same, modification of the concession shall not be considered substantial where: (a) the modification has been provided for in the original concession contract in clear, precise and unequivocal review clauses or options which state the scope and nature of possible modifications as well as the conditions under which they may be used; or (b) the value thereof does not exceed the threshold laid down in Article 6 and is below 5% of the updated value of the original contract. Where several successive modifications are made, the value shall be assessed on the basis of the updated cumulative value of the successive modifications.
Amendment 908 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Amendment 920 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 42 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 42 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(fc) in case of concessions awarded by contracting authorities where any increase in price is not higher than 50% of thethe value of the intended modification does not exceed 50% of the updated initial value of the original concession.;
Amendment 939 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 50 – paragraph 1
Article 50 – paragraph 1
1. References to paragraph 3(a) and (b) of Article 1 of Directive 2004/17/EC and paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 1 and Title III of Directive 2004/18/EC Directive shall be construed as references to this Directive.
Amendment 941 #
2011/0437(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
2. Services concessions for the purpose of pursuing the activity referred to in paragraph 3 of Annex III which are presently operated by affiliated undertakings, as defined in Article 11, can be extended without the provisions of this Directive being applicable, provided that 100 % of the total turnover of the affiliated undertaking with respect to services concerning the activity referred to in paragraph 3 of Annex III for the preceding three years derives from the provision of services to undertakings with which it is affiliated. Such extensions may take place within 3 years from the date referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 49. The resulting contracts will be valid as long as the aforementioned conditions are met and will come to end, at the latest, 5 years after the date referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 49.
Amendment 104 #
2011/0435(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Directive 2005/36/EC only applies to professionals who want to pursue the same profession in another Member State. There are cases where the activities concerned are part of a profession with a larger scope of activities in the host Member State. If the differences between the fields of activity are so large that in reality a full programme of education and training is required from the professional to compensate for shortcomings and if the professional so requests, a host Member State should under these particular circumstances grant partial access. However, in case of overriding reasons of general interest, such as in the case of a doctor of medicine or other health professionals, a Member State should be able to refuseThe Commission shall be informed by the Member State before taking such decision in order to facilitate the full implementation of this provision and to guarantee its uniform application throughout the Union. However, in case of overriding reasons of general interest a Member State should be able to refuse partial access. Professions which benefit from automatic recognition on the basis of coordination of minimum training conditions or common training principles should not be open to partial access.
Amendment 365 #
2011/0435(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 (new)
Directive 2005/36/EC
Article 4f – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 4f – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Partial access can never be granted to professions which benefit from automatic recognition under Title III Chapters III and IIIa.
Amendment 459 #
2011/0435(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point a
Directive 2005/36/EC
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Basic medical training shall comprise a total of at least fivesix years of study, which may also be expressed with the equivalent ECTS credits, and shall consist of at least 5500 hours of theoretical and practical training provided by, or under the supervision of, a university.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Horizon 2020 should contribute to the attractiveness of the research profession, particularly its industrial and biomedical branches, in the Union. Adequate attention should be paid to the European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers, together with other relevant reference frameworks defined in the context of the European Research Area, while respecting their voluntary nature.
Amendment 66 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Effective performance management, including evaluation and monitoring, requires development of specific common European performance indicators which can be measured over time; are both realistic and reflect the logic of the intervention; and relevant to the appropriate hierarchy of objectives and activities. Appropriate coordination mechanisms should be put in place between the implementation and monitoring of Horizon 2020, and the monitoring of progress, achievements and functioning of the ERA.
Amendment 227 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 1
Life long health and wellbeing for all, effective, high-quality and economically sustainable health and care systems, access to health care which is impartial and guaranteed throughout the EU and opportunities for new jobs and growth are the aims of support to research and innovation in response to this challenge and will make a major contribution to Europe 2020.
Amendment 237 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 2
The cost of Union health and social care systems is rising with care and prevention measures in all ages increasingly expensive, the number of Europeans aged over 65 expected to nearly double from 85 million in 2008 to 151 million by 2060, and those over 80 to rise from 22 to 61 million in the same period. Reducing or containing these costs such that they do not become unsustainable depends in part on ensuring the lifelong health and wellbeing of all and therefore on thereinforcing effective prevention, and awareness- raising of the factors posing a health risk and enabling the treatment and management of disease and disability.
Amendment 245 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 3
Chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, diabetes, neurological and mental health disorders, overweight and obesity and various functional limitations are major causes of disability, ill-health, morbidity and premature death, and present considerable social and economic costs.
Amendment 256 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 5
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 5
Amendment 259 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 6
Annex I – part III – point 1.1 – paragraph 6
Meanwhile, drug and vaccine development processes are becoming more expensive and less effective. Persistent health inequalities must be addressed, and access to effective, viable and competent health systems must be ensured for all Europeans.
Amendment 274 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 1
Effective health promotion, supported by a robust evidence base, and raising awareness of risk factors prevents disease, improves wellbeing and isare cost effective. Health promotion and disease prevention also depend on an understanding of the determinants of health, on European data based on common indicators, on effective preventive tools, such as vaccines, on effective health and disease surveillance and preparedness, and on effective screening programmes.
Amendment 279 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 2
Successful efforts to prevent, manage, treat and cure disease, disability and reduced functionality are underpinned by the fundamental understanding of their determinants and causes, processes and impacts, as well as factors underlying good health and wellbeing. Effective sharing of data and the linkage of these data with large scale cohort studies, particularly European studies (based, for example, on the Framingham cohort for cardiovascular disease) is also essential, as is the translation of research findings into the clinic, in particular through the conduct of multicentre clinical trials.
Amendment 287 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 3
An increasing disease and disability burden in the context of an aging population places further demands on health and care sectors. If effective health and care is to be maintained for all ages, efforts are required to improve decision making in prevention and, treatment provision and diagnosis, to identify and support the dissemination of best practice in the health and care sectors, and to support integrated care and the wide uptake of technological, organisational and social innovations empowering in particular older persons as well as disabled persons to remain active and independent. Doing so will contribute to increasing, and lengthening the duration of their physical, social, and mental well-being.
Amendment 290 #
2011/0401(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part III – point 1.3 – paragraph 4
All of these activities shall be undertaken in such a way as to provide support throughout the research and innovation cycle, strengthening the development of new market opportunities and the competitiveness of the European based industries and development of new market opportunitiesupporting SMEs.
Amendment 100 #
2011/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) This Regulation should apply to the out-of-court resolution of contractual disputes betweeninitiated by consumers andgainst traders that arise from the online sale of goods or provision of services by traders across borders. It should not apply to disputes betweeninitiated by consumers andgainst traders that arise from the online sale of goods or provision of services if at least one of them is not established or resident in a Member State of the Union at the time when the consumer orders such goods or services or the trader and the consumer are established or resident in the same Member State.
Amendment 102 #
2011/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The definition of ‘consumer’ should cover natural persons who are acting outside their trade, business, craft or profession. However, if the contract is concluded for purposes partly within and partly outside the person's trade (dual purpose contracts) and the trade purpose is so limited as not to be predominant in the overall context of the supply, that person should also be considered as a consumer.
Amendment 105 #
2011/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Regulation should not apply to disputes betweeninitiated by consumers andgainst traders that arise from the cross-border sale of goods or provision of services offline. This Regulation should not apply to disputes between traders.
Amendment 131 #
2011/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
This Regulation shall apply to the out-of- court resolution of contractual disputes initiated by consumers against traders arising from the cross-border online sale of goods or provision of services between consumers and traders through the intervention of an alternative dispute resolution entity complying with Directive [Office of Publications please insert number of Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR)] and involving the use of a European online dispute resolution platform.
Amendment 137 #
2011/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point g – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point g – paragraph 1
Procedures before dispute resolution entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed exclusively by the trader, procedures before consumer complaint handling systems operated by the trader, direct negotiation between the consumer and the trader, whether represented or not, and attempts made by a judge to settle a dispute in the course of a judicial proceeding concerning that dispute shall not be regarded as ADR procedures;.
Amendment 138 #
2011/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Procedures before dispute resolution entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed exclusively by the trader shall not be regarded as ADR procedures unless these entities comply with the general requirements of Chapter II in accordance with Article 17, and if the following additional conditions are met: - the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are hierarchically independent from the trader and cannot be subject to instructions given by the trader; - the remuneration of the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution is not subject to the outcome of the dispute resolution procedure; - the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution must not have worked for the trader concerned during the three years prior to assuming the post. - the dispute resolution entity is subjected to an annual evaluation by the competent authority of the Member State where it is established regarding compliance with the principles laid down in this Directive;
Amendment 143 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The definition of ‘consumer’ should cover natural persons who are acting outside their trade, business, craft or profession. However, if the contract is concluded for purposes partly within and partly outside the person's trade (dual purpose contracts) and the trade purpose is so limited as not to be predominant in the overall context of the supply, that person should also be considered as a consumer.
Amendment 148 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Directive should not apply to procedures before dispute resolution entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed exclusively by the trader nor to procedures before consumer compliant handling systems operated by the trader. It should not apply nor to direct negotiations between the parties. Furthermore, it should not apply to attempts made by a judge to settle a dispute in the course of a judicial proceeding concerning that dispute.
Amendment 153 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) This Directive should not apply to procedures before dispute resolution entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed exclusively by the trader unless a number of conditions are met to ensure appropriate independence and impartiality of the natural person in charge of the dispute resolution.
Amendment 155 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Member States should ensure that disputes covered by this Directive can be submitted to an ADR entity fulfilling the requirements set out in this Directive and which has been notified to the European Commission in accordance with article 17(2) of the present Directive . Member States should have the possibility to fulfil this obligation by relying on existing ADR entities and adjusting their scope of application, if needed, or by providing for the creation of new ADR entities. This Directive should not oblige Member States to create a specific ADR entity in each retail sector. Member States should have the possibility to provide for the creation of a residual ADR entity that deals with disputes for the resolution of which no specific entity is competent.
Amendment 231 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) procedures before dispute resolution entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed exclusively by the trader, unless these entities comply with the general requirements of Chapter II in accordance with Article 17, and if the following additional conditions are met: - the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are hierarchically independent from the trader and cannot be subject to instructions given by the trader; - the remuneration of the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution is not subject to the outcome of the dispute resolution procedure; - the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution must not have worked for the trader concerned during the three years prior to assuming the post. - the dispute resolution entity is subjected to an annual evaluation by the competent authority of the Member State where it is established regarding compliance with the principles laid down in this Directive;
Amendment 249 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ‘ADR entity’ means any entity, however named or referred to, which is established on a durable basis and, offers the resolution of a dispute through an ADR procedure, and has been notified to the European Commission in accordance with article 17(2) of the present Directive;
Amendment 259 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) inform the consumer that prior contact directly with the trader may be needed before the opening of proceedings before an ADR entity to ensure the effectiveness of the procedure and avoid overloading ADR entities with requests that could be dealt with by the trader' customer service, when it exists, within reasonable time limits;
Amendment 317 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the dispute is resolved within 90 days from the date on which the ADR entity has received the complaintete complaint file. In the case of complex disputes, or when the complaint file is incomplete, the ADR entity may extend this time period.
Amendment 332 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – introductory part
(a) the consumerparties, before agreeing to a suggested solution, isare informed that:
Amendment 334 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) they hasve the choice as to whether or not to agree to a suggested solution;
Amendment 337 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
(ii) the suggested solution may be less favourable thandiffer from an outcome determined by a court applying legal rules;
Amendment 341 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii
(iii) before agreeing or rejecting the suggested solution they hasve the right to seek independent advice;
Amendment 382 #
2011/0373(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. This cooperation shall include mutual exchange of information on business practices by traders about which consumers have lodged complaintscomplaints lodged by consumers and the positive or negative outcome of the ADR procedure. It shall also include the provision of technical assessment and information by such national authorities to ADR entities where such assessment or information is necessary for the handling of individual disputes.
Amendment 58 #
2011/0339(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In the context of an ageing society, well-directed investments to promote health and prevent diseases can increase the number of ‘healthy life years’ and thus enable the elderly to continue working as they grow older. Chronic diseases are responsible for over 80% of premature mortality in the EU. By identifying, disseminating and promoting the up-take of validated best practices for cost-effective prevention measures focused on the key risk factors, namely smoking, abuse of alcohol and obesity, obesity and internal and external air pollution, as well as on HIV/AIDS, the Programme will contribute to prevent diseases and promote good health, also bearing in mind underlying factors of a social and environmental nature.
Amendment 109 #
2011/0339(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – point 3 – paragraph 1
(3) To identify, disseminate and promote the up-take of validated best practices for cost-effective prevention measure by addressing the key risk factors, namely smoking, abuse of alcohol and obesity, obesity and internal and external air pollution, as well as HIV/AIDS, with a focus on the cross border dimension, in order to prevent diseases and promote good health.
Amendment 143 #
2011/0339(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – indent 3.1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – indent 3.1
– 3.1. Exchange best practices on key health issues such as smoking prevention, drug use, abuse of alcohol, internal and external air pollution and obesity;
Amendment 211 #
2011/0339(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – point 3 – introductory part
Annex 1 – point 3 – introductory part
3. To identify, disseminate and promote the up-take of validated best practices for cost- effective prevention measure by addressing the key risk factors, namely smoking, abuse of alcohol and obesity, obesity and internal and external air pollution, as well as HIV/AIDS, with a focus on the cross border dimension, in order to prevent diseases and promote good health.
Amendment 216 #
2011/0339(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – point 3 – point 3.1
Annex 1 – point 3 – point 3.1
3.1. Cost-effective promotion and prevention measures: this will include actions towards the setting up of pan- European networks and partnerships engaging wide range of actors in communication and awareness raising actions on key health issues such as smoking prevention, abuse of alcohol, internal and external air pollution and addressing obesity with a focus on the cross-border dimension and on Member States with no or little action on these issues.
Amendment 15 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2
The ERDF shall contribute to the financing of support which aims to reinforce economic, social and territorial cohesion by redressing the main regional imbalances through support for the sustainable development and structural adjustment of regional economies, including the conversion of declining industrial regions and regions lagging behind.
Amendment 17 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) investments in social, sports, health and educational infrastructure;
Amendment 21 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 43 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 4 – point a
Article 5 – point 4 – point a
(a) promoting the production and distribution of renewable and low-carbon energy sources;
Amendment 44 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 4 – point e
Article 5 – point 4 – point e
(e) promoting low-carbon strategies for– including sustainable mobility and clean public transport – for all types of region, particularly urban areas;
Amendment 50 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 6 – introductory part
Article 5 – point 6 – introductory part
(6) protecting the environment, biodiversity and ecosystems and promoting resource efficiency:
Amendment 52 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 6 – point b
Article 5 – point 6 – point b
(b) addressing the significant needs for investment in the water sector to reduce leakage and meet the requirements of the environmental acquis;
Amendment 63 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 9 – point a
Article 5 – point 9 – point a
(a) investing in health, sports and social infrastructure which contribute to national, regional and local development, reducing inequalities in terms of health status, and transition from institutional to community- based services;
Amendment 178 #
2011/0187(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The retail charge (excluding VAT) of a Eurotariff which a home provider may levy from its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated roaming call may vary for any roaming call but shall not exceed EUR 0,32 per minute for any call made or EUR 0,11 per minute for any call received as of 1 July 2012. The price ceiling for calls made shall decrease to EUR 0,28 and EUR 0,2418 on 1 July 2013 and on 1 July 2014 respectively, and for calls received to EUR 0,10 on 1 July 2013 and EUR 0,08 on 1 July 2014. Without prejudice to Articles 13 and 19 these regulated maximum retail charges for the Eurotariff shall remain valid until 30 June 20167.
Amendment 198 #
2011/0187(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. With effect from 1 July 2012, the retail charge (excluding VAT) of a Euro-SMS tariff which a home provider may levy from its roaming customer for a regulated roaming SMS message sent by that roaming customer may vary for any roaming SMS message but shall not exceed EUR 0,10shall decrease to EUR 0,09 on 1 July 2013 and 0,06 on 1 July 2014. Without prejudice to Articles 13 and 19, the regulated maximum retail charge for the Euro-SMS tariff shall remain at EUR 0,106 until 30 June 20167.
Amendment 224 #
2011/0187(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
With effect from 1 July 2012, the retail charge (excluding VAT) of a Euro-data tariff which a home provider may levy from its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated roaming data shall not exceed EUR 0,90 per megabyte. The price ceiling for data used shall decrease to EUR 0,70 and EUR 0,530, per megabyte used on 1 July 2013 and on 1 July 2014 respectively. Without prejudice to Articles 13 and 19, the regulated maximum retail charge shall remain at EUR 0,530, per megabyte used until 30 June 20167.
Amendment 119 #
2011/0150(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – introductory part
(1) ‘standard’ means a technical specification established by consensus and approved by a recognised standardisation organisation for repeated or continuous applicationuse, with which compliance is not compulsory, and which is one of the following:
Amendment 191 #
2011/0150(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The request referred to in subparagraph 1 shall be adopted after consulting within a reasonable deadline the committee of national experts set up by the corresponding sectorial directive where it exists.
Amendment 204 #
2011/0150(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The decision referred to in paragraph 2(a) of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 18(2), after consulting within a reasonable deadline the committee of national experts set up by the corresponding sectoral directive where it exists.
Amendment 206 #
2011/0150(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. The decision referred to in paragraph 2(b) of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 18(3), after consulting within a reasonable deadline the committee of national experts set up by the corresponding sectoral directive where it exists.
Amendment 256 #
2011/0150(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 2 – heading 1
Annex 2 – heading 1
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RECOGNITIONUSE OF TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS IN THE FIELD OF ICT
Amendment 17 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Creating a legal framework to facilitate the digitisation and dissemination of works for which no authorightholder is identified or, even if identified, is not located, so called orphan works, is a key action of the Digital Agenda for Europe, as set out in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions – A Digital Agenda for Europe. (This amendment applies throughout the text.)
Amendment 28 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Musical works, included those embedded in the audio, audiovisual, and cinematographic works referred to in Article 1.2 (2) and (3) should be excluded from the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 30 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Before a work can be considered an orphan work, a good faith and reasonable diligent search for the authorightholder should be carried out. Member States should be permitted to provide that such a diligent search may be carried out by the organisations referred to in this Directive or by other organisations. In the latter case, organisations referred to in this Directive should remain liable for the diligent search performed. Member States should appoint entities entitled to certify that diligent searches have been properly carried out in good faith.
Amendment 60 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of establishing whether a work is an orphan work, the organisations referred to in Article 1(1) shall ensure that a good faith and reasonable diligent search is carried out for each work, by consulting the appropriate sources for the category of works in question.
Amendment 63 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The sources that are appropriate for each category of works shall be determined by each Member State, in consultationagreement with rightholders and users, and include, the sources listed in the Annex.
Amendment 64 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In case the diligent search is carried out by other organisations than those referred to in Article 1(1), the latter shall remain liable for the search performed.
Amendment 70 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall appoint entities entitled to certify that diligent searches have been properly carried out in good faith, and shall ensure that the results of diligent searches carried out in their territories are recorded in a publicly accessible database.
Amendment 93 #
2011/0136(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7a Preventive measures In accordance with the parties concerned, Member States shall promote measures to prevent the development of orphan works in the future.
Amendment 1829 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. Each controller and processor and, if any, the controller's representative, shall maintain documentation of all processing operations under its responsibility.
Amendment 1879 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. The controller and the processor and, if any, the controller's representative, shall make the documentation available, on request, to the supervisory authority.
Amendment 1891 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The obligations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to the following controllers and processors:
Amendment 2018 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Where processing operations present specific risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects by virtue of their nature, their scope or their purposes, the controller or the processor acting on the controller's behalf shall carry out an assessment of the impact of the envisaged processing operations on the protection of personal data. A single assessment shall be sufficient to address a set of processing operations that present similar risks.
Amendment 2047 #
2011/0011(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 3
3. The assessment shall contain at least a general description of the envisaged processing operations, an assessment of the risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the measures envisaged to address the risks, safeguards, security measures and mechanisms to ensure the protection of personal data and to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation, taking into account the rights and legitimate interests of data subjects and other persons concerned.
Amendment 9 #
2010/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Insists however on the necessity to take into account the social cost of the digital transition, and to develop training programmes for professionals to enable them to adapt to the use of new technologies;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that the digital roll-out must preserve programming diversity and cultural facilities for ruralin all EU countries and especially in rural and remote areas; emphasizes the importance of the social and cultural role of cinemas that must be preserved, especially in rural and remote areas; calls on the Commission, Member States and regions to focus public funding for digital conversion on cinemas which do not have access to Virtual Print Fee deals or solidarity funds or geographical areas at risk, and to minimise the duration of the transition period;
Amendment 14 #
2010/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines the importance of public support for the digital transition of cinemas; insists on the fact that digitisation must not result in the closure of small and arthouse cinemas to the benefit of multiplexes;
Amendment 30 #
2010/2303(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. calls upon Member States to put in place specific initiatives to ensure a better representation of women within the boards of directors;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2301(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the interdependence between the Chinese and the EU markets, and the need for the respect of the principle of reciprocity and a level playing field where protectionism is avoided; notes the progress made by China towards opening up its markets; stresses, however, the need to address certain ‘behind the border measures’ in China, which hamper the business climate for European businesses; takes the view, while continuing along the WTO track, that a free trade agreement (FTA) with China could improve trade relations; insists nonetheless on the fact that an agreement at multilateral level should be the priority for the EU;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2301(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the importance of the EU- China High-Level Economic and Trade Dialogue; calls for the EU and China to meet twice each year to strengthen their dialogue and achieve concrete results, in particular oin the field of investments, provision of services, respecting intellectual property rights, standards,regulatory convergence and convergence of standards, reciprocal opening of public procurement markets, product safety and access to raw materials;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2301(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Insists especially on the need for China to respect WTO rules regarding access to raw materials, as confirmed by the WTO ruling on 5 July 2011, and rare earths;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2301(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets that the investment climate in China lacks transparency and that discriminatory requirements still exist; calls for a bilateral investment agreement with China, based on the principles of reciprocity and mutual advantage, aiming at increased market access for investments;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2301(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned atDenounces the high level of counterfeiting and piracy and the low level of IPR enforcement in China; draws attention to the economic, social and consumer health costs generated by such practices;
Amendment 34 #
2010/2301(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises the need for better access to public markets; is concerned about Chinese policies on public procurement, which openly discriminate; emphasises that the EU must maintain its pressure on China to accede rapidly to the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA); so as to obtain the reciprocal opening-up of the Chinese public procurement market, ensure that public procurement procedures comply with international standards and establish predictable conditions for subcontractors;
Amendment 49 #
2010/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Encourages the Commission to pursue its efforts within the Better Regulation strategy, through the consistent consultation of stakeholders and their involvement in the impact assessment process;
Amendment 50 #
2010/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Amendment 94 #
2010/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Supports the Commission's initiatives to develop alternative dispute resolution in the EU; insists on the necessity of better information for citizens on the existence of such mechanisms; encourages the creation of mediators in electricity, transports and telecoms businesses; underlines their role in fostering consumers' confidence in market and recommends the elaboration of a European definition of mediators;
Amendment 101 #
2010/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Highlights the mutual evaluation provided for in the Services Directive as an innovative way of using peer pressure to improve the quality of transposition; given the burden it creates on national administrations, supports where appropriate using mutual evaluation in other areas, e.g. in the area of free movement of goodspecially for cross-cutting issues;
Amendment 112 #
2010/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Suggests that the President of the European CouncilCommission should be given the mandate to coordinate and supervise the relaunch of the Single Market, in close cooperation with the President of the CommissionEuropean Council;
Amendment 231 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a
Paragraph 17 – point a
(a) to enhance European market surveillance, improve access to basic banking services, create a single integrated mortgage market and remove tax obstacles and double taxation;Priority area 1: qualifications and vocational training
Amendment 236 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint i (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint i (new)
(i) is in favour of Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications being revised to improve recognition of qualifications and increase occupational mobility;
Amendment 237 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint ii (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint ii (new)
(ii) Encourages the Member States and the European Commission to pursue and deepen cooperation on vocational education and training, notably by improving the tools developed during the Copenhagen Process and supporting their implementation, and stresses the necessity of constantly adapting vocational education and training to labour market needs and developments;
Amendment 238 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint iii (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint iii (new)
(iii) Requests that the Commission undertake a clear-cut assessment of a possible ‘professional card’ before it is introduced and specify its relationship to Europass;
Amendment 239 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint iv (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint iv (new)
(iv) Restates the need to boost and expand mobility for young people by removing existing barriers, notably as regards traineeships in Europe, calls on the Commission to introduce the ‘Youth on the Move’ card by setting out the procedures for its implementation;
Amendment 240 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint v (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint v (new)
(v) Restates the importance of validating skills acquired throughout a person’s life, supports the Commission’s intention to propose to the Council a recommendation on the promotion and validation of non- formal and informal learning by taking into account experience from the Education and Training 2010 Programme in particular;
Amendment 241 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint vi (new)
Paragraph 17 – point a – subpoint vi (new)
(vi) Calls on the Commission to support and expand the educational European mobility programmes, and the Leonardo da Vinci programme in particular, by prolonging credits for the development of an ambitious youth mobility programme, for apprentices in particular;
Amendment 244 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point b
Paragraph 17 – point b
(b) to implement an e-commerce policy in order to increase citizens’ and consumers’ confidence when shopping online;Priority area 2:Consumer safety
Amendment 245 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point b – subpoint i (new)
Paragraph 17 – point b – subpoint i (new)
(i) Supports the multi-annual EU action plan to develop market surveillance and revision of the directive on general product safety, which will ensure consumers are protected, and stresses that the Commission action plan against counterfeiting is particularly important in terms of improving safety for EU consumers;
Amendment 250 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point c
Paragraph 17 – point c
(c) to devise an action plan against counterfeiting and piracy as a major preventive tool, in order to ensure that goods circulating in the Single Market are safe to consume, of the appropriate standard and legal;Priority Area 3: Cross-border taxation of citizens
Amendment 251 #
2010/2278(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – point c – subpoint i (new)
Paragraph 17 – point c – subpoint i (new)
(i) Welcomes the Communication of the European Commission of 20 December 2010[1] on removing cross-border tax obstacles for EU citizens, and calls on it to implement rapidly the initiatives set out there, particularly as regards double taxation and cross-border successions; [1] Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee of 20 December 2010 on ‘Removing cross-border tax obstacles for EU citizens’
Amendment 11 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas all enterprises are affected by market fragmentation, but SMEs and craft manufacturing businesses are particularly vulnerable to the problems stemming from it,
Amendment 27 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas public procurement plays an important role to boost economic growth, accounting for around 17% of the EU's GDP; whereas cross-border procurement accounts for a low share of the whole public procurement market, despite being an opportunity for EU firms; whereas SMEs still have limited access to public procurement markets,
Amendment 49 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
I. Priority Area 1: An innovative and greener Single Market
Amendment 52 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Strongly supports the creation of an EU patent and of a unified patent litigation system in order to make the Single Market an innovation-friendly environment; stresses that the cost burden of multilingual patents would hinder innovation in the Single Market; strongly encourages interested Member States to take part in the reinforced cooperation procedure;
Amendment 85 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Welcomes the Commission 's proposal to revise the Energy tax Directive (2003/96/EC) to include a carbon-related component in the taxation of energy products and electricity in order to initiate a move from budget-driven taxation to environment-driven taxation while keeping the same overall level of taxation;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Insists on the importance of putting inventions to good use; supports the idea of creating a European Funds for Patents, which would create patents pools through a system of licences to the benefice of European enterprises, especially innovative SMEs;
Amendment 97 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to take the appropriate measures to enhance the confidence of businesses in e-commerce, namely by harmonizing contract law where possible andespecially by facilitating cross- border debt recovery;
Amendment 114 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the need to create a Single Market for online audiovisual goods by improving the electronic management of copyrights while supporting innovation and creativity by ensuring that rightholders receive adequate remuneration for their creative works;
Amendment 120 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Regrets that the revision of the Community Trademark Regulation is not mentioned in the Single Market Act; underlines that it should be among the Commission's priorities to ensure that trademarks are well protected in off-line as well as in online environments;
Amendment 124 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out the needCalls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen the fight against online piracy in aand ensure the proportectionate manner and with public support of intellectual property rights by making full use of the available technology while respecting fundamental rights;
Amendment 141 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Highlights the economic importance of SMEs and craft manufacturing businesses in the European economy; insists, therefore, on the need to ensure that the 'think small first' principle promoted by the 'Small Business Act' is well implemented and considered as a priority in the framework of the Single Market Act;
Amendment 149 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. points out the importance of interconnected business registers and calls on the Commission to develop a clear legal framework ensuring that information in such business registers is complete and correct;
Amendment 160 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. points out the importance of interconnected business registers and calls on the Commission to develop a clear legal framework ensuring that information in such business registers is complete and correct;
Amendment 164 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Swarmly welcomes the Commission's initiative for a Directive introducing a common consolidated corporate tax base and stresses that a common consolidated corporate tax base would increase the transparency and comparability of corporate tax rates, thus reducing the obstacles to cross-border activities;
Amendment 198 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to encourage the development of the business services sector and to take the necessary regulatory measures in order to protect especially SMEs from unfair commercial practices by larger enterprises in the retail sector; recalls its Resolution 2008/2126 (INI) and urges the Commission again to come up with a proposal to prevent the fraudulent practices of Misleading Business Directories;
Amendment 208 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. InviNotes the Commission to propose's intention to adopt a legal framework foron services concessions that would ensure transparency, effective judicial protection for bidders and legal certainty; ; recalls that the principles deriving from the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, such as transparency, equal treatment, proportionality, non-discrimination and mutual recognition, already apply to service concessions; recalls the European Parliament's position on an initiative on service concessions as stated in the Resolution on New developments in public procurement of 18th May 2010, according to which a legislative initiative would be justified only on the grounds of distortions in the functioning of the internal market, and that such a legislative initiative appears to be unnecessary given the fact that such distortions have not so far been identified;
Amendment 217 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Emphasises the importance of proper implementation of the Professional Qualifications Directive; urges the Commission to propose measures for the creation of EU-wide professional cards where appropriate while ensuring the protection of personal data;
Amendment 222 #
2010/2277(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Highlights the importance of the external dimension of the internal market and in particular of regulatory cooperation with main trading partners whether at bilateral or multilateral levels with the objective of promoting regulatory convergence, equivalence of third-country regimes and the wider adoption of international standards; insists on the necessity to ensure increased loyalty in international trade exchanges by guaranteeing the principle of reciprocity, especially in the field of public procurement, competition policy, and intellectual property rights;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
– having regard to the Council Decision of 26 November 2009 concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,
Amendment 2 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to the Council Conclusions on Common values and principles in European Union Health Systems (2006/C146/01),
Amendment 5 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)
Paragraph A c (new)
Ac. whereas people with disabilities constitute a vulnerable group, among whom the rate of poverty is 70% higher than average; whereas this higher exposure to the risk of poverty is the result of often limited access not only to employment and training but also to healthcare and appropriate treatment,
Amendment 6 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)
Paragraph A d (new)
Ad. whereas the success of the Europe 2020 strategy, the objective of which is to develop European growth which is smart (based on innovation and research), sustainable and inclusive, will necessarily require structural improvements as regards the mobility and inclusion of people with disabilities,
Amendment 7 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A e (new)
Paragraph A e (new)
Ae. whereas, at a time of economic crisis, it is urgent and essential to redesign the national public health systems to make them more efficient, balanced and viable,
Amendment 17 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Reiterates that the availability of access to all services, particularly health and care services, is a fundamental principle of the European model ofall health services in the European Union should be based on the fundamental values of universality, access to quality care and solidarity;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to urge Member States to adopt specific polici, with the support of the Commission, measures to ensure equal access to health care, including high-qualityfor people with disabilities to healthcare and rehabilitation services for people with disabilities;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the Council and the Member States to restructure failing healthcare systems and to rationalise public spending on healthcare in order to offer fair access to quality healthcare, without discrimination, to people with disabilities throughout the EU; encourages them, therefore, to promote the transition from institutional to community-based care by using the Structural Funds and the Rural Development Fund;
Amendment 49 #
2010/2272(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of ensuring more people with disabilities enter employment by means such as imposing specific quotas on employers or measures to adapt jobs to the needs of job-seekers with disabilities ;
Amendment 9 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Supports the Commission’s willingness to breathe life into neglected intellectual property; believes that one way to achieve this could be the creation of a European Funds for Patents, which would create patents pools through a system of licences to the benefice of European enterprises, especially innovative SMEs;
Amendment 46 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Highlights the necessity of speeding- up and modernising standard-setting to better facilitate interoperability and foster innovation in fast growing global markets;
Amendment 49 #
2010/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Insists on the importance of achieving a well-functioning European Research Area by 2014, by establishing an overarching governance structure, progressively aligning national programmes, streamlining administration rules and enhancing cross-border mobility of researchers;
Amendment 12 #
2010/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that the change in the balance between the retired and working populations has weakened pay-as-you-go pension schemes based on the principle of solidarity.
Amendment 14 #
2010/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points up the complementarity and interdependence of the various pension scheme pillars.
Amendment 15 #
2010/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the pauperisation concerns more often retired people than workers and more often women than meretired people are at risk of pauperisation, and whereas the elderly women are one of the most vulnerable groups at risk of poverty,
Amendment 28 #
2010/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that to meet citizen's expectations as regards the Union's internal market, ideally all pension rights should be portable within the EUStresses the need for all pension rights to be portable within the EU so as to strengthen the mobility of European citizens and meet their expectations as regards the Union's internal market; considers that currently only statutory and occupational pensions are portable in theory.
Amendment 33 #
2010/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls upon the Commission to further examineexamine in depth the obstacles to portability, such as accounting standards and fiscal barriers, in order to submit proposals to remove these, accompanied with appropriate supervision measures.
Amendment 37 #
2010/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the period spent by women or men on taking care of children or other dependent family members should be taken into account and recognised in the calculation systems and taken into account to the period of work as well as all kind of contracof pension entitlements;
Amendment 25 #
2010/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas violence is a way of denying fundamental rights and endangering the future and is a traumatic experience for any man, woman or child, butand whereas gender-based violence is preponderantly inflicted by men on women and girls, and both reflects and reinforces inequities between men and women and compromises the health, dignity, security and autonomy of its victims, but men are also victims of violence, particularly of the emotional variety,
Amendment 102 #
2010/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 8 a (new)
Paragraph 1 – indent 8 a (new)
– the establishment of programmes to prevent violence for the benefit of children who have witnessed violence against their mothers, in order to prevent reproduction of violent behaviour;
Amendment 164 #
2010/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that civil society, particularly NGOs, women’s associations and other public and private voluntary organisations providing support to victims of violence, offers a service of great value, particularly by assisting women victims who wish to break the silence in which violence encloses them, and should be given support by the Member States;
Amendment 178 #
2010/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises that Member States should devote appropriate resources to preventing and combating violence against women, which should particularly be allocated to support organisations, including through recourse to the Structural Funds;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. having regard to the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which for the first time assigns to the European Union powers to coordinate and supplement the action of the Member States in the field of tourism, with due regard for the subsidiarity principle,
Amendment 2 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the majority of operators in tourism are SMEs and whereas, by virtue of their structures and the seasonality of their activities, they are more directly affected by fluctuations in the economy and by natural factors,
Amendment 9 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on Member States to facilitate and encourage training and apprenticeships in tourism and to develop a specific policy geared to seasonal workers, and calls for improvements in the mutual recognition of professional qualifications in the tourist industry in order to make it easier for both skilled workers and people changing careers to find work in the industry;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission, the European Parliament and Member States to adopt a more integrated approach to tourism and coordinate better the various European policies which affect it, particularly in the field of services and consumer protection and particularly by quickly performing the next revision of Directive 90/314/EEC on package travel, package holidays and package tours;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Encourages Member States to establish, including possibly by means of greater cooperation, a harmonised European employment contract for seasonal workers who are Community nationals, in order to bolster the free movement of workers within the EU;
Amendment 38 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to support barrier-free and age-adapted tourism and tourism for people with disabilities and introduce a European quality label for tourist destinations which make barrier- free travel and stays possible for the elderly; notes that with this aim in view the Calypso programme should b and people with disabilities; calls in particular on the hotel industry, by drafting and adopting a code of good practice, to facilitate assccessed, in conjunction with stakeholders, and, if appropriate, continued. to its facilities for people with disabilities and reduced mobility in accordance with the principles set out in the Commission Communication of 15 November 2010 on the European Disability Strategy 2010- 2020 (COM(2010)0636);
Amendment 48 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes the launch by the Commission in 2009 of the Calypso programme, whose aim is both social (to enable categories of person who would be unlikely to travel on holiday nonetheless to do so) and economic (aid to tourism by encouraging people to travel on holiday during the 'low season'); considers that it should be continued, subject to an assessment – in which stakeholders should participate – of the results achieved ;
Amendment 58 #
2010/2206(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Supports the Commission initiatives to promote tourism within the EU, such as the EDEN (European Destinations of Excellence) project, which each year singles out in each participating country, in accordance with a specific theme, European tourist destinations which prioritise a sustainable development model; calls on the Commission to launch information campaigns in order to highlight such initiatives;
Amendment 124 #
2010/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Member States to facilitate and encourage training and apprenticeships in the tourism sector and to enhance career opportunities, in particular by developing the scope for retraining, obtaining new qualifications and taking advantage of lifelong training; emphasises that the inherently seasonal nature of tourism can give rise to precarity in terms of employment and working conditions; calls, in that connection, for the development of a specific policy to assist seasonal workers, involving, in particular measures to extend tourist seasons by diversifying tourist activities;
Amendment 23 #
2010/2173(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. UrgesConsiders it unacceptable that the Agency is noto complying effectively with its Code of Conduct by setting out principles and guidance on independence and confidentiality applicable to the Management Board and committees'’ members, experts and Agency'’s staff; calls on, also,expects the Agency to assess thoroughly, before the allocation of Project Team Leaders to products, whether the interests declared by staff members might influence their impartiality and independence; urges, in addition, the Agency to document and assess its controls and file the relevant allocation decisions;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2173(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Urges the Agency to inform the discharge authority of the steps it has taken to ensure the independence of its experts since its inception;
Amendment 32 #
2010/2173(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls ononsiders it unacceptable for the Agency to ensure thatallow the information included in the product files to support the procedure underpinning the authorisation of its files on human medicines is to be incomplete; urges, in this respect, the Agency to guarantee that key information is easily retrieved and all relevant guidelines on the filing system are in place;
Amendment 33 #
2010/2173(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls, moreover, on the AgencyAsks the Agency, moreover, to complete and regularly update the European Experts Database as required by the Agency's regulation, and to keep the discharge authority informed; urges also the Agency to allow SIAMED and Product Overview databases for efficient retrieval of information;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23
Citation 23
Amendment 7 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 12 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas, under the International Health Regulations (IHR) – a legal instrument binding on the states parties to it – the remit of the WHO includes public health surveillance, coordinating international public health measures and, in relation to potentially pandemic viruses, determining current phases of alert on a scale of one to six,
Amendment 13 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the phases of a global pandemic are determined in accordance with the provisions of the IHR and in consultation with other organisations and institutions and with the Member States affected,
Amendment 14 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 22 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. Considering the high degree of unforeseeability and severity of how the pandemic was going to unfold, always with the possibility that the pandemic might worsen in Europe, as it did in 1918 and 1968;
Amendment 28 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 40 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 56 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 60 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 69 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 74 #
Amendment 75 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls forRequests that the prevention plans established in the EU and its Member States to be revised to make them sufficiently autonomousin order to gain in effectiveness, in coherence and of flexible to be adapted as swiftly as possible and on a case by case basis to the actual risk, based not least on the latest scientific information availableility by a better coordination of the instruments installed but also of the scientific data available. For this purpose, it is in particular advisable to reinforce the mandate of the Committee of Public Health whose action should be more based on an intergovernmental level and whose composition should reflect a better representativeness of the executive decisions;
Amendment 80 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Emphasises the need to reinforce cooperation between Member States within the EU in the management of the response to a pandemic, within the framework of WHO, according to the International Health Regulation of 2005 ;
Amendment 81 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Wants to reinforce the collaboration between Member States by ensuring coherent risk assessment and risk management for fast evolving threats at EU level by putting in place, where necessary, additional structures and coordination mechanisms;
Amendment 82 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Is delighted about the fact that the Commission committed itself studying the possibility of a revision and, should this happen, a long-term reinforcement of the legal base of Health Security Committee;
Amendment 84 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Urges the WHO to revise the definition of a pandemic, taking into consideration, when a virus is detected, not only its geographical spread but also its severity;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Calls on the Member States to involve health professionals more closely at every stage in the preparation and application of strategies for preventing and combating pandemics;
Amendment 87 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 h (new)
Paragraph 1 h (new)
1h. Urges the European Union to allot more means to the research and the development while conforming to the objective which it assigned to allocate 3% of the European GDP to the R & D; more specifically claim an increase in the investments dedicated to a better evaluation and anticipation of the impact of an influenza virus as well in period between pandemic as at the beginning of a pandemic;
Amendment 88 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 i (new)
Paragraph 1 i (new)
1i. Welcomes the Commission's commitment to develop a mechanism for joint procurement of vaccines and antiviral medication which allows Member States, on a voluntary basis, a common acquisition of these products or common approaches to contract negotiations with the pharmaceutical industry; Recalls that only the seeking for joint solutions for a common purchasing of vaccines and antiviral medications will ensure equitable access, at the lowest price for the Member States;
Amendment 89 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 j (new)
Paragraph 1 j (new)
1j. Calls for continued investment in national epidemiological, serological and virological surveillance centres;
Amendment 97 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Demands that robust, crediblePoints out the need for and effective scientific procedures be introduced for the evaluation of medicinal products recommended in the event of health emergencies, and more particularly in genuine pandemic, independent, transparent and balanced scientific report for the evaluation of the drugs including in health emergency situations;
Amendment 100 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underscores the need for studies independent of the pharmaceutical companies on vaccines and antiviral medications, including with regard to the monitoring of vaccination coverage;
Amendment 101 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 116 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls in particular on the EMA to reviewimprove the accelerated authorisation procedures for the placing on the market of medicinal products designed to respond to a health crisis, in order to ensure correct assessment of the benefit-risk profile associated with the use of those medicinal products;
Amendment 117 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Wants to ensure that the scientific experts have no financial or other interests in the pharmaceutical industry that could affect their impartiality; Request the development of a European code of conduct relating to the exercise of the scientific function of expert in any European authority in charge of safety, of the management and the anticipation of the risks ; require that each expert subscribe to the ethical principles of this code of conduct before any taking up the duties ;
Amendment 118 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Asks that experts who are involved in the pharmaceutical sector could be consulted but should be excluded from decision-making ;
Amendment 119 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Requests the installation of a definition of the conflict of interest which is common to all the European agencies ;
Amendment 146 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls for full liability for the quality, safety and effectiveness of a medicinal product to rest with the manufacturer, while taking account of the different legal arrangements for compulsory vaccinations;
Amendment 150 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Is aware of the need to communicate more clearly and transparently to help the publics to facilitate the risk communication; Underlines the necessity to arrive to only one and single message bound for the citizens as soon as the health hazard was evaluated ; insists on the importance of consistent communication of the Member States regarding the informative contents of the message (as for the nature of the virus, with the nature of the risk and in the manner of securing and curing);
Amendment 151 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Requires a global European strategic approach for the so-called “at-risk” groups on how to reach them and communicate with them in case of pandemics;
Amendment 152 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Calls to build relationships of trust with the media concerned with disseminating public health messages; Request the setting-up of a select group of available experts to answer questions from journalists at all times, as well as the availability of a spokesperson;
Amendment 153 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)
Paragraph 10 d (new)
10d. Stresses the need for accountability of information professionals and the prudence required in the processing of health information messages a fortiori in the context of a pandemic;
Amendment 156 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)
Subheading 3 a (new)
Within the framework of the common and liable management of supply of vaccines, request to think over the possibility of easing the access of developing countries to vaccinal products in case of a pandemic;
Amendment 158 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Demands precise definition ofRequests to specify and clarify the roles, duties, remits, limits, relations and responsibilities of the key actors and the structures of management of the medical threats at the level of the EU which are the European Commission, the ECDC, the EMA and the Member States and also of more informal entities such as the Health Security Committee, the HEOF and the ‘public health’ group, composed of senior officials able to intervene in the decision- making process regarding the management of a health crisis;
Amendment 163 #
2010/2153(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 8 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the need for developing synergies between competition and consumer protection policies, including creating a European form of collective redress based on the opt-in principle for individual victims of competition law violations;
Amendment 17 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets the lack progress in improving competition in the pharmaceutical sector; asks the Commission to fight against abuses that may arise from the systematic practice of patent clusters that delay the market entry of generic medicines and restrict patients’ access to affordable medicines; urges the Commission to take punitive measures in the case of misleading information campaigns against generic medicines;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Proposes the creation of an EuropeanU patent and an EU-wide patent dispute settlement mechanism to tackle competition distortions caused by the current provisions on patents;
Amendment 5 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the wind of protectionism blowing across Europe is alarmingshould be avoided, especially in times of crisis, in order to reap the full potential of the internal market,
Amendment 22 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the primary focus must be on the effective enforcement of Treaty principles, existing internal market rules and instruments, and self-regulation, rath; underlines, however, than taking a regulatory approacht self-regulation cannot in itself substitute completely for regulation, especially in terms of enforcement and sanctions;
Amendment 52 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. NotesDraws attention to the concern expressed by parts of civil society and SMEs about the increase in shopping centres and the decrease in local shops and markets in remote areas and town centres; stresses that retail planning should not sacrifice consumers'’ freedom of choice; insists furthermore on the key role played by local shops and markets in the revitalisation of rural and urban areas and regions, the creation of social ties, the preservation of cultural specificities, and the reduction of car use;
Amendment 71 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that e-commerce is an important complement to offline trade and that appropriate action must be taken to develop its full potential including improving access to Internet in the European Union's most remote areas; calls on the Commission to include in the upcoming Communication on e-commerce measures to enhance confidence, in particular by simplifying registration of domains across borders, improving secure online payment and facilitating cross- border debt recovery;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Reaffirms that free competition and, freedom of contract and proper effective enforcement of relevant legislation are key to a well- functioning retail market;
Amendment 92 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes noteInsists, however, ofn a widespread concern about market dominance by bigger actors, who are perceived tomay impose unfair terms on small suppliers and traders, for instance through mechanisms of selective distribution, restrictive practices, price control and delisting without notice, thereby distorting competition; underlines that the entire retail supply chain is affected by such practices; denounces such practices that distort competition and exploit power imbalance between economic actors;
Amendment 111 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that ‘parasitic copying’, which can result from the retailer's dual role as the customer and competitor of brand manufacturers, is an unacceptable practice that should be addressed without delayby the Commission without delay, including through legislative measures if deemed appropriate to ensure a uniform treatment of such practice across the EU;
Amendment 130 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Considers that, rather than proposing legislation, alternative and informal dispute resolution and redress mechanisms should be explored and their effectiveness evaluated;
Amendment 140 #
2010/2109(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Calls on the Commission to develop at the EU level a common methodology to evaluate the environmental impact of products and services sold, as indicated in its resolution on a Single Market for Enterprises and Growth, based on the product's whole life cycle, particularly with a view to avoiding the use of inaccurate and incomparable labels which could mislead European consumers and distort the functioning of the Internal Market;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2099(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 34 #
2010/2099(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 36 #
2010/2099(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Ask the Commission to consider setting up a ‘European Monetary Fund’ to complement the Stability and Growth Pact in its function of controlling the budget situation in Member States. The fund could be financed by contributions from the euro area countries, pro rata with GDP, and fines proportionate to levels of debt and deficit. The Member States could request assistance from the fund to a level equivalent to their contributions to it,
Amendment 45 #
2010/2099(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. As well as aligning national budget timetables, and in the context of the ‘Union Semester’, ensure better working coordination between the European Parliament, with its enhanced budgetary powers, and the national parliaments. The Council and the Commission should consult Parliament on the broad economic policy guidelines, on the employment guidelines and on the indicators used as a basis for national reform programmes.
Amendment 6 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Highlights the economic importance of SMEs and craft manufacturing businesses in the European industrial fabric; insists, therefore, on the need to place the 'think small first' principle promoted by the 'Small Business Act' at the heart of the EU's new industrial policy in order to guarantee that the specific characteristics of these undertakings are taken into account in the process of defining and implementing it;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission and Member States to foster key technologies through an innovation-friendly and technology- neutral framework, whilst guaranteeing respect for intellectual and industrial property rights; encourages public authorities to support public acceptance of new technologies, based on scientific evidence;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that protecting intellectual property rights is the cornerstone for protecting European know-how and promoting innovation within the EU, which notably entails stepping up the fight against counterfeiting and reducing the cost of patents in Europe; calls on the Member States and the Commission in this context to continue their efforts with a view to the earliest possible creation of a European Union patent and a suitable dispute-settlement system, and to strengthen resources and coordination between customs authorities and market surveillance authorities in order better to detect the entry onto the single market of counterfeit products;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Highlights the need to take account of the specific characteristics of SMEs and craft enterprises in the European standardisation system, particularly in terms of cutting the cost of access to standards, the dissemination of standards (publication of abstracts) and financial support; stresses the key role to be played by national standards bodies in promoting and boosting participation by SMEs and craft enterprises in the standardisation process, in keeping with the 'national delegation' principle;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Member States and the Commission, if an agreement at European level proves to be impossible, to continue their efforts to create a European Union patent through the introduction of intensified cooperation, with a view to the development of a competitive and innovative European industrial policy;
Amendment 22 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Takes the view that competition policy must respond to the needs of an ambitious industrial policy, whilst respecting the rules of the internal market;
Amendment 23 #
2010/2095(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that social partners are best qualified to manage the appropriate adjustments following the economic crisis; notes that state intervention in restructuring should be limitfocused ton the mitigation of social hardship and re-qualification of the labour force, and that an expansion of EU funds for restructuring purposes should be avoidedon measures designed to limit relocations outside EU territory;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to Article 23 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights relating to equality between men and women in all areas,
Amendment 3 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
- having regard to the 8 June 2010 Council Conclusions on “Equity and Health in All Policies: Solidarity in Health",
Amendment 3 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 4 b (new)
Citation 4 b (new)
- having regard to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union,
Amendment 4 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to Council Conclusions on Common values and principles in European Union Health Systems (2006/C 146/01),
Amendment 4 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that health inequalities exist both between and within Member States;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
Amendment 8 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph B
Paragraph B
B. whereas women oftecan find themselves in precarious situations linked to their gender, way of life, religion, age, social status and financial solvency,
Amendment 13 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
Amendment 14 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas health inequalities have also an important gender dimension: women in generalthe gender dimension in terms of livfe longer than men but may spend a longer proportion of their lives in ill healthexpectancy is also a major issue to be addressed where health inequalities are concerned,
Amendment 14 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that within the internal market the accessibility and affordability of pharmaceutical treatments should be considered a key aspect of health inequality and, in this regsocioeconomic factors (obesity, smoking, etc.) and difficulties of access to care (non-reimbursement of the costs of care and of medicines, inadequate prevention, fragmentation of medical demography) are the main causes of health inequality within the internal market; in order to promote access to carde, calls on Member States to ensure that the Transparency Directive (89/105/EEC) is being properly implemented;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C a (new)
Paragraph C a (new)
Ca. whereas there is a life expectancy gap between men and women, with women living longer,
Amendment 22 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on Member States to adapt their health systems to the needs of the most disadvantaged by developing methods of pricing and of remuneration of healthcare professionals which ensure access to care for all patients;
Amendment 23 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses the existence of discrimination against older persons in access to care; calls on the Commission and Member States to analyse the reasons for it and to take whatever measures are possible to combat such discrimination; calls on the Commission and Member States to make access to care for older persons a priority for the European Year of Active Ageing (2012);
Amendment 29 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas comparative measurement of health inequalities is a fundamental first step towards effective action,
Amendment 32 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to introduce and collate epidemiological tools to analyse the causes of the life expectancy gap between men and women;
Amendment 35 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the EU and the Member States to adopt strategies tailored to specific aspects of women's daily lives in order to reduceing economic and social inequalities, thereby also helping towhich will help reduce health inequalities;
Amendment 36 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that the existence of geographical areas which are poor in healthcare professionals is one of the causes of health inequalities; advocates therefore mobility of healthcare professionals within the European Union in accordance with the genuine needs of the population;
Amendment 40 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas a social gradient in health status exists, whereby people in lower educational, occupational and income groups tend to die at a younger age and to have a higher prevalence of most types of health problemsthe Commission has observed that there is a social gradient in health status in all the EU Member States (Commission Communication of 20 October 2010 entitled ‘Solidarity in Health: Reducing Health Inequalities in the EU’); and whereas the World Health Organization defines this social gradient as being the link between socio-economic inequalities and inequalities in the areas of health and access to healthcare,
Amendment 43 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas health inequalities are due to differences between population groups in a wide range of factors which affect health, including: living conditions; health related behaviours; education, occupation and income; health care, disease prevention and health promotion services; and public policies influencing the quantity, quality and distribution of these factorsnot only the result of a host of economic, environmental and lifestyle-related factors, but also of problems relating to access to healthcare,
Amendment 43 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the EU and the Member States to introduce more targeted healthdevelop targeted prevention and awareness campaigns to encourage and improve access to the early detection and diagnosis of diseases, specifically affecting women, such asuch as cardiovascular diseases, breast, cervical and ovarian cancer, etc.;
Amendment 47 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Argues that open, competitive and well functioning markets stimulate innovation, investment and research in the healthcare sector and may help in identifying effective healthcare modelsCalls on the Commission and Member States to support innovation and R&D in the healthcare sector in order to promote the development of new technologies and their applications in this field (e.g. in telemedicine);
Amendment 49 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas despite the socio-economic and environmental progress that has led to an overall improvement in peoples’ health status over long periods, a number of factors such as hygiene, living and working conditions, malnutrition, education, income, alcohol consumption and smoking are still having a direct impact on health inequalities,
Amendment 50 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)
Recital H b (new)
Hb. whereas the dearth of medical professionals in certain areas of the EU and their ability to move to other areas of the EU is a real problem, and whereas this situation is resulting in major inequalities in terms of access to healthcare and patient safety,
Amendment 51 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H c (new)
Recital H c (new)
Hc. whereas health inequalities are also linked to problems in accessing healthcare, both for economic reasons (not as much for major treatment, which is dealt with correctly by the Member States, but rather for everyday treatment such as dental and eye care) and as a result of poor distribution of medical resources in certain areas of the EU,
Amendment 51 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Member States to solve the problems of inequalities in access to healthcare that has an effect on everyday life, such as dentistry or ophthalmology;
Amendment 55 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the Commission forecasts that unemployment is likely to reach 10.3% by the end of 2010, and whereas there is widespread concern that the present economic crisis, particularly its effect on unemployment, will adversely affect population health, according to Eurostat, the EU’s statistical office, unemployment across the 27 EU Member States reached 9.6% in September 2010, and whereas the Council of the European Union’s Social Protection Committee, in its opinion of 20 May 2010, expressed concern that the present economic and financial crisis will adversely affect citizens’ access to healthcare and the Member States’ health budgets,
Amendment 55 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the EU and the Member States to collect, analyse and make effective unduct epidemiological studies and to collect and produce comprehensive data based of data in order regularly to assessn common, strictly defined indicators in order to assess the impact of existing health policies and programmes specifically targeted aton the health of men and women;
Amendment 59 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the current economic and financial crisis may have a severe impa, in its opinion of 20 May 2010, the Council of the European Union’s Social Protection Committee emphasised that the restrict ion the heals imposed by the care sector in several EU Member States, on both the supply and the demand sidesurrent economic and financial crisis mean that the Member States must step up their efforts to improve the effectiveness of health expenditure,
Amendment 64 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the EU and the Member States rapidly to find ways of combating ethnic discrimination, particularly in certain Member States where Council Directive 2000/43/EC has not been implemented and where women from ethnic minorities have little or no social protection or access to healthcarefacilitating and guaranteeing access to health services and fair social protection in compliance with the principles of gender equality and ethnic (in accordance with Council Directive 2000/43/EC), economic, social, linguistic, geographical or cultural non- discrimination;
Amendment 65 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the combination of poverty with other vulnerabilities, such as childhood or, old age, disability or minority background, further increases health riskthe risks of health inequalities,
Amendment 66 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Member States to adapt their health systems to the needs of the most disadvantaged groups by developing pricing and wage systems for health professionals that guarantee access to healthcare for all patients;
Amendment 69 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K c (new)
Recital K c (new)
Kc. whereas, with ageing populations, the Member States are having to deal with problems relating to dependency and an increasing need for geriatric care and treatment; whereas a change in the approach to organising healthcare is therefore needed; and whereas inequalities relating to access to healthcare for elderly people are on the increase,
Amendment 69 #
2010/2089(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 70 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K d (new)
Recital K d (new)
Kd. Whereas equitable access to healthcare is not secured, not only in practice but also in law, for undocumented migrants in many EU countries,
Amendment 76 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that attention must focus on the whole social gradient, with particular attention to be given to the needs of people in poverty, disadvantaged migrant andCalls on the Commission and the Member States to press ahead with their efforts to tackle socio-economic inequalities, which will ultimately make it possible to iron out some of the inequalities relating to healthcare; furthermore, calls on them to focus on the needs of vulnerable groups, including disadvantaged migrant groups and people belonging to ethnic minority groupies, people with disabilities, elderly people and children living in poverty;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to make access to adequate, quality healthcare for the elderly a priority for 2012, the European Year of Active Ageing and Intergenerational Solidarity;
Amendment 87 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on the Member States to ensure that the most vulnerable groups, including undocumented migrants, are entitled to and are provided equitable access to healthcare;
Amendment 88 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Calls on the Member States to look into the feasibility of publicly funding healthcare for irregular migrants by providing a common definition for the basic elements of healthcare to which all residents of the EU would be entitled, irrespective of their legal situation;
Amendment 97 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Council toand the Member States to implement and evaluate new measures to mitigate the impact of the economic crisis on the health care sector, in particular in the following areas: investing in health infrastructure, public health, health promotion and disease prevention, optimising funding for the health care sector, restructuring and reorganising the health care systemoptimise and rationalise public spending on health care, to restructure failing health care systems in order to provide equitable access to high- quality health care (in particular routine medical care) without discrimination throughout the EU, to support investment in infrastructure, research and training and to promote and step up disease prevention;
Amendment 102 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses on the need for the European Union and its Member States to anticipate through an appropriate long term strategy the social and economic impacts of the ageing of the European population, in order to guarantee the financial and organisational sustainability of healthcare systems, as well as an equal and continued delivery of care for patients;
Amendment 106 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Member States to improve their capacity to monitor closely the socialhealth impacts of the crisis;
Amendment 109 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Member States to promote access to good quality legal advice and information in coordination with civil society organizations to help the citizens, including undocumented migrants, to learn more about their individual rights;
Amendment 110 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Encourages all the Member States to invest in social, educational, environmental and health services infrastructure; and to coordinate actions with regards to the qualification, training and mobility of health professionals, thus ensuring capacity and sustainability of the health workforce at both EU and national level;
Amendment 126 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States to promote public policies aiming at ensuring healthy life conditions for all children, including actions to support pregnant women and parents;
Amendment 129 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the Member States to ensure all pregnant women and children, irrespective of their status, are entitled to and effectively benefit from social protection as defined in their national legislation;
Amendment 137 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points to the importance of raisimproving the average level ofccess to disease prevention, health promotion, primary and specialised healthcare services, and decreasing the inequalities between different social groups, and underlines that these objectives could be achieved through the optimisation of public spending for healthcare;
Amendment 152 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Council and the Commission to give greater recognition within the Europe 2020 strategy to the fact that physical and mental health and well- being are key to fighting exclusion and to include comparative indicators stratified by socio-economic status in the monitoring of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 200 #
2010/2089(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Asks the Commission and the Member States to develop policies and programmes to promote research of causes, early diagnosis, prevention and access to quality treatments for chronic diseases in the European Union, regardless of geographic or socio- economic origins;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Whereas the existing differences in the level of market surveillance between EU Member States may generate distortion of competition and jeopardize consumers' safety;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on Member States to designate adequate financial and human resources to market surveillance activities; calls on the Commission to put pressure on, assist and encourage the Member States to increase the resources for market surveillance; emphasizes that failing market surveillance systems generate a distortion of competition, jeopardize consumers' safety and undermine the citizen's trust in the internal market;
Amendment 57 #
2010/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on Commission to allow product safety professionals, consumer organisations and national authorities to have access to all relevant information and to promote such access through information campaigns;
Amendment 66 #
2010/2085(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on the Commission and national competent authorities to further develop awareness-raising campaigns targeting consumers to inform them about the risk of buying counterfeited products online;
Amendment 3 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
– having regard to the World Alzheimer Report 20109 released by Alzheimer’s Disease International (ADI) in the context of World Alzheimer’s Day on 21 September 20109,
Amendment 9 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas it is estimated that 35.6 million people worldwide will be living with dementiasuffering from dementia in all its forms in 2010 – and thatwhereas this number is estimated to nearly double every 20 years, topossibly reaching 65.7 million in 2030 (2010 report by Alzheimer's Disease International),
Amendment 15 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the number of people suffering from neurodegmenerative diseasestia in Europe is estimated to be 8.69.9 million, with (2010 report by Alzheimer’'s accounting for the vast majority of those casesDisease International); whereas neurodegenerative diseases represent one of the main causes of disability in the elderly, and whereas the number of people suffering from these diseases is expected to rise dramatically by 2020, owing to increased life expectancy and a decreasing ratio of working to retired populations,
Amendment 30 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the total direct and informal care costs ofaccording to certain estimates (2010 report by Alzheimer’'s dDisease and other dementias in 2005 amounted to EUR 130 billion for the EU 27 region, or approximately EUR 21 000 per year per person affected by dementia (56% of the costs being generated by informal care2)International) the total direct medical and social care costs of Alzheimer's disease in Europe amount to USD 135.04 billion,
Amendment 33 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D – footnote 2
Recital D – footnote 2
Amendment 34 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the European Union does not currently have at its disposal sufficiently precise statistics concerning neurodegenerative diseases, and whereas the estimates vary by up to a factor of three, depending on the study consulted; whereas it is essential, therefore, that European epidemiological studies should be carried out on the basis of common, strictly defined indicators,
Amendment 37 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the bulk of the research effort in this field ishas been carried out by Member States,; with a relatively low level of transnational coordination, leading to fragmentation and limited sharinghereas, however, two recent European initiatives, the ALCOVE joint action in the area of health and the joint programming in the area of research, Joint Programming on Neurodegenerative Disease, should make it possible to reduce fragmentation of knowledge and best practice among Member States,
Amendment 44 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas there is a growing awareness that the impact of neurodegenerative diseases on the population in Europe is of such a magnitude that no Member State is capable of resolving it alone; whereas it is therefore necessary in the EU to significantly strengthen cooperation and coordination of innovative and multidisciplinary clinical research efforts and the level of financial investment in this area, in order to combat neurodegenerative diseases, particularly Alzheimer’s, which is a major challenge for European societies,
Amendment 48 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas dementia is not only a devastating disorder for the patients themselves, but also a very heavy burden placed on the shoulders of the patients’ relatives, givethe role of carers, whether family members or relatives, is vital in assisting persons suffering from Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia; whereas, in the light of the fragmented and complex nature of the care and assistance arrangements, on the one hand, and of the gulf between the needs of dementia sufferers and carers and the nature of the vocational training provided in the Memotional, physical and financial difficulties faced by the relatives and friends of those affected by all types of dementiaber States, on the other, the task of looking after dementia sufferers results in an increased domestic workload, a deterioration in their state of health and psychological distress for carers, whether family members or relatives,
Amendment 55 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas, in connection with the care of dementia sufferers and support for carers, the European Union and the Member States must pursue a threefold objective: provide high-quality care for sufferers, ensure that carers can take advantage of periods of respite tailored to their needs, and ensure that sufferers can be looked after at home or in high-quality, innovative care facilities,
Amendment 63 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas, although social awareness and scientific knowledge of Alzheimer’s disease have increased dramasubstantically in the past 20 years, therapeutic options are still limited to symptomatic drugs, and diagnosis is still largely based on individual physician experience and subjective judgementwhereas there are currently striking disparities between and even within Member States and shortcomings in terms of the training and qualifications of staff and the availability of equipment needed for diagnosis and research,
Amendment 68 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H c (new)
Recital H c (new)
Hc. whereas Alzheimer's disease and the other forms of dementia do not only affect the elderly, but may also be developed by young people; whereas access to diagnostic services, research and care, support and accommodation should be improved for young sufferers,
Amendment 69 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H d (new)
Recital H d (new)
Amendment 74 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Council to declare dementia an EU health priority, and urges the Member States to develop national strategies to provide services and support for people with dementia and their families, as has been done in several Member States, including France, where the 'Alzheimer's and similar diseases' plan launched in 2008 has made it possible to coordinate medical and social care and clinical and basic research into these diseases at national level;
Amendment 83 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Suggests that the Council and the Commission consider launching a European Year of the Brain in order to raise awareness of brain-related diseases associated with ageing, and measures to prevent themprevention and information campaigns about the treatment of cerebral vascular accidents;
Amendment 94 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the relevance of early diagnosis for preventive interventions, and the need for epidemiological data to help direct research and acand the collection of epidemiological data for new research and primary and secondary preventive interventions;
Amendment 98 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Is convinced that the early diagnosis tests recently proposed by the International Working Group on the New Criteria for Alzheimer's Disease, research into risk factors and the definition of early-diagnosis criteria are vitally important;
Amendment 99 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Encourages all the Member States to engage actively in the definition, and development and implementation of common protocols for early diagnosis and a common research agenda in the field of neurodegenerative diseases and the sharing of best practices in the area of research into neurodegenerative diseases, thus reducing the prevailing inequalities between Member States and within Member States as regards diagnosis and treatment; emphasises that standard operational procedures for the assessment of disease markers will be key to drug discovery and to the development of more effective, technology-assisted care of patients with Alzheimer’s disease;
Amendment 103 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Encourages the Commission to draw up guidelines for the development and implementation of common early diagnostic services based on a multidisciplinary assessment of the patient’s state of memory and an adapted notification and information system to provide patients and their families with the best possible framework in which to approach the onset of the disease;
Amendment 104 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 d(new)
Paragraph 4 d(new)
4d. Points out that standard operational procedures for the assessment of disease markers will be key to drug discovery and to the development of more effective, new- technologies-based care of patients with Alzheimer’s disease;
Amendment 105 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4e. Encourages the Member States to establish specialist centres and to provide satisfactory medical equipment (including magnetic resonance imaging, whose contribution to dementia research is indisputable) nationwide;
Amendment 109 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the importance of a multidisciplinary approach on ways in which cooperation and coordination in the field of research at European level can improve knowledge, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and social researchCalls on the Commission to draw up guidelines for coordination, cooperation between Member States and research centres, and the development of a European approach and network for innovative and multidisciplinary research. Studies will concern the development of new approaches, particularly into the welfare of patients and their families and carers; believes that early diagnostic tests, research into risk factors and criteria for early diagnosis are crucial; this being the case, sees clear added value infield of drug therapies, non-drug therapies and vaccine therapies and on the quality of care and quality of life of patients and carers. Establishing and studying monitoring cohorts and conducting large- scale epidemiological and clinical studies in transnational collaboration; will clearly bring European added value to our understanding of the mechanisms of Alzheimer’s disease;
Amendment 120 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Invites the Member States to develop a Strategic Research Agendaction Plan establishing medium- to long-term research needs and objectives in the area of neurodegenerative diseases, especially Alzheimer’s; takes the view that the strategic research agenda should be further developed towards an implementation plan establishing priorities and timetables and specifying the actions, instruments and resources required for its implementation. These action plans should focus on enhancing the potential of young researchers and supporting innovative research approaches based on a public- private partnership;
Amendment 126 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 138 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to draw up guidelines for the training of staff who work in whatever capacitycreation, professionalisation, enhancement and specialisation of jobs in the treatment, care and support of people with Alzheimer’s patients (medical and, paramedical and social professions), and for the training of family carers to ensure competent and effective use of the existing resourcesand monitoring of carers, particularly in care, non-verbal communication and stress management techniques and in maintaining the relationship with a sick relative;
Amendment 149 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that the recent advances in imaging and biomarker research have indicated that Alzheimer’s disease develops as a result of the deposition in the brain of are opening up new areas of investigation into the causes of, and mechanisms at work, in Alzheimer’s disease, and tend to suggest that certain types of proteins (amyloid beta,) a small neurotoxic proteinre linked to the appearance and development of this disease;
Amendment 152 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 163 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Encourages Member States to develop services with the core principle of maximising coverage and ensuring equity of access, to benefit people with dementia regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, wealth, disability, and rural or urban residence;
Amendment 168 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11d. Encourages the Member States to develop personalised pathways for multiprofessional and multidisciplinary care and support coordinated by a single reference person from the moment the diagnosis is notified in order to facilitate home-based care through increased use of multi-purpose and specialised home help and care services, home automation and new information and communication technologies;
Amendment 169 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 e (new)
Paragraph 11 e (new)
11e. Calls on the Member States to develop diverse, innovative and high- quality facilities to offer respite to carers, such as accommodation and temporary reception centres, and to monitor the health of carers by, for example, providing them with appropriate medical care and psychological or social support;
Amendment 170 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 f (new)
Paragraph 11 f (new)
11f. Calls on the European Union and the Member States to strengthen research, improve access to diagnostic services and adapt care and support services to the needs of young sufferers;
Amendment 171 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 g (new)
Paragraph 11 g (new)
11g. Encourages the Member States to provide patients with access to new treatments whose therapeutic effectiveness has been verified and established, and to do so as soon as possible after they become available;
Amendment 172 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 h (new)
Paragraph 11 h (new)
11h. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider the possibility of establishing a specific financing instrument for facilitating patient access to new treatments;
Amendment 176 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Encourages the Commission and the Member States to develop information campaigns for the general public and for specific groups such as schoolchildren, health care professionals and social workers, comparing and exchanging experiences on support measures for family carers, patients’ associations and non-governmental organisations by promoting the publication and distribution of information pamphlets concerning the training and organisation of voluntary workers and legal, psychological and healthpublic awareness campaigns to highlight the situation of sufferers and their families and to provide information about the training and organisation of people working with sufferers, the various protocols and all the research currently being undertaken at regional, national and European levels, about care and home-based support, about the existing respite measures (access to this information could be facilitated by setting up as sistants both at home and at day centresngle national telephone number and a website), and by promoting or setting up Alzheimer’s associations to enable those concerned to exchange experiences;
Amendment 182 #
2010/2084(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 d (new)
Paragraph 12 d (new)
12d. Encourages the Member States and the Commission to promote a consideration of the needs of and an ethical approach to sufferers in order to guarantee respect for human dignity, and to consider the legal status of people suffering from neurodegenerative diseases with a view to providing a legal framework for the deprivation of liberty and legal protection for sufferers;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas transposition of the Services Directive is a major challenge for the Member States, public administrations and local authorities in view of its provisions on the right of establishment and freedom to provide services, and of the establishment of ‘points of single contact’ to provide assistance to service providers, in particular SMEs,
Amendment 47 #
2010/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Member States to continue improving the accessibility of PSCs and the quality and relevance of the information given to service providers, in particular SMEs; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the information given by PSCs is available in several languages;
Amendment 4 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas advertising fosters competition and competitiveness, combats abuses of dominant position and encourages innovation in the internal market, and is consequently of benefit to consumers, particularly by increasing the range of choice and lowering prices,
Amendment 10 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas unfair commercial practices are still common in the advertising field, as is clear from Special Eurobarometer 298,
Amendment 13 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. bearing in mind the significant impact on advertising of the development of communications media, particularly through development of the internet, social networks, forums and blogs, the rising mobility of users and the rapid growth of digital products,
Amendment 15 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas the development of new advertising practices online and via mobile devices is generating a range of problems that need dealing with in order to safeguard a high level of protection for users,
Amendment 16 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas online advertising plays an important economic role, particularly by financing free services, and whereas it has grown exponentially,
Amendment 20 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the personalisation of advertising messages must not lead to the development of intrusive advertising infringing legislation on the protection of personal data and privacy,
Amendment 21 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas groups of people who are particularly vulnerable because of their mental or physical disabilities, age or credulity – such as children, teenagers, the elderly or certain people made vulnerable by their social and financial situation (such as those with excessive debts) – need special protection,
Amendment 33 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Maintains that the UCPD provides an appropriate legal framework for combating misleading and aggressive advertising in relations between companies and consumers, although it is not yet possible to undertake a comprehensive evaluation;
Amendment 38 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that differences in its interpretation and implementation at national level have precluded the desired level of harmonisation, creating legal uncertainty and undermining cross- border trade in the single market;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to update its guidelines on the implementation of the UCPD on a regular basis and ensure it is translated into the EU’s official languages; encourages the Member States to take those guidelines into account as far as possible;
Amendment 43 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 48 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Member States to provide the competent national authorities with the necessary mefinancial, humans and resourcestechnological resources necessary for their effective action;
Amendment 50 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Amendment 58 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises the limits ofnevertheless that self- regulation, which cannot entirely take the place of legislation (in the area of penalties, for example)public regulation, particularly to punish operators who deliberately break the law;
Amendment 59 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Encourages co-regnsultation, whereby of the various stakeholders are involved in legislative developments;
Amendment 94 #
2010/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – indent 6
Paragraph 16 – indent 6
encourage the use of default settings – for computer systems sold to the public and for social networking services – that meet the strictest data protection standards (‘privacy by design’);
Amendment 4 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Monti report on a new strategy for the single market affirms that standardisation is key for the governance of the single market and emphasises that it is necessary to review the European standards process, maintaining the benefits of the current system and striking the right balance between the European and national dimensions,
Amendment 9 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. whereas a modern and flexible European standardisation system is a crucial component for an ambitious and renewed European industrial policy;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the Commission's Asks the Commission to accompany the proposal for the review of the current legal framework on European standardisation must be accompanied bywith a strategy document establishing a comprehensive framework for action at European and national level, including concrete proposals for those improvements that cannot be implemented through the review of the legislation; stresses that such a strategy document should not be limited to the recommendations contained in the EXPRESS report;
Amendment 19 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses, however, that these principles are not in themselves sufficient to ensure that small and medium-sized enterprises and societal stakeholders – in particular those representing health and safety, consumer and environmental interests – are adequately represented in the standardisation process; considers, therefore, that a vital element is the addition of the principle of "balancedappropriate representation", given that it is of the utmost importance, whenever the public interest is concerned, to incorporate all stakeholder positions in a balancedn appropriate manner, especially in the development of standards intended to support EU legislation and policies;
Amendment 26 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses that SMEs, although they represent an essential part of the European market, they are not adequately involved in the standardisation system and cannot, therefore, exploit entirely the benefits derived from standardisation; believes that it is essential to improve their representation and participation in the system, especially in the technical committees at national level; asks the European Commission to identify, through its impact assessment in the context of the revision of the European Standardisation System, the best way to reach this aim, evaluating the necessary funding to help SMEs;
Amendment 48 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages European and national standardisation bodies, therefore, to promote and facilitate effective participation in the standardisation process by all interested parties, in particular representatives of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and all stakeholders representing the public interest such as consumers (including people with disabilities and vulnerable consumers), environmentalists, workers and bodies representing other societal interests;
Amendment 60 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Holds the view that these European organnational standardisation bodies must obtain a stronger role within the ESOs; recommends that, without prejudice to the national delegation principle, all such organisations should be given a vote in the ESO technical bodies, on condition that they are associate members or cooperating partners of the ESOs and have participated in the respective work iplay a key role in promoting and reinforcing the participation of SMEs and societal stakeholders in the standardisation process, given that according to the "national delegation principle", the position statemd at technical level; considers also that such organisations should, under the same conditions, be given a symbolic vote in the formal adoption of standards, which would not necessarily be counted in the voting result but would serve as an indicatEuropean level by the national representatives results from the discussions that took place within the framework of the level of support for a given standard among all stakeholdernational standardisation bodies;
Amendment 70 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 79 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Asks the Commission and the ESOs to promote training programmes and to take all measures needed to enable weaker NSBs, which do not currently run technical-committee secretariats, to assume a more active role in the standardisation process in order to enhance confidence in the Internal Market by ensuring a level- playing field; considers that these programmes should also target SMEs by raising the importance of standardisation as a strategic offering marketing tool;
Amendment 115 #
2010/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Emphasises that the regulatory dialogue is an important aspect of the external dimension of the Internal Market and considers thus the need to safeguard and enhance the European standardisation system's position in the international standardisation environment in order to promote the development of international standards with genuine global relevance, facilitate trade and increase European competitiveness;
Amendment 182 #
2010/2050(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Urges the Council and the Commission to demand that the Iranian regime not deter human rights activists from making use of their constitutional rights and abolish death penalty;
Amendment 257 #
2010/2050(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. RejectCondemns fiercely the desire expressed by the Iranian leadership to "wipe out" Israel; also fiercely rejects the anti-Semitic rhetoric of the Iranian president, especially his denial of the Holocaust and his underlying agenda of delegitimizing the Israeli state; calls on the EU institutions to safeguard the existence of the Jewish state;
Amendment 5 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Treaty on European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights set out the values on which the EU is founded, which apply in practice to all citizens, including women belonging to ethnic minority groups,
Amendment 9 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas not all people living in the EU benefit from the Charter of Fundamental Rights, especially women from ethnic minority and migrant groups,
Amendment 12 #
2010/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that advertising and marketing often propagate the idea of perfection, which can have a negative influence on the self-esteem and self-respect of women, men and young people; dDraws attention to the vulnerability of consumers to mimetism, which can lead to inappropriate behavioural attitudes, anxiety, harmful addictions (smoking, drugs), eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia, and a disturbance of mental equilibrium; calls on all advertisers to reconsider the promotion of extremely thinskinny models (men or women) in order to avoid harmful messages about appearance, body imperfections, age and weight;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas there is no definition for historically settled and newly established minorities, but differences are reported between them as well as differences among different groups of minoritieuniversally accepted legal definition for ethnic minority groups; whereas the principles of equal opportunities and equal treatment based on mutual respect, understanding and acceptance should be a cornerstone of the EU’s integration policies for all regardless of their background,
Amendment 27 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 29 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 46 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the lower socio-economic status of ethnic minority women translates into their right to integrity being denied practice into the limitation of the exercise of their fundamental rights,
Amendment 61 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Stresses that there is no universally accepted legal definition for ethnic minority groups, and that this notion covers a wide range of situations of different ethnic groups within the EU Member States;
Amendment 89 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to consider widening EU funding opportunities from the European Social Fund and the European Integration Fund and giving them a more strategic focus in order to play a role in the integration and reintegration of women from ethnic minority groups into the labour market, in particular in times of economic crises;
Amendment 114 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on Member States to respect the fundamental rights of all women, including ethnic minority and immigrant women, whether or not their status is regularwomen, and in particular access to justice, legal aid, housing and health care;
Amendment 143 #
2010/2041(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Fundamental Rights Agency to include a transversal gender equality and women’s rights perspective in all aspects of the Multiannual Framework and its subsequent activities, including those on ethnic discrimination and on migrants’ and Roma’s fundamental rights;
Amendment 4 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas every generation worries about its teenagers fears for them or in some cases just fears them; whereas a society’s moral values can be gauged simply by observing the way in which it treats its teenagers; whereas ‘it takes a village to bring up a child’, in other words the necessary supervision sometimes has to be brought to bear while young persons are being brought up by their parents within the familand it is the duty of the European Union and Member States to protect them from juvenile delinquency,
Amendment 7 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)
Recital B (new)
B. whereas juvenile delinquency means a range of criminal offences punishable by national legislation that are committed by a minor, i.e. a young person who has not attained the age of legal majority,
Amendment 10 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas juvenile delinquency is no longer confined to acts of violence against others, theft, gang crime, smoking, drinking, taking socially accepted drugs such as cannabis, the influence of cults, or suicidal acts, but it now also extt a new concern, but a growing problem affecting adolescendts to early sexualisation and exposure to pornography, for which the Internet has become a prime vehicle, dangerous games such as the ‘scarf game’ (voluntary strangulation), Jackass, happy slapping, gang rape, substances which are smokedof a younger and younger age; whereas it now covers a wide range of actions such as acts of violence against others, theft, gang crime, druink, or injected, self-harm, or the glorification of anorexia, excesses of which teenagers can be both instigators and victimsing, taking drugs, early sexualisation and exposure to pornography particularly through the Internet, and gang rape,
Amendment 18 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas these excesses are particularly worrying because they are often made easieris phenomenon is all the more worrying as it is often facilitated by new technologies, on account of the anonymity and hence impunity that they allow, and by the amount of spare time which so many teenagers have, bearing in mind that the period termed ‘adolescence’ now starts earlier and sometimes ends after a person has officially come of age,
Amendment 25 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas political activities should not, therefore, be centralised at the Community decision-making level; whereas, however, the EU could do more to support national initiatives by providing budgets for projects set up by governments, NGOs, local and national associations working for and with young people, or networks for the exchange of best practice and information,
Amendment 31 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the European Union and its Member States are still struggling to become the most dynamic knowledge- based economy in the world, whilst priorities have shifted to the need for a common-sense-based economy,deleted
Amendment 37 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. Whereas international institutions, in addition to focusing on parental responsibility for children’s development and for building their human and social capacity, also stress the importance of parental vigilance and involvement to combat lawless behaviour by young people and the violence that they inflict on others; whereas, however, those institutions aredo not as explicit about the material conditions required in order to make for effective parenting and rule out direct or indirect discrimination against women and men on the labour market and the disadvantages that they would suffer if national social security systems were to be covertly undermined, whether immediately or with a time lagsufficiently address the other socio- economic factors involved in juvenile delinquency, such as failure at school, violence at school or the absence of prevention programmes supported by the public authorities,
Amendment 49 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas although the family is unquestionably the first environment in which children are socialised in terms of their perception of the world and their behaviour, it is now no longer the only environment involved, nor indeed is its role invariably the most decisive; whereas other socio-economic factors play a role in influencing the child’s development,
Amendment 67 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas teenagers need to be allowed their say and hence given the opportunity to articulate the expectations which they have of society, in order to avoid blind, unthinking law-and-order policy, as exemplified by ‘Do you know where your child is now?’, a European project set up by the Slovak Government to raise parental awareness as a means of prevention,
Amendment 86 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the appropriate national and international bodies to publish micro- and macroeconomic studies on the impact of effective parenting to build the human and social capacity of future generations in the light of measures to combatviolence and failure at school, the abandonment of parental responsibility and the role of associations working with young people in the field of juvenile delinquency;
Amendment 130 #
2010/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the authorities to take the steps required to put woenable men and women in a better position to choose how they wish to achieve work-life balance in order to exercise their parental responsibility to more fruitful effectto balance work and family life so that they can assume their parental responsibilities; to introduce measures aimed at resolving the problems of failure at school and violence at school; to support the work of associations and NGOs working with young people on preventing juvenile delinquency;
Amendment 59 #
2010/2012(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses the importance of making full use of the potential of e-commerce as part of making the EU more competitive on the global level;
Amendment 61 #
2010/2012(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for standardisation of pre- contractual information in e-commerce, while retaining a minimum harmonisation approach for face-to-face contractsdistance selling, particularly e-commerce, to be standardised at a high level of consumer protection to the extent that such harmonisation can be adapted to the advent of new forms of distance selling, and calls for a minimum harmonisation approach to be retained for distance selling in specific sectors, such as health services or estate agents;
Amendment 67 #
2010/2012(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for uniformisation of specific rules and practices to allow distance traders and direct sellers, particularly those in e-commerce, to move beyond their national borders in the guarantees and liability offered;
Amendment 129 #
2010/2012(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for a harmonisaton the Commission ofand the rules on unfair contractMember States to identify the criteria constituting unfair terms so as to establish a single EU-wide clause on unfairness so as to ensure that national authorities and courts follow the same standards when assessing contract clauses;definition of unfairness.
Amendment 132 #
2010/2012(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 145 #
2010/2012(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for clearer and improved horizontala single legal instruments and combining the hvarmonisation of certain aspects of consumer contract law; consiious texts currently in force in orders that this should include other directives, such as those on distance selling of financial services ando clarify the rules applicable to e-commerce;
Amendment 195 #
2010/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
Amendment 198 #
2010/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Calls on the Commission to attach to its single market legislative package a working document on measures to develop a social single market based on Article 9 TFEU, including a framework directivmeasures to ensure tohe protection of services of general economic interest, based on Article 14 TFEU and Protocol 26 thereto, especially since ambiguity and lack of legal clarity have given rise to numerous uncertainties at local-government level;
Amendment 220 #
2010/0271(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Category L6e– criterion (3), introductory part
Annex I – Category L6e– criterion (3), introductory part
(3) the mass in running order ≤ 35400 kg, not including:
Amendment 224 #
2010/0271(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I - Category L7e - criterion (3) - point (a)
Annex I - Category L7e - criterion (3) - point (a)
≤ 4050 kg for transport of passengers
Amendment 48 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Member States should promote open communications and an open dialogue and cooperate with countries outside the EU to prosecute, under the relevant national legislation, criminal behaviour by perpetrators from the EU who travel beyond the EU borders for the purposes of sex tourism and child pornography.
Amendment 59 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member StatesIn accordance with the subsidiarity principle, Member States shall be free to set their own criminal penalties. They shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional conduct referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5 is punishableseverely punished, taking into account the gravity of the crimes committed.
Amendment 119 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In accordance with Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society1 and Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights2, and the Order of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 19 February 2009 in Case C-557/07, LSG- Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung von Leistungsschutzrechten GmbH v Tele2 Telecommunication GmbH3, Member States shall take the necessary measures to increase the accountability of internet service providers so that they deny access to child pornography websites of which they are aware. ___________ 1 OJ L 167, 22.6.2001, p. 10. 2 OJ L 157, 30.4.2004, p. 45. 3 OJ C 113, 16.5.2009, p. 14.
Amendment 1 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. NotDeplores the imbalance of power in the food supply chain between producers, processors and retailers caused bythe weak bargaining position of producers and the strong bargaining position of traders, wholesalers, mass caterers, processors, retailers and supermarket chains caused inter alia by a lack of efficiency and coordination on the part of producer organisations and differences in economic size, market power and position in the chain; emphasizes that balanced commercial relations will improve the functioning of the food supply chain and benefit consumers and producers;
Amendment 4 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 6 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Calls on the Commission to include, in its analysis of food supply chain problems, the impact of new actors in the chain which specialise in modern forms of catering, in particular the mass catering sector; calls on the Commission to determine the market shares of those new actors across the European Union and to study the differences in market conduct between those actors and the traditional actors in the chain; calls on the Commission to publish a report and, where appropriate, propose measures to foster better compliance by that sector with European competition rules and with good commercial and contractual practices;
Amendment 7 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the asymmetric response observed between commodity and consumer food price developments has negative consequences for the food supply chain as it canconstitutes undeniable proof that the market mechanisms within the food supply chain are clearly malfunctioning, not only preventing consumers from benefiting from lower prices, but also demonstrating that farmers receive fair revenues not by comparison with the profits, very large in many instances, made by downstream actors along the food supply chain when commodity prices rise; stresses that increased transparency along the chain is key to improving competition and resilience to price volatility;
Amendment 10 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the Community tools for intervention in order to lessen price volatility on the agro- food market;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Stresses the importance of the revision of the European CAP food aid programme for the most deprived so as to provide support, along the food supply chain, for the European Union's poorest citizens;
Amendment 14 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Notes with satisfaction the publication by the Commission of the first version of the European food prices monitoring tool; calls on the Commission to step up monitoring of price formation with an analyses of costs, processes and added value, in line with competition law and commercial confidentiality, by setting up a European centre for monitoring volumes, prices and margins across all sections of the food supply chain;
Amendment 15 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. Calls on the Member States, with a view to bringing food supply chain prices more under control, to strengthen the role of multisector organisations, in particular to develop price indicators, and, especially, to make primary producers and SMEs in the processing sector more integrated into the food supply chain;
Amendment 16 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to put contractual relations throughout the food supply chain on a more secure footing so that all actors will be able to reap the full benefits from the single market, while retaining their freedom to contract, by proposing voluntary codes of good contractual practices and by identifying and banning unfair contractual practices; also stresses the importance of shortening payment periods along the food supply chain as part of the ongoing revision of Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating late payment in commercial transactions; calls on the Commission to prepare voluntary standard contracts for the agro-food sector;
Amendment 20 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission's decision to expand the remit and membership of the High Level Group on the competitiveness of the agro-food industry; calls on the Commission to invite consumer groups to participate and asks for the different platforms within the forum to promote, across the European Union, information sharing, best practice and to develop voluntary Codes of Good Commercial Practices for all actors in the food supply chain;
Amendment 21 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to draw up, within the High- Level Group on the Competitiveness Of the Agri-Food Industry, a single European voluntary code of good commercial practices for the food supply chain;
Amendment 22 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Considers that a European voluntary code of good commercial practices could include a participatory guarantee label, intended for consumers, for products supplied on markets in accordance with those good practices; states that voluntary adherence to a European code by the various actors in the chain that are down stream from basic production could make it possible for supply chain actors to certify their contracts, and the products they process, distribute and place on the market under those contracts, by means of a participatory guarantee label in order to ensure greater transparency for consumers as regards good commercial practices within the supply chain;
Amendment 23 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Stresses that that label would attest to the compatibility of contracts, and the products purchased under them, with food chain sustainability, and in particular to the fairness of farmers' revenue; states that an actor purchasing a product with no such single European participatory guarantee label would not be in a position to award it subsequently to the processed, packaged, distributed or marketed product concerned;
Amendment 25 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the establishment in all Member States of Ombudsmen to arbitrate disputes between retailers and supplieall the various food supply chain actors, investigate complaints and make recommendations on how to improve compliance with legislation and voluntary codes;
Amendment 27 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. 6. Stresses that a better awareness of contractual rights and stronger action against unfair contractual practiceand commercial practices and abuses of dominant positions will contribute to preventing them; requests an information campaign informing all actors, especially farmers, within the food supply chain of their rights as well as of the most common unfair commercial practices.;
Amendment 31 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment - backed, if necessary, by a legislative proposal - of the benefits of a better legal framework for private quality and distributor labels, so as to limit the number thereof and simplify the criteria, and in order to improve market access for producers and transparency for consumers;
Amendment 35 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)
Paragraph 6 h (new)
6h. Calls on the Commission to supplement existing CAP market management tools with tools to remedy the effects of a crisis with greater efficiency, in particular by means of an across-the-board clause for exceptional measures so that, in the event of a major crisis, the European Union can intervene promptly on the markets for all the various agricultural products;
Amendment 36 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 i (new)
Paragraph 6 i (new)
6i. Calls on the Commission to clarify, for public purchasers in the food supply chain, application of the environmental and social criteria of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts1 and to supplement them with innovation-fostering criteria, in particular to encourage: (a) fair trade for local producers and local products, (b) sustainable European farming, (c) selection of bids offering the best value for money rather than the cheapest bids, and (d) a return to innovative investment in European farms; calls on the Commission to include these proposals in the interpretive communication which has been announced on the legal framework for helping awarding authorities to take better account of the objectives of promoting innovation, sustainable development and combating social exclusion; _____________ 1 OJ L 134, 30.4.2004, p. 114.
Amendment 37 #
2009/2237(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)
Paragraph 6 j (new)
Amendment 127 #
2009/2237(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to put contractual relations throughout the food supply chain on a more secure footing so that all actors will be able to reap the full benefits from the single market while retaining their freedom to contract, by proposing voluntary codes of good contractual practices and by identifying and banning unfair contractual practices; also stresses the importance of shortening payment periods along the food supply chain as part of the ongoing revision of Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating late payment in commercial transactions; calls on the Commission to prepare voluntary standard contracts for the agro- food sector;
Amendment 200 #
2009/2237(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Amendment 202 #
2009/2237(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to prevent the discrimination to which European agro-food SMEs are subjected on international markets calls on the Commission, in particular, to propose a measure enabling the European Union's awarding authorities to give public procurement preference to European SMEs in the food supply chain along the lines of the measures already applied by some parties to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA);
Amendment 207 #
2009/2237(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Commission to include, in its analysis of food supply chain problems, the impact of new actors in the chain which specialise in modern forms of catering, in particular the mass catering sector; calls on the Commission to determine the market shares of those new actors across the European Union and to study the differences in market conduct between those actors and the traditional actors in the chain; calls on the Commission to publish a report and, where appropriate, propose measures to foster better compliance by that sector with European competition rules and with good commercial and contractual practices;
Amendment 16 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Regrets that the Commission Communication does not regard the protection of intellectual property rights, and especially the fight against counterfeiting and pirating, as a principle of internet governance;
Amendment 17 #
2009/2229(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Welcomes the fact that the Commission Communication, bearing in mind the international context, explicitly refers to respect for human rights, particularly freedom of expression, as essential principles of internet governance.
Amendment 8 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that any data that can be tied to a specific consumer, through data mining or by other means, constitutes personal data that must be handlede need to combat the fraudulent collection and handling of personal data on the Internet and to protect these data in compliance with privacy and data protection principles;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses that innovation and creativity constitute significant added value for Europe’s economy and competitiveness and that they should be maintained and developed;
Amendment 15 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Agrees that it is essential thatthe creation and development of new systems and applications areshould not be hampered by barriers such as excessive licences/fees or inappropriate intellectual property schemes, to ensure a competitive market and adequate levels of interoperabilitystructural or operational barriers, and that the interoperability of systems and applications should be encouraged;
Amendment 18 #
2009/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 13 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 bis (new)
Citation 16 bis (new)
- having regard to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) report of August 2010 on ‘Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict’,
Amendment 16 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20
Citation 20
– having regard to the work of the United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and, in particular, its October 2009 report on ‘Addiction, Crime and Insurgency – the transnational threat of Afghanistan opium’ and its World Drug Report 2010,
Amendment 22 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the international community has implicitly recognised that nine years of war and international involvement have not succeeded in eliminating the Taliban insurgency and bringing peace and stability to the country,
Amendment 24 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas an impasse has been reached in Afghanistan: a coalition of occupying powers in place but unable to defeat the Talibanit is difficult to see an obvious end in sight, with an international coalition unable to defeat the Taliban through military means only, and an insurgency movement unable to prevail against these military forces; and whereas there is no obvious end in sight,
Amendment 32 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the overall security condisituations haves deteriorated over the last 2 years, along with the popular consensus the coalition's presence enjoyed at one stage; whereas this general assessment of the security conditions must be mitigated, given that most big cities and the majority of provinces are not facing any major violence,
Amendment 38 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas extremist groups have failed to obstruct the election process and numerous Afghans went to vote for their members of parliament on 18 September 2010, showing their courage and commitment to democracy-building in their country,
Amendment 45 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 49 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 80 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes, therefore, that a new EU strategy for Afghanistan will have to take as its starting point two premises: an acknowledgement of the continuing deterioration in securcontinuation of the international community’s and socio- economic indicators in Afghanistan despite almost a decade of internthe Afghan Government’s ongoing efforts to improve the security and socio-economic situational involvement and investment Afghanistan; and the need to encourage a profound shift in the mindset of the international community, which has all too often in the past shaped plans and decisions with scant regard for Afghan involvevolvement of Afghans in their country’s reconstruction and development;
Amendment 103 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Commends, in this regard, the progress accomplished in the elections held on 18 September 2010, such as the good technical preparation of the polls by the independent electoral commission, the increased role of the Afghan authorities, decreased violence and a higher participation rate (estimated at 40%) compared to last year's presidential election, as well as a higher number of candidates than in previous legislative elections;
Amendment 122 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises that real progress has been achieved on women’s rights, as evidenced by the adoption of the Constitution in January 2004 and the increase since 2001 in the proportion of women among Members of the Afghan Parliament (27.7% in 2010) and at university (21% in 2010);
Amendment 127 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that, despite the huge injections of foreign aid, more Afghans are dying through poverty than as a direct result of the armed conflict, and that, shockingly, since 2002 infant mortality has risen, and life expectancy at birth and encouraging progress is evident in the fields of health (where, in particular, infant mortality fell by 26% between 2005 and 2010 and the proportion of the Afghan population with access to basic health care increased from 8% in 2002 to 85% in 2010) and access to education (with a sixfold increase in the levels of literacy have declined markedly; since 2004, the population living below the poverty threshold has increased by 130%enrolment at school since 2001 and the renovation or construction of 4 480 schools since 2002);
Amendment 131 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that these disappointing indicators are not compensated for by the limited progress made in infrastructuprogress has also been achieved in relation to infrastructure and public access to services (specifically, more than 13 000 km of roads have been repaired since 2001, electricity production has tripled since 2002, and the proportion of the population who are, telecommunications and basic education usually cited as achievements by donors and the Afghan Government; phone subscribers has risen from 0.1% in 2000 to 30% in 2010) as well as economic development (in particular, household income has risen by 53% as against 2008- 2009, while GDP grew by 22.5% between 2009 and 2010;
Amendment 134 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Equally, dDraws attention to the huge cost of the war prosecuted in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2009, estimated at over USD 300 billion and equivalent to more than 20 times Afghanistan’s GDP, and which, with the additional military ‘surge’ foreseen, is set to rise to over USD 50 billion per year;
Amendment 137 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 145 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 161 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is appalled by the absence oflimited coordination among international donors and the lack of detailed evaluations on the impact of the international civilian and military intervention, by the lack of transparency and by the limited mechanisms for donor accountability;
Amendment 188 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Advocates a policy of increasing procurement within Afghanistan itself wherever possible rather than importing goods or services; commends General Petraeus' new guidelines aiming at using the purchasing power of coalition forces as a tool in the fight against the insurgency; hopes this change of orientation in contracting policy will be implemented quickly;
Amendment 192 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 197 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 203 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 222 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Fears that these errors have fuelled the resurgence of the Taliban in over halcertain parts of the country, exacerbating the deterioration in security;
Amendment 226 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Believes, too, that this, plus the poor performance of international aid and of the Afghan gGovernment in delivering it, and the increased use of lethal force by coalition troops, has further alienated ordinary Afghans;
Amendment 228 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Emphasises that, according to the latest report by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, the Taliban are directly responsible for 76% of the civilian deaths and injuries in Afghanistan and that the number of civilian casualties caused by NATO and Afghan Government forces’ action was down by 29% in the first half of 2010 compared with the same period in 2009 – evidence of the increased emphasis on protecting civilians;
Amendment 317 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Draws attention to the many different police training missions present on the ground, and to the funding being invested in police training, with little to show for it; ; calls on all relevant actors to closely coordinate in order to avoid unnecessary duplication and to fulfill complementary tasks at strategic and operational levels;
Amendment 321 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
Amendment 332 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Believes that one of the main factors behind the ineffectivenesunsufficient results of overall training has been the practice, predominantly by the US, of relying on private contractors to train the police;
Amendment 346 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
Amendment 354 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55 a (new)
Paragraph 55 a (new)
55 a. Commends EUPOL's initiative to cooperate closely with NATO in areas where EUPOL has specific expertise, for example in the setting-up of a Staff College to train the leadership of the ANP, in starting a Female Training Centre in Bamiyan, and in developing the Afghan Police Training Teams (APTTs);
Amendment 367 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Notes, however, that the opium problem was not considered a priority by the Bush Administration, which preferred to cooperate with the warlords in the name of the war on terrorduction is still a key social, economic and security issue, and calls on the EU to consider this as a strategic priority in its policies towards Afghanistan;
Amendment 129 #
2009/2175(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 i (new)
Paragraph 15 i (new)
Amendment 29 #
2009/2151(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the European Commission to propose a more systematic pooling of existing national resources through the creation of a European civil protection force, in order to strengthen the effectiveness of EU prevention mechanisms.
Amendment 39 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Late payment is particularly regrettable if it occurs despite the debtor’s solvency. Surveys show that public authorities often pay invoices very late after expiration of the applicable payment period. Public authorities may face lighter financing constraints because they may benefit from more secure, predictable and continuous revenue streams than private undertakings. At the same time, they depend less than private undertakings on building stable commercial relationships for the achievement of their aims. Consequently, public authorities may have less incentive to pay on time. In addition, many public authorities can obtain financing at more attractive conditions than private undertakings. Therefore, late payment by public authorities not only leads to unjustified costs for private undertakings, but to inefficiency in general. It is therefore appropriate to introduce correspondingly higher dissuasive compensation in case of late payment by public authorities.
Amendment 82 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3
Article 3
Amendment 106 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that, when interest for late payment becomes payable in commercial transactions in accordance with Articles 3 and 5 and unless otherwise specified in the contract, the creditor is entitled to obtain from the debtor any of the following amounts:
Amendment 137 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – title
Article 5 – title
Amendment 143 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that, in commercial transactions between undertakings, or in commercial transactions leading to the delivery of goods or the provision of services for remuneration to public authorities, the creditor is entitled, without the necessity of a reminder, to interest for late payment equal to statutory interest if the following conditions are satisfied:
Amendment 151 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For public health institutions and public medico-social institutions, the time limits referred to in Article 5(2)(b)(i), (ii) and (iii) shall be sixty days.
Amendment 157 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the maximum duration of a procedure of acceptance or verification referred to in paragraph 2(b)(iii) shall not exceed 30 days, unless otherwise specified and duly justified in the tender documents and the contractcontract relating to commercial transactions between undertakings, or in the tender documents and the contract relating to commercial transactions leading to the delivery of goods or the provision of services for remuneration to public authorities.
Amendment 167 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the period for payment fixed in the contract shall not exceed the time limits provided for in paragraph 2(b), unless it is specifically agreed between the debtor and the creditor and is duly justified in the light of particular circumstances such as an objective need to schedule payment over a longer period. The period for payment shall in no event exceed 60 days.
Amendment 175 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Amendment 190 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that the applicable reference rate in commercial transactions between undertakings and in commercial transactions leading to the delivery of goods or the provision of services for remuneration to public authorities:
Amendment 196 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Lump-sum compensation for late payment in commercial transactions 1. Member States shall ensure that, in commercial transactions between undertakings or in commercial transactions leading to the delivery of goods or the provision of services for remuneration to public authorities, when interest for late payment becomes payable, the creditor is entitled to obtain from the debtor lump-sum compensation equal to: (a) 2% of the amount due from the date when interest for late payment becomes payable; (b) 3% of the amount due after 30 days from the date when interest for late payment becomes payable; (c) 4% of the amount due after 45 days from the date when interest for late payment becomes payable; (d) 5% of the amount due after 60 days from the date when interest for late payment becomes payable. 2. The lump-sum compensation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be additional to the interest for late payment and to the compensation for recovery costs.
Amendment 207 #
2009/0054(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – subparagraph 1a (new)
Article 7 – subparagraph 1a (new)
Member States shall make efforts to encourage the dissemination of information on the rights of creditors and debtors in commercial transactions, and the publication of a list of prompt payers to foster the spread of good practice.
Amendment 65 #
2009/0006(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 b (new)
Recital 19 b (new)
(19b) This Regulation is limited to rules concerning the harmonisation of textile fibre names and the labelling of the fibre composition of textile products. In order, however, to eliminate obstacles that might arise to the proper functioning of the internal market caused by diverging provisions or practices of Member States, and in order to keep pace with the development of electronic commerce and future challenges in the market of textile products, it would be desirable to examine the harmonisation or standardisation of other aspects of textile labelling with a view to facilitate the free movement of textile products in the internal market and achieve throughout the EU a uniform and high level of consumer protection. To that end, the Commission should submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council regarding possible new labelling requirements to be introduced at Union level.
Amendment 94 #
2009/0006(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20 a (new)
Article 20a Review By ...* at the latest, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council regarding the possible introduction of new labelling requirements at Union level. ___________ * Two years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 26 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 28 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) With a view to ensuring that the same level of scientific expertise in the area of pharmacovigilance decision-making at both Community and national level, when fulfilling pharmacovigilance tasks the coordination group should be able to rely on the advice of the Agency’s Pharmacovigilance Risk-Benefit Balance Assessment Advisory Committee of the Agency.
Amendment 30 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Requirements for periodic safety update reports should be proportional to the risks posed by medicinal products. Periodic safety update reporting should therefore be linked to the risk management system for newly authorised medicinal products and routinethe intervals between reportings should not be necessarybe extended for generic, well- established use, informed consent, homeopathic, or traditional use registered herbal medicinal products. However, in the interest of public health the authorities should require periodic safety update reports for such products at specific intervals when there is a need to assess their risk or review the adequacy of product information.
Amendment 32 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 36 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 8
Article 1 – point 8
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 21 a – introductory part
Article 21 a – introductory part
Amendment 41 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
For the fulfilment of its pharmacovigilance tasks, the coordination group shall be assisted by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Advisory CommitteAgency’s advisory committee to assess the risk-benefit balance as regards pharmacovigilance referred to in Article 56(1)(aa) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004.”
Amendment 45 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 47 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 18
Article 1 – point 18
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Amendment 51 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 20
Article 1 – point 20
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 65 – point g
Article 65 – point g
Amendment 52 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 102 – point 1
Article 102 – point 1
1) take all appropriate measures to encourage doctors, pharmacists and, other health-care professionals and patients to report suspected adverse reactions to the national competent authority or the marketing authorisation holder;
Amendment 53 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) With a view to ensuring that the same level of scientific expertise in the area of pharmacovigilance decision-making at both Community and national level, when fulfilling pharmacovigilance tasks the coordination group should be able to rely on the advice of the Pharmacovigilance Risk-Benefit Ratio Assessment Advisory Committee of the Agency.
Amendment 63 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 107 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Marketing authorisation holders shall be required to record all suspected adverse reactions in the Community or in third countries which are brought to their attention, stating that they have occurred at doses normally used in humans for prophylaxis, diagnosis or treatment of a disease or for restoring, correcting or modifying a physiological function; following a medication error; or following use not consistent with the authorised summary of product characteristics, whether reported spontaneously by patients or healthcare professionals or occurring in the context of a post- authorisation safety study.
Amendment 64 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 – paragraph 2
Article 107 – paragraph 2
2. The marketing authorisation holder may not refuse reports of suspected adverse reactions received electronically or by any other suitable means from patients and health-care professionals.
Amendment 65 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 – paragraph 3 – subparagraphs 1 and 2
Article 107 – paragraph 3 – subparagraphs 1 and 2
3. Marketing authorisation holders shall be required to submit electronically to the database and data-processing network referred to in Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Eudravigilance database’) information on all serious suspected adverse reactions that occur in the Community and in third countries, stating whether they have occurred at doses normally used in humans for prophylaxis, diagnosis or treatment of a disease or for restoring, correcting or modifying a physiological function; following a medication error; or following use not consistent with the authorised summary of product characteristics, within 15 days following the receipt of the report or, in the absence of a report, followingwithin 15 days of the dayte on which the holder concerned gained knowledge of the event. Marketing authorisation holders shall be required to submit electronically to the Eudravigilance database information on all non-serious suspected adverse reactions that occur in the Community, stating whether they have occurred at doses normally used in humans for prophylaxis, diagnosis or treatment of a disease or for restoring, correcting or modifying a physiological function; following a medication error; or following use not consistent with the authorised summary of product characteristics, within 90 days following the receipt of the report or, in the absence of a report, following the day on which the holder concerned gained knowledge of the event.
Amendment 66 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Requirements for periodic safety update reports should be proportional to the risks posed by medicinal products. Periodic safety update reporting should therefore be linked to the risk management system for newly authorised medicinal products and routine reportings should not be necessarybe required at longer intervals for generic, well- established use, informed consent, homeopathic, or traditional use registered herbal medicinal products. However, in the interest of public health the authorities should require periodic safety update reports for such products at specific intervals when there is a need to assess their risk or review the adequacy of product information.
Amendment 66 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 107a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. The Member States shall record all suspected adverse reactions that occur in their territory which are brought to their attention from healthcare professionals and patients, stating whether they have occurred at doses normally used in humans for prophylaxis, diagnosis or treatment of a disease or for restoring, correcting or modifying a physiological function; following a medication error; or following use not consistent with the authorised summary of product characteristics.
Amendment 67 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 107a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall ensure that reports of such reactions are submitted by means of the national medicines safety web-portalweb portals or by any other appropriate means.
Amendment 68 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107a – paragraph 2– subparagraph 1
Article 107a – paragraph 2– subparagraph 1
2. Member States shall, within 15 days following the receipt of the reports referred to in paragraph 1, submit the reports electronically to the Eudravigilance database, stating whether they have occurred at doses normally used in humans for prophylaxis, diagnosis or treatment of a disease or for restoring, correcting or modifying a physiological function; following a medication error; or following use not consistent with the authorised summary of product characteristics.
Amendment 69 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107b – paragraph 3 – introductory wording
Article 107b – paragraph 3 – introductory wording
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1 of this Article, holders of marketing authorisations for medicinal products referred to in Articles 10, 10a or 10c, and holders of registrations for medicinal products referred to in Articles 14 or 16a, shall be required to submit periodic safety update reports for such products only every three years, save in the following cases:
Amendment 71 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107k – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 107k – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. The Pharmacovigilance Risk-Benefit Balance Assessment Advisory Committee shall assess the matter which has been submitted. Fconsider the situation concerned. It may hold a public hearing for theat purposes of that assessment, it may hold a public hearing in connection with a risk-benefit analysis.
Amendment 72 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107k – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
Article 107k – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
In cases where a public hearing is held, a preliminary report shall be published following the hearing.
Amendment 73 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Amendment 104 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point 3a – and Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point 3a – and Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 140 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 27– paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 27– paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
For the fulfilment of its pharmacovigilance tasks, the coordination group shall be assisted by the Pharmacovigilance Risk- Benefit Assessment Advisory Committee referred to in Article 56(1)(aa) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 145 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 18
Article 1 – point 18
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Amendment 162 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 20
Article 1 – point 20
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 65 – point g
Article 65 – point g
Amendment 172 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 102 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 102 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) take all appropriate measures to encourage doctors, pharmacists and other health-care professionals as well as patients to report suspected adverse reactions to the national competent authority or the marketing authorisation holder;
Amendment 219 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 107 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Marketing authorisation holders shall be required to record all suspected adverse reactions in the Community or in third countries which are brought to their attention and to specify whether they occurred at doses normally used in man for the prophylaxis, diagnosis or therapy of disease or for the restoration, correction or modification of physiological function, as a result of a medication error or following off-label use, whether reported spontaneously by patients or healthcare professionals or occurring in the context of a post- authorisation safety study.
Amendment 225 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 – paragraph 2
Article 107 – paragraph 2
2. The marketing authorisation holder may not refuse reports of suspected adverse reactions received electronically or by any other appropriate means from patients and health-care professionals.
Amendment 227 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 – paragraph 3 – subparagraphs 1 and 2
Article 107 – paragraph 3 – subparagraphs 1 and 2
3. Marketing authorisation holders shall be required to submit electronically to the database and data-processing network referred to in Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Eudravigilance database’) information on all serious suspected adverse reactions that occur in the Community and in third countriesUnion and in third countries, specifying whether they have occurred at the doses normally used in humans for the prevention, diagnosis or treatment of an illness or in order to restore, correct or alter a physiological function, following a medication error or following use not in accordance with the authorised summary of product characteristics, within 15 days following the receipt of the report or, in the absence of a report, following the day on which the holder concerned gained knowledge of the event. Marketing authorisation holders shall be required to submit electronically to the Eudravigilance database information on all non-serious suspected adverse reactions that occur in the CommunityUnion, specifying whether they have occurred at the doses normally used in humans for the prevention, diagnosis or treatment of an illness or in order to restore, correct or alter a physiological function, following a medication error or following use not in accordance with the authorised summary of product characteristics,, within 90 days following the receipt of the report or, in the absence of a report, following the day on which the holder concerned gained knowledge of the event.
Amendment 232 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 107 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. The Member States shall record all suspected adverse reactions that occur in their territory which are brought to their attention from healthcare professionals and patients, specifying whether they have occurred at the doses normally used in humans for the prevention, diagnosis or treatment of an illness or in order to restore, correct or alter a physiological function, following a medication error or following use not in accordance with the authorised summary of product characteristics.
Amendment 233 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 107 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall ensure that reports of such reactions are submitted by means of the national medicines safety web-portals, or by any other appropriate means.
Amendment 237 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 107 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. Member States shall, within 15 days following the receipt of the reports referred to in paragraph 1, submit the reports electronically to the Eudravigilance database. , specifying whether they have occurred at the doses normally used in humans for the prevention, diagnosis or treatment of an illness or in order to restore, correct or alter a physiological function, following a medication error or following use not in accordance with the authorised summary of product characteristics.
Amendment 243 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 b – paragraph 3 – introduction
Article 107 b – paragraph 3 – introduction
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1 of this Article, holders of marketing authorisations for medicinal products referred to in Articles 10, 10a or 10c, and holders of registrations for medicinal products referred to in Articles 14 or 16a, shall be required to submit periodic safety update reports for such products only every three years, except in the following cases:
Amendment 253 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 21
Article 1 – point 21
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 107 k – paragraph 2
Article 107 k – paragraph 2
2. The Pharmacovigilance Risk/Benefit Assessment Advisory Committee shall assess the matter which has been submitted. For the purposes of that assessment, it may hold a public hearing as part of a risk/benefit analysis. Public hearings shall be announced by means of the European medicines safety web-portal. The announcement shall include information on how marketing authorisation holders and the public can participate. The Agency shall provide the opportunity, to all those who request it, to participate in the hearing either in person or through the use of web-based technology. Where a marketing authorisation holder or another person intending to submit information has commercially confidential data relevant to the issue of the procedure, he may request to present those data to the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Advisory Committee in a non-public hearing. Where a public hearing is organised, a preliminary report shall be published at its conclusion.
Amendment 267 #
2008/0260(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 28
Article 1 – point 28
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Amendment 8 #
2008/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure the availability of the necessary expertise and resources for pharmacovigilance assessments at Community level, it is appropriate to create a new scientific committee within the Agency, the Pharmacovigilance Risk- Benefit Assessment Advisory Committee. That committee should be composed of independent scientific experts with competence in the safety of medicines including the detection, assessment, minimisation and communication of risk, and the design of post-authorisation safety studies and pharmacovigilance audit.
Amendment 12 #
2008/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 — point 1
Article 1 — point 1
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Amendment 25 #
2008/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure the availability of the necessary expertise and resources for pharmacovigilance assessments at Community level, it is appropriate to create a new scientific committee within the Agency, the Pharmacovigilance Risk- Benefit Balance Assessment Advisory Committee. That committee should be composed of independent scientific experts with competence in the safety of medicines including the detection, assessment, minimisation and communication of risk, and the design of post-authorisation safety studies and pharmacovigilance audit. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 35 #
2008/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
Regulation EC/726/2004
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
(1) In Article 5(2) the following sentence is added: ‘For the fulfilment of its pharmacovigilance tasks, it shall be assisted by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Risk-Benefit Balance Advisory Committee referred to in Article 56(1)(aa)’. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 37 #
2008/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Amendment 85 #
2008/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Amendment 28 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In the area of information, Directive 2001/83/EC lays down detailed rules on the documents to be annexed to the marketing authorisation and intended for information purposes: the summary of product characteristics (distributed to health-care professionals) and the package leaflet (inserted in the product’s packaging when it is dispensed to the patient). On the other hand, as regards the disseminationmaking available of information from the marketing authorisation holder to patients and the general public, the Directive only provides that certain information activities are not covered by the rules on advertising, without providing for a harmonised framework on the contents and the quality of non -promotional information on medicinal products or on the channels through which this information may be disseminated.made available. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 29 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Experience gained from the application of the current legal framework has also shown that certain restrictions on the possibilities of pharmaceutical companies to providmake information available to patients and the general public result from the fact that the distinction between the notions of advertising and information is not interpreted consistently across the Community. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout)
Amendment 30 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Those disparities in the interpretation of the Community rules on advertising, and between national provisions on information have a negative impact on the uniform application of Community rules on advertising, and on the effectiveness of the provisions on product information contained in the summary of products’ characteristics and the package leaflet. Although those rules are fully harmonised to ensure the same level of protection of public health across the Community, this objective is undermined if widely divergent national rules on the disseminationmaking available of such key information are allowed. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout)
Amendment 32 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) National competent authorities and health care professionals should remain importantthe main sources of information on medicinal products for the general public. Member States should facilitate the access of citizens to high-quality information through appropriate channels. MWithout prejudice to the importance of the role played by national competent authorities and health care professionals in better informing patients and the general public, marketing authorisation holders may be a valuablen additional source of non -promotional information on their medicinal products. This Directive should therefore establish a legal framework for the disseminationmaking available of specific information on medicinal products by marketing authorisation holders to the general public. The ban on advertising to the general public for prescription-only medicinal products should be maintained.
Amendment 34 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to further ensure that marketing authorisation holders disseminatmake available only high-quality information and to distinguish non-promotional information from advertising, the types of information which may be disseminatedmade available should be defined. It is appropriate to allow marketing authorisation holders to disseminatmake available the contents of the approved summaries of product characteristics and package leaflets, information that is compatible with those documents without going beyond their key elements, and other well-defined medicinal product-related information. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 35 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Information to the general public on prescription-only medicinal products should only be provided through specific channels of communication, including the Internet and health-related publications, to avoidensure that the effectiveness of the prohibition on advertising is not undermined by unsolicited provision of information to the public. Where information is disseminatedmade available via television or radio, patients are not protected against such unsolicited information and such disseminationmaking available should therefore not be allowbe prohibited.
Amendment 39 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – indent 4
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – indent 4
– information made available by the marketing authorisation holder to the general public on medicinal products subject to medical prescription, which is subject to the provisions of Title VIIIa.
Amendment 40 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 88 – paragraph 4
Article 88 – paragraph 4
4. The prohibition set out in paragraph 1 shall not apply to vaccination campaigns and other campaigns in the interest of public health carried out by the industry and approved by the competent authorities of the Member States.
Amendment 41 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 a – paragraph 1
Article 100 a – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall allow the marketing authorisation holder to disseminatmake available, either directly or indirectly through a third party, information to the general public or members thereof on authorised medicinal products subject to medical prescription provided that it is in accordance with the provisions of this Title. Such information shall not be considered advertising for the purposes of the application of Title VIII. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout)
Amendment 43 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
1. Without prejudice to the importance of the role played by national competent authorities and health care professionals in better informing patients and the general public on authorised medicinal products subject to medical prescription, Member States shall allow the marketing authorisation holder to disseminatmake available, either directly or indirectly through a third party, information to the general public or members thereof on authorised medicinal products subject to medical prescription provided that it is in accordance with the provisions of this Title. Such information shall not be considered advertising for the purposes of the application of Title VIII.
Amendment 45 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 b – introductory part
Article 100 b – introductory part
The following types of information on authorised medicinal products subject to medical prescription may be disseminatedmade available by the marketing authorisation holder to the general public or members thereof: (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 50 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive - amending act
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) National competent authorities and health care professionals shouldmust remain importantthe main sources of information on medicinal products for the general public. Member States should facilitate the access of citizens to high-quality information through appropriate channels. MWithout prejudice to the importance of the role played by national competent authorities and health care professionals in better informing patients and the general public, marketing authorisation holders may be a valuablen additional source of non promotional information on their medicinal products. This Directive should therefore establish a legal framework for the disseminationmaking available of specific information on medicinal products by marketing authorisation holders to the general public. The ban on advertising to the general public for prescription-only medicinal products should be maintained.
Amendment 50 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 b – point b
Article 100 b – point b
(ba) information which does not go beyond the elements of the summary of product characteristics, labelling and the package leaflet of the medicinal product, and the publicly accessible version of the assessment report drawn up by the competent authorities, but presents them in a different waya patient-friendly way, without prejudice to the comprehensive and impartial nature of the information made available;
Amendment 58 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 c – point b
Article 100 c – point b
(b) imarketing authorisation holders’ Internet websites on medicinal products, to the exclusion of unsolicited material actively distributed to the general public or members thereof;
Amendment 62 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 100 g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
The methods may include the voluntary control of information on medicinal products by self-regulatory or co- regulatory bodies and recourse to such bodies, if proceedings before such bodies are possible in addition to the judicial or administrative proceedings available in the Member States.
Amendment 114 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive - amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 a – paragraph 1
Article 100 a – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to the importance of the role played by national competent authorities and health care professionals in informing the patients and the general public on authorised medicinal products subject to medical prescription, Member States shall allow the marketing authorisation holder to disseminate, either directly or indirectly through a third party, information to the general public or members thereof on authorised medicinal products subject to medical prescription provided that it is in accordance with the provisions of this Title. Such information shall not be considered advertising for the purposes of the application of Title VIII.
Amendment 144 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive - amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 b – point b
Article 100 b – point b
b) information which does not go beyond the elements of the summary of product characteristics, labelling and the package leaflet of the medicinal product, and the publicly accessible version of the assessment report drawn up by the competent authorities, but presents them in a different waypatient-friendly way, without prejudice to the comprehensive and impartial nature of the information made available;
Amendment 242 #
2008/0256(COD)
Proposal for a directive - amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Article 1 – point 5
Directive 2001/83/EC
Article 100 g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 100 g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
The methods may include the voluntary control of information on medicinal products by self-regulatory or co- regulatory bodies and recourse to such bodies, if proceedings before such bodies are possible in addition to the judicial or administrative proceedings available in the Member States.
Amendment 10 #
2008/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Directive 2001/83/EC provides that certain types of information are subject to control by the Member States' national competent authorities prior to their disseminationbeing made available. This concerns information about non-interventional scientific studies, or accompanying measures to prevention and medical treatment, or information which presents the medicinal product in the context of the condition to be prevented or treated. In the case of medicinal products for human use authorised pursuant to Title II of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, provision should also be made for certain types of information to be subject to prior vetting by the European Medicines Agency (hereinafter referred to as the 'Agency').
Amendment 13 #
2008/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004
Article 20b – paragraph 1
Article 20b – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 100g(1) of Directive 2001/83/EC, medicinal product-related information referred to in Article 100b(d) of that Directive shall be subject to vetting by the Agency prior to its disseminationbeing made available.
Amendment 14 #
2008/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004
Article 20b – paragraph 2
Article 20b – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the marketing authorisation holder shall submit to the Agency a mock-up of the information to be disseminatedmade available.
Amendment 216 #
2008/0241(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 - paragraph 1
Article 14 - paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that producers are allowed to show purchasers, at the time of sale of new products, the costs of collection, treatment and disposal in an environmentally sound way. The costs mentioned shall not exceed the actual costs incurred and shall reflect the environmental impact of equipment at the end of its useful life.
Amendment 115 #
2008/0240(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 - paragraph 3 - point b
Article 2 - paragraph 3 - point b
Amendment 245 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The existing CommunityUnion legislation on consumer financial services contains numerous rules on consumer protection. For this reason the provisions of this Directive cover contracts relating to financial services only insofar as this is necessary to fill the regulatory gapsvarious special contracts or sectors, such as financial services and package travel, contains numerous rules on consumer protection. For this reason this Directive shall apply to those sectors without prejudice to the provisions of existing Union legislation.
Amendment 257 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 k (new)
Recital 11 k (new)
(11k) This Directive shall be without prejudice to the application of the provisions of the Member States relating to the acquisition of immovable property and guarantees relating to immovable property or the formation or transfer of rights in immovable property. This includes agreements connected with such legal acts, such as sales of immovable property still to be developed and hire- purchase.
Amendment 274 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) An off-premises contract should be defined as a contract concluded with the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer, away from business premises, for example at the consumer's home or workplace. In an off- premises context, consumers are under psychological pressure no matter whether they have solicited the trader's visit or not. Furthermore, in order to prevent circumventions of rules when consumers are approached away from business premises, a contract negotiated, for example at the consumer's home but concluded in a shop should be regarded as an off-premises contract. Contracts which are endorsed by a public officer in accordance with Member States’ national legislation shall not constitute an unusual situation from a psychological point of view. Such contracts must not be regarded as off- premises or distance contracts within the meaning of this Directive.
Amendment 372 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Consumer contracts should be drafted in plain, intelligible language and be legible. Traders should be free to choose the font type or size in which the contract terms are drafted. The consumer should be given an opportunity to read the terms before concluding the contract. This opportunity could be given to the consumer by providing him with the terms on request (for on-premises contracts) or making those terms otherwise available (e.g. on the trader's website in respect of distance contracts) or attaching standard terms to the order form (in respect of off-premises contracts). The trader should seek the consumer's express consent to any payment in addition to the remuneration for the trader's main contractual obligation. Inferring consent by using opt-out systems, such as pre-ticked boxes online, should be prohibited.
Amendment 458 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
(a) any sales or service contract concluded away from business premises with the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer or any sales or service contract for which an offer was made by the consumer in the same circumstances, or, even if preceded by an offer from the consumer,
Amendment 480 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b a (new)
(ba) Contracts which, in accordance with the laws of the Member States, are authenticated by a public official shall be excluded from the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 496 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20
(20) 'ancillary contract' means a contract by which the consumer acquires goods or services related to a distance contract or an off-premisprincipal sale or services contract and these goods or services are provided by the trader or a third party on the basis of an arrangement between that third party and the trader.
Amendment 506 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall only apply to financial services as regards certain off- premises contracts as provided for by Articles 8 to 20, unfair contract terms as provided for by Articles 30 to 39 and general provisions as provided for by Articles 40 to 46, read in conjunction with Article 4 on full harmonisationbe without prejudice to the provisions contained in European Union legislation concerning special contracts or sectors.
Amendment 534 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 566 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Prior to the conclusion of any sales or serviceIn good time and at all events prior to the conclusion of the distance or off- premises contract, the trader shall providecommunicate to the consumer with the following information, if not already apparent from the contextn a clear and intelligible manner:
Amendment 582 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the business address of the trader and his telephone and fax numbers or e-mail address, where available, so that the consumer can genuinely contact the trader;
Amendment 625 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) the date by which the trader undertakes to deliver the goods or to perform the service;
Amendment 626 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) the fact that the consumer cannot invoke the right of withdrawal if he explicitly requests performance of the service during the withdrawal period;
Amendment 632 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) in addition to a reminder of the existence of a legal guarantee of conformity for goods, the existence and the conditions of after-sales services and commercial guarantees, where applicable;
Amendment 691 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to Articles 7(2), 13 and 42, the consequences of any breach of Article 5, shall be determined in accordance with the applicable national law. Member States shall provide in their national laws for effective contract lawfor effective remedies for any breach of Article 5.
Amendment 736 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. With respect toIn good time and at any event before the conclusion of the off-premises contracts, the information provided forreferred to in Article 95 shall be given in the order forsupplied to the consumer on a durable medium in plain and intelligible language and be legible. The order forminformation supplied shall include the standard withdrawal form set outprovided for in Annex I(B). The consumer shall choose the durable medium on which the information is set out and shall at any event have the option of requesting a paper document.
Amendment 773 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. With respect to distance contracts, the information provided for in Article 9(a)5 shall be given or made available to the consumer prior toin good time and at any event before the conclusion of the contract, in plain and intelligible language and be legible, in a way appropriate to the means of distance communication used.
Amendment 779 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where the subject of the contract and the urgency of its performance render the application of paragraph 1 wholly impracticable, the information referred to in Article 5 may be given verbally prior to the conclusion of the contract and confirmed without delay in accordance with the above-mentioned paragraph.
Amendment 789 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. If the trader makes a telephone call to the consumer with a view to concluding a distance contract by telephone, he shall disclose his identity and the commercial purpose of the call at the beginning of the conversation with the consumer- and, where applicable the identity of the person on whose behalf he is making the call - and the commercial purpose of the call at the beginning of the conversation with the consumer. The trader shall send the consumer a confirmation of his offer in writing or on a durable medium. The consumer shall not be bound by the contract unless or until he has signed it.
Amendment 797 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. If the contract is concluded through a medium which allows limited space or time to display the information, the trader shall provide at least the information regarding the main characteristics of the product andor services, the total price referred to, the duration of the contract and, in the case of automatically renewable contracts, the conditions for terminating the contract, as provided for in Articles 5(1)(a), (c) and (cg) on that particular medium prior to the conclusion of such a contract. The other information referred to in Articles 5 and 7 shall be provided by the trader to the consumer in an appropriate way in accordance with paragraph 1. The consumer shall be informed of the medium in question before the conclusion of the contract.
Amendment 810 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Within the context of an online contract, in order for the distance contract to be validly concluded, the consumer must have had the opportunity to verify the details of his order and its total price and to correct any errors before confirming the order and thereby expressing his acceptance.
Amendment 825 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. The consumer shall have a period of fourteen days to withdraw from a distance or off-premises contract, without giving any reasonUnless otherwise provided by this Directive, the consumer shall have a withdrawal period which shall expire after fourteen days from the day of the conclusion of the contract.
Amendment 834 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 839 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 846 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 853 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. However, as regards the distance sale of goods, the withdrawal period may not expire before 14 days from the day when the consumer takes delivery of the goods. Where an order made by the consumer relates to different goods which are delivered separately, the withdrawal period shall begin from when each good is delivered. Where the order relates to a batch made up of different goods or services, the withdrawal period shall begin from when the consumer has taken delivery of the final element making up the batch.
Amendment 860 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. TIn the case of distance contracts, the Member States shallmay not prohibit the parties from performing their obligations under the contract during the withdrawal periodas laid down in this Directive during the withdrawal period. In the case of off-premises contracts, this Article shall be without prejudice to any rule of national law establishing, within the withdrawal period, a period of time during which the performance of the contract may not begin.
Amendment 867 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13
Article 13
If the trader has not provided the consumer with the information on the right of withdrawal in breach of Articles 9(b5(1)(e), 10(1) and 11(4), the withdrawal period shall expire three months after the trader has fully performed his other contractual obligationsbe extended by three months from the day referred to in Article 12.
Amendment 880 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. The consumer shall inform the trader of his decision to withdraw on a durable medium either in a clearly worded statement addressed to the trader drafted in his own words or using the standard withdrawal form as set out in Annex I(B).
Amendment 901 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The trader shall reimburse any payment received from the consumer within thirtybe required to return to the consumer all of the sums paid, without delay and not later than fifteen days from the day on which he receives the communnotification of withdrawal. Reimbursement shall be made by any means of payment, in agreement with the consumer.
Amendment 932 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The consumer shall only be charged for the direct cost of returning the goods unless the trader has agreed to bear that cost. He shall not be charged for that cost if the trader has agreed to bear it or if the cost of returning the goods is more than EUR 50.
Amendment 984 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
ca) the supply of foodstuffs, beverages and other hygienically sensitive goods, or goods that may create a sanitary risk if returned within the withdrawal period;
Amendment 1067 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. This Chapter shall also apply toFor the purposes of this Directive, contracts for the supply of goods to be manufactured or produced shall also be defined as sales contracts.
Amendment 1097 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. Where the trader has failed to fulfil his obligations to deliver, the consumer shall be entitled to a refund of any sums paid within seven days from the date of delivery provided for in paragraph 1delivery does not take place within seven days of the established delivery date, as indicated in paragraph 1, the consumer shall be entitled to rescind the contract and claim a refund of any sums paid under the contract. The contract shall be deemed to be terminated on the date the trader receives a letter from the consumer informing him of his decision, if the delivery has not taken place in the meantime. The trader shall be required to reimburse all sums paid under the contract as soon as possible, and no more than seven days after receiving the letter rescinding the contract.
Amendment 1120 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. The risk of loss of or damage to the goods shall pass to the consumer when he, or a third party, other than the carrier and indicated by the consumer has acquired the material possession of the goods, on delivery. In the case of off-premises contracts, this provision shall not apply to the period referred to in Article 12(4), during which the contract is not enforceable.
Amendment 1123 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. The risk referred to in paragraph 1 shall pass to the consumer at the time of delivery as agreed by the parties, if the consumer or a third party, other than the carrier and indicated by the consumer has failed to take reasonable steps to acquire the material possessionMember States may lay down additional national provisions governing the passing of risk if the consumer has failed to take all the necessary steps to take delivery of the goods.
Amendment 1185 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1189 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. As provided for inWhen the goods present a lack of conformity, the consumer is entitled, under the terms of paragraphs 2 to 5, wherto: (a) have the goods do not conform to the contract, the consumer is entitled to:repaired, (b) have the goods replaced, (c) have the price reduced, (d) have the contract rescinded. The consumer may only rescind the contract if the lack of conformity is not minor.
Amendment 1237 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1243 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1254 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1259 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. If the consumer chooses repair, replacement or having the price reduced, and this choice proves impossible, unlawful or would cause the trader a disproportionate effort, the trader may insist vis à vis the consumer that the lack of conformity be remedied by repair or replacement, according to the consumer's initial choice. A trader's effort is disproportionate if it imposes costs on him which, in comparison with the repair or replacement, is excessive, taking into account the value of the goods if there was no lack of conformity and the significance of the lack of conformity.
Amendment 1265 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The consumer may resort to any remedy available under paragraph 1In case of repair or replacement of goods, chosen by the consumer or insisted on by the trader, the consumer may nonetheless resort to having the contract rescinded or the price reduced, where one of the following situations exists:
Amendment 1366 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
5. Unless proved otherwise, any lack of conformity which becomes apparent within sixtwelve months of the time when the risk passed to the consumer, shall be presumed to have existed at that time unless this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods and the nature of the lack of conformity.
Amendment 1374 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Member States shall have the right to maintain or adopt different national provisions concerning the legal guarantee of conformity, particularly by providing for or maintaining longer periods of guarantee or reversal of the burden of proof, or providing for or maintaining particular rules for serious lack of conformity which becomes apparent after the expiry of the guarantee, so as to guarantee consumers a higher level of protection.
Amendment 1424 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. This Chapter shall apply, in contracts between traders and consumers, to contract terms which have not been individually negotiated. A term shall be regarded as not individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term, particularly in the context of a pre-formulated standard contract. Terms negotiated individually do not fall within the scope of this chapter. Member States may therefore maintain or introduce national rules that reflect these terms and extend the benefit of this chapter to them.
Amendment 1425 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Member States may maintain or introduce into their national law provisions that diverge from those laid down in this chapter, with the exception of the provision of Article 34.
Amendment 1433 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. This Chapter shall apply without prejudice to any national provisions declaring terms, included in certain sales or service contracts, that conflict with legal provisions – sometimes relating to public policy – to be unlawful.
Amendment 1467 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Where a contract term is not included in Annex II or III, Member States shall ensure that it is regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith,it may nevertheless be considered unfair if it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
Amendment 1476 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to the assessment ofrovided that the trader fully complies with Article 31(1), (2) and (3), the assessment of the unfairness of contract terms shall not concern either the main subject matter of the contract or to the adequacy of the price or remuneration foreseen for the trader's main contractual obligation, provided that the trader fully complies with Article 31in relation to the goods or services, as long as these terms are drafted in a clear and intelligible manner.
Amendment 1497 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that contract terms, as set out in the list in point 1 of Annex III, are considered unfair, unless the trader has proved that such contract terms are fair in accordance with Article 32. That list of contract terms shall apply in all Member States and may only be amended in accordance with Articles 39(2) and 40.
Amendment 1500 #
2008/0196(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Members States may maintain or adopt provisions that are more protective of consumer interests and may supplement the list of terms included in Annex III to this directive with other contract terms presumed to be unfair.
Amendment 75 #
2008/0193(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Citation 1
Citation 1
– Having regard to the Treaty establishingon the Functioning of the European CommunityUnion, and in particular Articles 137(2) and 141(353(2) thereof,
Amendment 78 #
2008/0193(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 2
Recital 2
Amendment 80 #
2008/0193(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 150 #
2008/0193(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 92/85/EEC
Article 10 – point 1
Article 10 – point 1
1. The Member States shall take the necessary measures to prohibit the dismissal and all preparations for a dismissal of workers within the meaning of Article 2 during the period from the beginning of their pregnancy to two months after the end of the maternity leave provided for in Article 8(1), save in exceptional cases not connected with their condition which are permitted under national legislation and/or practice and, where applicable, provided that the competent authority has given its consent.
Amendment 151 #
2008/0193(COD)
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 92/85/EEC
Article 10 – point 2
Article 10 – point 2
2. If a worker within the meaning of Article 2 is dismissed during the period referred to in point 1 the employer must cite duly substantiated grounds for her dismissal in writing. If the dismissal occurs within sixeight months following the end of maternity leave as provided for in Article 8(1), the employer must cite duly substantiated grounds for her dismissal in writing at the request of the worker concerned.
Amendment 175 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) the amounts of fat, saturatesprotein, carbohydrates with specific reference to sugars, and saltfat, saturates, fibre and sodium.
Amendment 181 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – points f and g
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – points f and g
Amendment 214 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The particulars referred to Article 31(2) related to the mandatory nutrition declaration shall be included in the principal field of vision. They shall be presented, where appropriate, together in a clear format in the following order: energy, fat, saturatesprotein, carbohydrates with specific reference to sugars, and saltfat, saturates, fibre et sodium.
Amendment 229 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to labelling in accordance with specific Community legislation, and more specifically with Council Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 of 20 March 2006 on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed1, Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs2, Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 of 29 April 2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine, amending Regulations (EC) No 1493/1999, (EC) No 1782/2003, (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 3/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2392/86 and (EC) No 1493/19993, Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2008 on the definition, description, presentation, labelling and the protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/894 and Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/91 of 10 June 1991 laying down general rules on the definition, description and presentation of aromatized wines, aromatized wine- based drinks and aromatized wine-product cocktails5, paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply where the country of origin or the place of provenance of a food is voluntarily indicated to inform consumers that a food originates or comes from the European Community or a given country or place. 1 OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 1. 2 OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12. 3 OJ L 148, 6.6.2008, p. 1. 4 OJ L 39, 13.2.2008, p. 16. 5 OJ L 149, 14.6.1991, p. 1.
Amendment 230 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. Where the country of origin or the place of provenance of the food is not the same as the one of its primary ingredient(s), the country of origin or place of provenance of those ingredient(s) shall also be given, except for products whose ingredients do not need to be listed, in accordance with Article 20 of this Regulation.
Amendment 244 #
2008/0028(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may decide not to require the provision of some of the particulars referred to in paragraph 1, other than those referred to in Article 9(1) (c), provided that the consumer or mass caterer still receives sufficient information. With regard to the particulars referred to in Article 9(1) (c), the Member States shall determine how these are presented, after consulting the stakeholders.