BETA

15 Amendments of Vicky FORD related to 2015/2065(INI)

Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas UTPs arcan be an obstacle to the development and functioning of the internal market and seriously disrupt market mechanisms;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas SMEs and microenterprises are particularly vulnerable to UTPs and arcan often be more affected than large enterprises by their impact of UTPs, which make it harder for them to survive on the market, undertake new investments and innovate, and make it more difficult for SMEs to expand their activities, including across borders within the single market;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
J. whereas UTPs are covered only in part by competition law, the provisions of which relate to only a few UTPs in the B2B food supply chain;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas many actors operate in the food supply chain, including manufacturers, retailers, intermediaries and producers, and UTPs may occur at different levels of the chain;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the progress that has been achieved by the Supply Chain Initiative, with a growing number of companies joining the initiative, and acknowledges that where implemented it has been an effective tool to combat UTPs;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recognises and welcomes the national voluntary mechanisms that have been established and are proving effective in dealing with the problem of UTPs at national level; recognizes new systems can need time to show effectiveness;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes theRecalls that all Member States already have regulatory frameworks addressing UTPs; notes the recent 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 by extending their provisions to cover B2B relations, and set up independent enforcement agencies;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Confirms the existence of UTPsNotes that where UTPs exist in the food supply chain and acknowledges that they are contrary to the basic principles of law;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
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 mechanismcan offer a cost-effective means to ensure fair conduct in the market and resolve disputes if coupled with effective enforcement mechanisms which can take different forms depending on Member State legal and regulatory circumstances;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission to submit specific proposals for EU legislation banning UTPs in the food supply chain that willassess the efficiency of voluntary, self-regulatory and regulatory schemes in addressing UTPs in the food supply chain including analysing and establishing best practices in Member States in order to enable markets to operate as they should and fair and transparent relations to be maintained between food producers, suppliers and distributors and ensure effective enforcement;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Suggests that work should begin on EU rules on theMember States should, when not already the case, establishment or recognition ofse national public agencies with responsibility for enforcing lawsaction to combat unfair practices in the food supply chain; takes the view that Member States empowering 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, can facilitate enforcement;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Believes strongly that a single, clear, precise and binding definition of UTPs sAcknowledges and supports the principles of good practices in the vertical relationships called for in the European Parliament Report on a more fair and efficient retail market which was agreed on by all relevant stakehould be drawn up, so as to allow effective rules to be laid dowers and includes clear and precise definitions of UTPs so as to allow proper action to be taken with a view to combating such practices;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for due account to be taken, when drafting rulmeasures 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;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the Report of the European Commission of 29th January 2016 on unfair business-to-business trading practices in the food supply chain,
2016/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the steps taken to date by the Commission to combat UTPs with a view to securing a more balanced market and takes note of the Commission Report of the 29th January 2016 on unfair business-to-business trading practices in the food supply chain, supports its conclusions, which suggest that regulatory harmonisation at EU level would have no added value to actions already being taken at member state level;
2016/03/02
Committee: IMCO