8 Amendments of Catherine BEARDER related to 2014/2228(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Having regard to the National Emission Ceiling Directive 2001/81/EC, as part of the implementation of the Thematic Strategy on Air pollution, and taking into account the legislation for specific source categories, like Euro 5/6, EURO VI, which aim at reducing air pollution which causes 400, 000 premature deaths in Europe.
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the secret character of negotiatEuropean Commissions has they have been conducted in the past has led to deficiencies in terms ofmade significant efforts to increase access to information by launching a transparency initiative, which has increased democratic control of the negotiation process;
Amendment 303 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls for no lowering of the existing EU air quality limits that protect public health and should standards be found to be non-aligned to be levelled at the highest level of protection, including effective real world driving limits for both diesel and petrol vehicles.
Amendment 304 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Urges the Commission to work with their U.S. counterparts on compatible traceability provisions to ensure that processed and unprocessed foods containing products of animal origin can be effectively traced throughout the entire food chain.
Amendment 402 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
(vi) to ensure an adequate carve-out of sensitive services such as public services and public utilities (including water, health, social security systems and education) allowing national and local authorities enough room for manoeuvre to legislate in the public interest; awelcomes the joint declaration reflecting negotiators’ clear commitment to exclude these sectors from the negotiations would be very helpful in this regardstance that public services are excluded from TTIP;
Amendment 538 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiv b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiv b (new)
(xivb) to seek to ensure that developing countries indirectly benefit from TTIP and to remain committed to advancing the multilateral trade agenda;
Amendment 725 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xi
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xi
(xi) to ensure that TTIP includeswelcome the commitment of both sides and the inclusion of a specific chapter on SME’s andin TTIP that aims at creating new opportunities in the US for European SMEs, for instance by eliminating double certification requirements, by establishing a web-based information system about the different regulations, by introducing ‘fast-track’ procedures at the border or by eliminating specific tariff peaks that continue to exist; it should establish mechanisms for both sides to work together to facilitate SMEs’ participation in transatlantic trade, for instance through a common SME ’one-stop shop’;
Amendment 772 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv
(xiv) to ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion and have a fair opportunity to seek and achieve redress of grievances, which can be achieved without the inclusion of an ISDS mechanism; such a mechanism is not necessary in TTIP given the EU’recognising that both state-to-state dispute settlement and the use of national courts present significant difficulties and that there are also legitimate concerns regarding the investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses ands the US’ devely have been adopted legal systems; a state-to- state dispute settlement systemin the past in more than 1300 bilateral investment agreements by European Member States; to continue, therefore, to explore all avenues to improve and reform ISDS in such a way that concerns regarding the right to regulate , transparency, appeals procedures and othe use of national courts are the most appropriate tools to address investment dispur procedural aspects of tribunals and the relationship between national courts and ISDS are addressed; to move ahead, alongside the TTIP negotiations, with finding a broader solution to the concerns about ISDS clauses which are contained in other European investment agreements, including treaties between EU member states;