Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | ECON | SCHWAB Andreas ( PPE) | |
Committee Opinion | EMPL | ||
Committee Opinion | ITRE | ||
Committee Opinion | TRAN | MARINESCU Marian-Jean ( PPE) | Michael CRAMER ( Verts/ALE), Jaromír KOHLÍČEK ( GUE/NGL) |
Committee Opinion | IMCO | FOX Ashley ( ECR) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted a resolution in response to the Annual Report on EU Competition Policy.
The text adopted in plenary had been tabled by the EPP, S&D, ALDE, ECR, Greens/EFA as a joint resolution aiming to replace the motion for a resolution tabled by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs.
Parliament welcomes the Commission Report on Competition Policy 2010, and highlights, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of this report, the numerous benefits that EU competition policy has brought, stating that it is a constructive and stabilising factor in the EU’s financial system and in the real economy in general. Members feel that improved price transparency is essential in stimulating competition in the single market and offering real choice to consumers.
Control of State aid : the resolution stresses that the temporary regime applicable to State aid has been positive as an initial reaction to the crisis, but that it cannot be prolonged unduly. It emphasises the need to discontinue temporary measures and exemptions as soon as possible and as soon as the economic situation allows it. It urges the Commission to link the extension of the temporary State aid to the banking sector beyond 2011 with enhanced and more stringent conditions related to the reduction of the balance sheet composition and size. This must include a proper focus on retail lending as well as stronger restrictions on bonuses, distribution of dividends and other operations on an ex post basis.
The Commission is called upon to come forward with the legislative proposal to address in a true European framework the resolution of failing banks, guaranteeing a common rulebook as well as a common set of intervention tools and triggers, and limiting taxpayers’ involvement to a minimum, namely through the creation of harmonised self-financed (on a risk based approach) industry resolution funds.
Parliament stresses that the on-going consolidation in the banking sector has actually increased the market share of several major financial institutions and, therefore, urges the Commission to maintain a close watch on the sector in order to enhance competition in European banking markets, including by imposing restructuring plans that imply the separation of banking activities where retail deposits allow these institutions to fund riskier investment banking activities.
The Commission is also invited to ensure that the intended simplification of State aid rules for SGEI will not lead to deterioration in the monitoring of overcompensation. Parliament takes note of the Commission’s intention to introduce a ‘de minimis’ arrangement in respect of State aid for SGEI, and underlines that unambiguous criteria are needed to determine what services would be covered by it.
Members underline the importance of fostering competition in all sectors and not least in the service sector , which constitutes 70% of the European economy. They further highlight the right to establish new companies and services. They consider that State aid should support innovation and research clusters and thereby support entrepreneurship.
Antitrust : the resolution suggests, should the Commission submit a proposal for a horizontal framework governing collective redress , that where appropriate a principle governing follow-on action could be adopted whereby private enforcement under collective redress may be implemented if there has been a prior infringement decision by the Commission or a national competition authority. Parliament notes that establishing the principle of follow-on action does not in general preclude the possibility of providing for both stand-alone and follow-on actions. It believes that proper account should be taken of the specific issues arising in the competition field and that any instrument applicable to collective redress must take full and proper account of the specific nature of the antitrust sector. Members reiterate that, as regards collective redress in competition policy, safeguards need to be introduced in order to prevent the development of a class-action system involving frivolous claims and excessive litigation and to guarantee equality of arms in court proceedings.
The resolution stresses that any horizontal framework must ensure compliance with two basic premises:
Member States will not apply more restrictive conditions to the collective redress cases arising out of the infringement of EU law than those applied to cases arising out of the infringement of national law; none of the principles laid out in the horizontal framework will prevent the adoption of further measures to ensure that EU law is fully effective.
Members welcome the legislative instrument announced by the Commission in its 2012 Work Programme covering actions for damages for breaches of antitrust law . They stress that it should take account of earlier Parliament resolutions on the topic, and emphasises that it should be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure.
The resolution notes that the method for setting fines is contained in a non-legislative instrument - the 2006 Fining Guidelines - and urges once again the Commission to incorporate a detailed basis for calculating fines, along with new fining principles, into Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. It encourages the Commission to review its fining guidelines and suggests that it evaluate principles such as:
introducing a distinction on the level of fines for undertakings who have acted intentionally or negligently; taking into account the interaction between public and private liabilities under EU antitrust law; specifying conditions under which parent companies who exercise decisive influence over a subsidiary but are not directly involved in an infringement should be made jointly and severally liable for antitrust infringements on the part of their subsidiaries; requiring, as regards recidivism, a clear connection between, on one hand, the infringement under investigation and past infringements and, on the other, the undertaking concerned.
The Commission is urged to take a closer look at trickle-down economics when analysing possible abuses of dominant positions, when it discovers that the dominant position has not been abused.
Merger control : Members believe that the economic and financial crisis cannot justify a relaxation of EU merger control policies. They call on the Commission to ensure that mergers, and in particular mergers designed to rescue or restructure ailing banks, do not create more ‘too big to fail’ and more generally systemic institutions.
International cooperation : Members encourage the Commission to conclude bilateral cooperation agreements on competition enforcement, and welcome the announcement of the negotiation of such an agreement with Switzerland.
Specific sectors : insofar as an open and competitive single market in energy has not yet been fully achieved, Parliament asks the Commission to actively monitor competition in energy markets, specifically whenever privatisation of public utilities originates in monopolistic or oligopolistic markets. Members note that the three largest players still represent about 75% (electricity) and above 60% (gas) of the market, despite the gradual opening of the markets in the mid-1990s. The Commission is invited to issue guidelines in order to improve the access by renewables to the energy network.
The resolution also discusses the following issues :
the concentration of critical raw materials suppliers whch may be harmful to the activity of client sectors and a more eco-efficient economy; the need to open up competition in the credit rating agencies sector , particularly in so far as barriers to entry, alleged collusive practices and abuse of dominant positions are concerned; the need to monitor developments in commodity-related markets push forward ambitious legislative proposals within the revision of MiFID and MAD framework in order to tackle speculative practices which adversely affects European industry; the competition situation in the retail sector, in particular the consequences of alleged abuse of market power by dominant retail chains in the agriculture and food market; carry out a competition inquiry in the agro-food industry to investigate the effect of the market power that major suppliers and retailers hold on the functioning of that market; sector inquiry into online advertising and search engines ; an inquiry into the application of public procurement rules , and whether national differences lead to a distortion of competition; the need for completion of the internal market for all transport modes as the main goal of the European transport policy (the EU still lacks a sufficiently interconnected, interoperable and efficient cross-border transport infrastructure network, which is indispensable for fair competition within the completion of the internal market); the lack of competition in the roaming market ; the need to analyse the aviation sector , in particular code-share agreements between airlines which in many cases do not produce any benefits for consumers.
Parliament urges the Commission to examine the extent to which a too generous allocation of free European Union Allowances (EUA) permits in certain sectors may distort competition.
Competition Dialogue : Members call for the conclusion of an agreement between Parliament and the Commission setting up a comprehensive dialogue on competition policy which should strengthen the role of Parliament as the directly elected body representing European citizens.
Parliament urges the Commission to present the Competition Work Programme at the beginning of each year, including a detailed list of the binding and non-binding competition instruments expected to be adopted during the coming year and of the public consultations envisaged.
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Andreas Schwab (EPP, DE) on the Annual Report on EU Competition Policy. It welcomes the Commission Report on Competition Policy 2010, and highlights, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of this report, the numerous benefits that EU competition policy has brought, stating that it is a constructive and stabilising factor in the EU’s financial system and in the real economy in general. Members feel that improved price transparency is essential in stimulating competition in the single market and offering real choice to consumers.
Control of State aid : the report stresses that the temporary regime applicable to State aid has been positive as an initial reaction to the crisis, but that it cannot be prolonged unduly. It emphasises the need to discontinue temporary measures and exemptions as soon as possible and as soon as the economic situation allows it. It urges the Commission to link the extension of the temporary State aid to the banking sector beyond 2011 with enhanced and more stringent conditions related to the reduction of the balance sheet composition and size. This must include a proper focus on retail lending as well as stronger restrictions on bonuses, distribution of dividends and other operations on an ex post basis;
The committee calls on the Commission to come forward with the legislative proposal to address in a true European framework the resolution of failing banks, guaranteeing a common rulebook as well as a common set of intervention tools and triggers, and limiting taxpayers’ involvement to a minimum, namely through the creation of harmonised self-financed (on a risk based approach) industry resolution funds.
Members stress that the on going consolidation in the banking sector has actually increased the market share of several major financial institutions and, therefore, urge the Commission to maintain a close watch on the sector in order to enhance competition in European banking markets, including by imposing restructuring plans that imply the separation of banking activities where retail deposits allow these institutions to fund riskier investment banking activities.
Members call on the Commission to ensure that the intended simplification of State aid rules for SGEI will not lead to deterioration in the monitoring of overcompensation. They take note of the Commission’s intention to introduce a ‘de minimis’ arrangement in respect of State aid for SGEI, and underline that unambiguous criteria are needed to determine what services would be covered by it. Any proposal to exempt in principle further categories of SGEI from the notification requirement must be based on evidence that such an exemption from the rules is justified and necessary, and does not unduly distort competition.
Antitrust: the committee supports the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Towards a Coherent European Approach to Collective Redress’. It notes that private enforcement through collective redress could facilitate EU-level compensation for harm caused to consumers and undertakings and it discusses the issues relating to collective redress. Members also discuss fining policy as an important tool for public enforcement and deterrence. It urges the Commission to incorporate a detailed basis for calculating fines, along with new fining principles, into Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. Members encourage the Commission to review its fining guidelines and suggest a series of principles to evaluate such as introducing a distinction on the level of fines for undertakings who have acted intentionally or negligently.
Merger control : Members believe that the economic and financial crisis cannot justify a relaxation of EU merger control policies. They call on the Commission to ensure that mergers, and in particular mergers designed to rescue or restructure ailing banks, do not create more ‘too big to fail’ and more generally systemic institutions.
International cooperation : Members encourage the Commission to conclude bilateral cooperation agreements on competition enforcement, and welcome the announcement of the negotiation of such an agreement with Switzerland.
Specific sectors : insofar as an open and competitive single market in energy has not yet been fully achieved, the committee asks the Commission to actively monitor competition in energy markets, specifically whenever privatisation of public utilities originates in monopolistic or oligopolistic markets. Members note that the three largest players still represent about 75% (electricity) and above 60% (gas) of the market, despite the gradual opening of the markets in the mid-1990s. The Commission is invited to issue guidelines in order to improve the access by renewables to the energy network.
The report also discusses the following issues : (i) the concentration of critical raw materials suppliers; (ii) the need to open up competition in the credit rating agencies sector; (iii) the need to monitor developments in commodity-related markets push forward ambitious legislative proposals within the revision of MiFID and MAD framework in order to tackle speculative practices which adversely affects European industry; (iv) the competition situation in the retail sector, in particular the consequences of alleged abuse of market power by dominant retail chains in the agriculture and food market; (v) a sector inquiry into online advertising and search engines; (vi) an inquiry into the application of public procurement rules, and whether national differences lead to a distortion of competition; (vii) the need for completion of the internal market for all transport modes as the main goal of the European transport policy; (vii) the lack of competition in the roaming market; (ix) the need to analyse the aviation sector, in particular code-share agreements between airlines which in many cases do not produce any benefits for consumers.
Competition Dialogue : Members call for the conclusion of an agreement between Parliament and the Commission setting up a comprehensive dialogue on competition policy which should strengthen the role of Parliament as the directly elected body representing European citizens.
Annual Competition Report : the committee urges the Commission to include in its Annual Report certain specified matters, including a description of the instruments adopted during the year in question, together with a justification for the changes made, and a summary of the contributions received from Parliament and from stakeholders in the context of public consultations, together with a justification as to why it has accepted some of the views expressed and not others.
Lastly, Members urge the Commission to present the Competition Work Programme at the beginning of each year, including a detailed list of the binding and non-binding competition instruments expected to be adopted during the coming year and of the public consultations envisaged.
PURPOSE: to present the Commission’s 2010 report on competition policy.
CONTENT: on the 40th anniversary of the Report on Competition Policy, this edition contains an overview of the major developments of competition policy and enforcement over the past 40 years.
Evolution and adaptability of EU competition policy : the report notes that the Treaty provisions laying down the Commission's powers and responsibilities in the field of competition policies have remained remarkably stable over the past 40 years, while the economic and political environment have dramatically changed. Competition policy rules have thus undergone a constant process of adaptation in order to contribute to the major objectives of the EU: building the Single Market, making it deliver for consumers and achieving a competitive social market economy .
The EU is undergoing a period of rapid and dramatic changes. Some challenges and issues can be foreseen with some degree of certainty – the exit from the crisis, global competition and sustainable development are among the most prominent. But the EU will no doubt face other challenges which cannot be foreseen yet. Nevertheless, it is clear that competition policy throughout its existence has, against the background of a stable Treaty framework, been able to cope with the considerable evolutions in its environment. Given its resilience and adaptability, EU competition policy will continue to be one of the European Union's assets.
Competition policy as a tool to support competitiveness in line with the Europe 2020 Strategy: as the EU exits from the current crisis in the face of fierce global competition, a major challenge for competition policy in the coming years will be to support as effectively as possible the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, inclusive and sustainable growth.
The Commission considers that competition policy is well placed to make such a contribution as it is a key driver for making markets work better through an efficient allocation of resources and increased productivity and innovation. It therefore underpins the competitiveness of the EU economy, which is more important than ever to maintain economic and financial stability. Competition policy and competition-enhancing reforms must thus form an integral part of the economic governance. Competition rules also recognise the need to enable Member States to promote the Union's objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion. The regional aid guidelines facilitate the realisation of the territorial cohesion of the Union by promoting the development of poorer regions. The different State aid rules also allow for training aid and the promotion of the access of disadvantaged and disabled workers to employment. Another essential area where competition policy has evolved to take into account a long-term challenge to the Union is the protection of the environment and the promotion of sustainable growth. Through both its antitrust enforcement activities in the energy sector which enhances liquidity and security of supply in the internal market and its adoption of environmental State aid guidelines, which facilitate aid to address market failures in this area, the Commission has ensured that competition policy supports the shift towards a more sustainable economy.
Use of instruments in 2010 : the report gives an overview of how the instruments of competition policy, namely the State aid, antitrust and merger control rules, were further developed and applied.
In 2010, la Commission adopted seven cartel decisions imposing fines totalling over EUR 3 billion on 70 undertakings, maintaining its strong enforcement focus on the fight against cartels. The Commission continued its enforcement activities of Article 102 TFEU (abuse of dominant position), notably in the energy sector, where it took four decisions and in the ICT sector, where it opened several proceedings. In 2010 the number of mergers notified was at low level due to the economic crisis. In total, 274 transactions were notified to the Commission, 16 decisions were submitted to conditions and no prohibition was decided this year. The majority of aid approved in 2010 related to horizontal objectives of European common interest, such as culture and heritage conservation, regional cohesion, environment protection, research, development and innovation and compensations of damages caused by natural disaster, and aid related to the economic and financial crisis. Total aid excluding crisis-related measures amounted in 2009 to 0.62% of GDP or EUR 73.2 billion, at a slightly higher level than 2008 (0.58% of GDP). On average, 84% of aid to industry and services was directed towards horizontal objectives of common interest.
The report also includes an update on the use of the temporary rules for State aid adopted as a response to the financial and economic crisis. In view of the fragility of the recovery, the Commission considered premature to let the Temporary Framework expire in its entirety at the end of 2010. A progressive phasing-out was considered the most suitable response to the current market situation. On 1 December 2010, the Commission extended the validity of the rules for crisis-related measures for the financial sector until the end of 2011. The measures that address outstanding market failures, in particular the remaining problems on access to finance for SMEs, were maintained, subject to tighter conditions to reflect the gradual transition into the normal State aid regime.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2012)260
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0031/2012
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0424/2011
- Committee opinion: PE473.723
- Committee opinion: PE470.013
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE472.269
- Committee draft report: PE470.074
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2011)0328
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Committee draft report: PE470.074
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE472.269
- Committee opinion: PE470.013
- Committee opinion: PE473.723
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2012)260
Activities
- Roberta ANGELILLI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- George Sabin CUTAȘ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Ashley FOX
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Krišjānis KARIŅŠ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Petru Constantin LUHAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Vladimír MAŇKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Thomas MANN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Hans-Peter MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Claudio MORGANTI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Jaroslav PAŠKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Anni PODIMATA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Antolín SÁNCHEZ PRESEDO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Olle SCHMIDT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Peter SKINNER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Monika SMOLKOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Kay SWINBURNE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
- Silvia-Adriana ȚICĂU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 EU competition policy (debate)
Amendments | Dossier |
153 |
2011/2094(INI)
2011/09/21
TRAN
38 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that the completion of the internal market for all transport modes needs to be and remain the main goal of the European transport policy;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the need to ensure the independence of rail-related service providers from railway undertakings, while safeguarding the efficiency and quality of the service;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the need to ensure the independence of rail-related service providers from railway undertakings; notes that the full management structure of the national railways ensures that the rail sector performs well and is therefore in a good competitive position on the international freight market, enabling the public financing of railways to be limited and even providing revenue;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the need to ensure the independence of rail-related service
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Recalling that the Commission has launched a number of infringement procedures against Member States for not properly implementing the First Railway Package, stresses the need for
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to ascertain whether the abolition of trade tax for a rail undertaking with a registered office in a given Member State and the simultaneous introduction of a flat-rate levy on rolling stock is compatible with EU competition law, given that non-national undertakings – unlike domestic undertakings – have to pay the trade tax in their Member State of establishment and that this situation is liable to create unfair competition;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that, in view of the level of indebtedness of companies in the railway sector in
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that, in view of the level of indebtedness of companies in the railway sector in the new Member States, historic debt cancellation should continue to be permitted under certain conditions and in particular if such cancellation helps to ease the way to an open rail market;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Considers it necessary to strengthen the transparency of all the costs and charges in the transport sector as a precondition for assessing eligibility for state support, including regional services, and reiterates, therefore, its call on the Commission to publish on the one hand a report with an overview of all state aid offered to the public transport sector, and on the other hand an overview of indirect support such as taxation, levies, infrastructure financing and charges for the different transport modes and their effect on inter- and intramodal competition;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that, in view of the level of indebtedness of companies in the railway sector in the new Member States, debt cancellation should continue to be permitted under certain conditions and in particular if such cancellation helps to ease the way to an open rail market, though distortions of competition should always be avoided;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission to work on the swift abolition of all existing restrictions on cabotage, in order to allow fair competition and avoid as many unnecessary empty runs as possible, together with harmonisation of the social provisions at European level to prevent wage dumping and social imbalances;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Calls on the Commission to monitor closely state support granted to low-cost air carriers
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Calls on the Commission to monitor closely state support granted to regional airports and to low-cost air carriers and to ensure fair allocation and effective use of slots;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Is concerned about the practice adopted by some air carriers to prevent passengers boarding with articles purchased in airport shops, in addition to their one item of hand luggage, but allowing them to make unrestricted purchases on board; considers that this practice restricts the freedom of choice and creates unfair competition; urges the Commission to open an investigation aimed at putting an end to such practices;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Considers it fundamental that all passengers are guaranteed the right to an immediate, straightforward, and accessible procedure for lodging complaints at no additional cost, so that competent national and EU consumer authorities can identify abuses of a dominant position, unfair competition and/or unfair terms in travel contracts; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with consumer rights defence associations and consumer authorities, to put an end to such practices;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the Commission to ensure fair and transparent allocation and effective use of slots, awaits its proposal in this regard;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take action against any discriminatory policies that may be applied by non-European countries, in order to avoid competitive distortions between international airlines and thus ensure fair competition;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the European Commission to constantly monitor the proper enforcement of the EU acquis on price transparency and anti-discrimination obligations concerning national road charging systems;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Shares the Commission's view that the EU still lacks a sufficiently interconnected, interoperable and efficient cross-border transport infrastructure network, which is indispensable for fair competition within the completion of the internal market;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Repeats that the rules on the obligation to show real, transparent and complete prices of flight tickets should be strictly enforced in favour of fairer inter- and intra-modal competition;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11. Expresses its satisfaction with the fact that passenger rights have now been regulated for all transport sectors and welcomes in particular the Commission’s intention to publish a comprehensive common overview of
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 12 12. Encourages the Commission to
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 12 12. Encourages the Commission to promote a charter and standards which help to further strengthen tourists' rights and the competitiveness of the European tourism industry, and reiterates in this context its call on the Commission to support the harmonisation of the European accommodation classification system;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 12 12. Encourages the Commission to promote standards which help to further strengthen tourists’ rights and the competitiveness of the European tourism industry, in particular by furthering the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, which makes it a policy in its own right, and reiterates in this context its call on the Commission to support the harmonisation of the European accommodation classification system;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Reminds the Commission that the road freight market is not fully open yet; expresses its disappointment with the current rules on cabotage;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Member States to
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Calls on the Commission, in implementing the directive on postal service liberalisation, to verify compliance with the universal service obligation and to ensure that competition focuses on the areas of quality and service and does not lead to social dumping at the expense of workers;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Shares the Commission’s view that the EU still lacks a sufficiently interconnected, interoperable and efficient cross-border transport infrastructure network, which is indispensable for the completion of the internal
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reaffirms its commitment to making a reality of the Single European Railway Area, where non-discriminatory access to the rail network is crucial;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reaffirms its commitment to making a reality of the Single European Railway Area, where non-discriminatory access to the rail network is crucial; calls on the Member States to
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reaffirms its commitment to making a reality of the Single European Railway Area, where non-discriminatory access to the rail network is crucial; calls on the Member States to
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reaffirms its commitment to making a
source: PE-472.207
2011/10/03
ECON
77 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 10 a (new) - having regard to the Commission Staff working paper entitled ‘The effects of temporary State aid rules adopted in the context of the financial and economic crisis’,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Commission Report on Competition Policy 2010; highlights, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of this report, that competition policy has brought numerous benefits in terms of consumer welfare and continues to be an essential tool for preserving the single market; stresses that
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Welcomes the fact that EU competition policy is able to adapt to the changing economic situation and ensure equal competition conditions within the single market. The combined effect of rigid principles and flexible procedures enables competition policy to be a constructive and stabilising factor in the EU’s financial system and in the real economy in general;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that the temporary regime applicable to State aid has been positive as an initial reaction to the crisis, but that it cannot be prolonged unduly, and that a new, permanent regulatory system and new
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the announcement of specific rescue and restructuring guidelines for the banking sector; recommends to the Commission that it take into account the
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Commission to quickly come forward with the foreseen legislative proposal to address in a true European framework the resolution of failing banks, guaranteeing a common rulebook, a common set of intervention tools and triggers, limiting taxpayers’ involvement to a minimum, namely through the creation of harmonised self-financed (on a risk based approach) industry resolution funds;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Underlines the need to decrease State aid and make it more targeted, as the European Parliament has previously recommended;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Stresses that State aid must be allocated in a way that does not distort competition or favour established companies at the expense of emerging ones;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Is of the opinion that State aid should focus on innovation and research clusters and thereby support entrepreneurship rather than individual entities;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the financial and economic crisis which broke out in autumn 2008 has not yet been overcome
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Takes note of the Commission's intention to introduce a ‘de minimis’ arrangement in respect of State aid for SGEI; underlines that clear and unambiguous criteria are needed to determine what services would be covered by it;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Insists that any proposal to exempt in principle further categories of SGEI from the notification requirement must be based on evidence that such an exemption from the rules is justified and necessary, and does not unduly distort competition;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that the ECB performed several non standard liquidity injections over the crisis; stresses that, without prejudice of the ECB independence, it is so far not possible to verify properly whether these measures could be assessed as State aid measures, as long as methods used to determine the ‘theoretical price’ of assets eligible as collateral have not been disclosed;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Underlines that, despite these unprecedented non-standard liquidity injections, such support measures received by banks during the whole year 2009 and beyond have not been included in the Commission’s compatibility assessment, whereas recapitalisation measures and guarantees were; therefore asks the Commission to assess such operations on a ex post basis and implement corrective measures whenever required in order to ensure a level playing field within the Single Market;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Welcomes measures adopted so far by the Commission in order to reduce the balance sheet size of certain too big or interconnected-to-fail institutions which have received State aid over the crisis; deems than more measures are required with that purpose;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 d (new) 3d. Stresses however that the ongoing consolidation in the banking sector has actually increased the market share of several major financial institutions and, therefore, urges the Commission to maintain a close watch on the sector in order to enhance competition in European banking markets, including by imposing restructuring plans that imply the separation of banking activities where retail deposits allow these institutions to cross-subsidise riskier investment banking activities;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 e (new) 3e. Therefore urges the Commission to link the extension of the temporary State aid to the banking sector beyond 2011 with enhanced and more stringent conditions related to the reduction of the balance sheet composition and size, including a proper focus on retail lending as well as stronger restrictions on bonuses and distribution of dividends; deems that these conditions should be explicit, imperative as well as assessed and summarised on an ex post basis in the forthcoming annual Competition reports;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Believes that
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the Commission responded to the eruption of the crisis in a prompt and reasonable manner by adopting special State aid rules and using competition policy as a crisis management tool; whereas this was, and still is, meant to be a temporary regime although its timeframe has exceeded what was originally expected;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that private enforcement already exists in most of the Member States; takes note of the Commission's ideas concerning EU-wide collective redress; calls on the Commission to take careful note of all the potential risks that have been observed in other jurisdictions
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that forms of private enforcement already exists in most of the Member States
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that private enforcement already exists in most of the Member States; takes note of the Commission's ideas concerning EU-wide collective redress; calls on the
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Welcomes the Commission’s work towards a coherent European approach to collective redress and calls in this context on the Commission to come forward with sector specific initiatives, as in the fields of competition, consumer protection and the environment, where a specific need has been identified, as well as with a framework including minimum standards for an EU-consistent system;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Takes a positive view, furthermore, of the setting-up of ADR schemes at European level so as to allow fast and cheap settlement of disputes as a more attractive option than court proceedings; is of the opinion that the parties concerned should seek to resolve disputes by consensus before launching collective court proceedings;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission once more to incorporate the basis for calculating fines, along with new fining principles, into Regulation (EC) No 1/2003;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to incorporate
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Believes that the use of ever higher fines as the sole antitrust instrument may be too blunt, not least considering potential job losses as a result of an inability to make payments; emphasises that a policy of high fines should not be used as an alternative budget financing mechanism; favours a ‘carrot-and-stick’ approach with penalties that serve as an effective deterrent, in particular for repeat offenders, while encouraging compliance;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Believes that the use of ever higher fines as the sole antitrust instrument may be too blunt; therefore favours a ‘carrot- and-stick’ approach with penalties that serve as an effective deterrent, in particular for repeat offenders, while encouraging compliance;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Welcomes the use of the settlement procedure in cartel cases with a view to making the process more efficient; is concerned about the increased number of requests for fine reduction on account of an inability to pay, particularly from ‘mono- product’ undertakings and SMEs; deems that a system of delayed and/or split payments could be considered as an alternative to fine reduction;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas between 1 October 2008 and 1 October 2010 the Commission took more than 200 decisions on State aid for the financial sector; whereas in 2009 the nominal amount of aid to the financial sector used by Member States constituted EUR 1 107 billion (9.3% of EU GDP); whereas the maximum volume of Commission-approved measures since the beginning of the crisis until 1 October 2010 (including both schemes and ad hoc interventions) amounts to EUR 4 588.90 billion;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of establishing a separate procedure for cartel cases with an independent tribunal presided over by a judicial panel, as a way to dispatch cases with greater speed;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Urges the Commission to increase the effectiveness of the penalty system for price-fixers, by assessing the possibility of introducing individual sanctions (such as individual fines or director disqualification) against executives, as well as providing less focus on the application of the turnover criteria in the calculation of fines and greater focus on the actual effect of the cartel on the market;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Encourages the Commission to consider greater incentives to encourage more applicants to come forward with evidence of cartel activity, including the protection of leniency applicants from civil claims, the adoption of an ‘Amnesty Plus’ procedure, and the abandonment of prosecutorial discretion as a way to foster legal certainty;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Believes that, as regards decisions on fines, the existence of robust compliance programmes should not have negative implications for the infringer beyond what is a proportionate remedy to the infringement;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Urges the Commission to take a closer look at trickle-down economics when analysing possible abuses of dominant positions, when it discovers that the dominant position has not been abused;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Encourages the Commission to review its fining guidelines and to regulate – with due regard for the extent of the losses suffered by consumers and the market and the principle of subsidiarity – the interaction between public and private liabilities under EU antitrust law; encourages the Commission to make sure fines take into account any compensation already paid to third parties; urges the Commission to initiate a review on ways to encourage the infringer to pay damages on an out-of-court settlement basis before the final decision on the fine is taken;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Stresses that, as regards recidivism, a clear connection should be established between, on one hand, the infringement under investigation and past infringements and, on the other, the undertaking concerned; emphasises that, most importantly, a maximum time-limit should be
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Believes that the economic and financial crisis cannot justify a
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Believes that the economic and financial crisis cannot justify a more benevolent assessment of merger cases; calls on the Commission to ensure that mergers and in particular mergers designed to rescue or restructure ailing banks do not create
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas the Commission introduced, from 1 January 2011, a requirement to submit a restructuring plan for every beneficiary of a recapitalisation or an impaired asset measure, irrespective of whether the bank is considered to be fundamentally sound or distressed;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Believes that the economic and financial crisis cannot justify a more
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Underlines that the application of competition rules to mergers must be evaluated from the perspective of the entire internal market;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Invites the Commission to set out criteria applicable for launching a sector inquiry; takes the view that the Commission should act not only on complaints from industry or consumers, but also on the recommendation of Parliament;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Underlines the importance of fostering competition in all sectors and not least in the service sector, which constitutes 70 % of the European economy; further highlights the right to establish new companies and services;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) 14b. Highlights the importance of those parts of the service sector which in Members States are seen as services of general economic interest and underlines the need for plurality and competition also in these areas; recalls the need for higher quality and new ways to provide services and notes that these industries would enhance European competitiveness if opened up for export and development;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Welcomes the Commission's Energy 2020 initiative; urges the Commission to pursue the full implementation of the internal energy market package; encourages the Commission, insofar as an open and competitive single market in energy has not yet been fully achieved, actively to monitor competition in energy markets, specifically whenever privatisation of public utilities originates in private monopolistic or oligopolistic markets in countries with weak regulatory and supervisory structures;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15.
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Recalls its invitation to the Commission during the early steps of the implementation of the third energy package to closely monitor the level of competition, since the three largest players still represent about 75 % (electricity) and above 60 % (gas) of the market, despite the gradual opening of the markets in the mid-1990s; invites the Commission to issue guidelines in order to improve the access of renewables to the energy network;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Recalls its invitation the Commission to examine in its next annual report the extent to which the concentration of critical raw materials suppliers may be harmful to the activity of client sectors and a more eco-efficient economy, since some of these are of paramount importance for the deployment of eco- efficient technologies such as photovoltaic panels and lithium-ion batteries;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 c (new) 15c. Deems that the forthcoming Commission proposal on EU 2020 Project Bonds could and should be a major vector for the development of services of general interest in the Member States as well as at European Union level; underlines that procedures established with that purpose should be explicitly laid down in a project eligibility framework to be defined following the ordinary legislative procedure;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Urges the Commission to treat competition issues in a complex environment such as multilateral payments with due care; believes that specific issues arising in this field should be addressed on a case-by-case basis;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Welcomes the efforts that the Commission is making in order to open up competition in the credit rating agencies sector and calls on the Commission to ensure that all rating agencies abide by the highest standards of integrity, disclosure, transparency and conflict of interest management as set out in the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 in order to ensure the quality of ratings and to avoid ‘rating shopping’;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Calls on the Commission to thoroughly investigate competition in the credit rating agencies market, particularly in so far as barriers to entry, alleged collusive practices and abuse of dominant positions are concerned;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 d (new) 15d. Calls for the Commission to actively monitor developments in commodity- related markets following the conclusions of the European Council of June 2008 (paragraph 40) and to push forward ambitious legislative proposals within the revision of MiFID and MAD framework in order to tackle speculative practices which adversely affects European industry and generate distortion in the Single Market; asks the Commission to add a section in its next annual competition summarising its monitoring activities on potential market distortions related to developments in commodity- related activities;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 e (new) 15e. Underlines that recent investigations carried out by US, UK and Japan regulators have revealed that, during the crisis, evidence has emerged that US and European banks have manipulated LIBOR rates; is therefore concerned about potential market distortions generated by such practices; asks the Commission in this regard to highlight in its next annual Competition report its preliminary conclusions and assessment on this matter;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Encourages the Commission to investigate the competition situation in the retail sector, in particular the consequences of alleged abuse of market power by dominant retail chains with negative consequences for small retailers and producers, namely in the agriculture and food market;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 f (new) 15f. Recalls its demands to the Commission to carry out a competition inquiry in the agro-food industry to investigate the effect of the market power that major suppliers and retailers hold on the functioning of that market;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Points out that there are innumerable cases of undertakings occupying a clearly dominant position in the new-technology markets, particularly the internet, without causing any actual harm for users of these platforms or products and without leading to abusive practices or closure of the market; encourages the Commission, bearing in mind the particularly volatile nature of these markets, where one day’s dominant position can be the next day’s marginal one, to adopt specific sectoral guidelines for these markets;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to conduct a sector inquiry into on-line advertising and search engines;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Reiterates its call for an inquiry into the application of public procurement rules, and whether national differences lead to a distortion of competition;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas protectionism and non- enforcement of competition rules would only deepen and prolong the crisis; whereas competition policy is an essential tool to enable the EU to have a dynamic, efficient and innovative internal market and to be competitive on the global stage;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that bilateral agreements between countries in the air transport sector do not give formal preference to a specific airport for flights going from one country to another;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Urges the Commission to analyse the aviation sector, in particular code-share agreements between airlines which in many cases do not produce any benefits for consumers but merely contribute to greater closure of the market, leading to abuses of dominant positions and concerted practices between undertakings which would otherwise have to act competitively;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 c (new) 15c. Urges the Commission to pay particular attention to examining oligopolistic markets, since the existence of sectors where competition is limited generally leads to absence of innovation, abusive practices and a deterioration in the quality of the products and services provided, causing genuine harm to consumers and the market;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 g (new) 15g. Deems that competition policy should contribute to promoting and enforcing open standards and interoperability in order to prevent the technological lock-in of consumers and clients by a minority of market players;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 h (new) 15h. Urges the Commission to examine the extent to which a too generous allocation of free EUA (European Union Allowances) permits in certain sectors may distort competition, given that these permits, whose efficiency has diminished since the slowdown of the activity, have generated windfall profits for certain companies while reducing their incentive to play their part in the transition to an eco-efficient economy;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the Commission's Report on Competition Policy, for the conclusion of an agreement between Parliament and the Commission
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Highlights that, without prejudice to the Commission’s exclusive powers under the Treaty, this Interinstitutional Agreement should enable the European Parliament to co-shape policies and should lead to de facto accountability of the European Commission in the field of competition policy; the Agreement should set up an Interinstitutional Panel where the Commission reports at least twice a year on the follow up to the European Parliament’s recommendations in the spirit of ‘comply or explain’;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 – indent 1 a (new) – a description of the development of State aid in the light of its aim to decrease the allocated amounts and target the funds more effectively;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas, notwithstanding all the efforts to cope with the economic crisis, cartels remain the most serious threat to competition, consumer welfare and the proper functioning of markets, and consequently cannot be accepted even during an economic crisis; whereas the formation of cartels is encouraged by both deflation and inflation;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Commission Report on Competition Policy 2010; highlights, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of this
source: PE-472.269
2011/10/28
IMCO
38 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the 40th anniversary of the Commission’s Competition Report and the contribution the Reports have made to building the single market
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the complexity of the food supply chain and the lack of transparency in food pricing; believes that an improved analysis of costs, processes, added value, volumes, prices and margins across all sections of the food supply chain, in line with competition law and commercial confidentiality, will improve
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the complexity of the food supply chain and the lack of transparency in food pricing; believes that an improved analysis of costs, quality, processes, added value, volumes, prices and margins across all sections of the food supply chain, in line with competition law and commercial confidentiality, will improve price transparency and choice for consumers, while avoiding unfair consumer discrimination; welcomes the establishment of the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain and its positive effects on the improvement of trading practices;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the complexity of the food supply chain and the lack of transparency in food pricing; believes that an improved analysis of costs, processes, added value, volumes, prices and margins across all sections of the food supply chain, in line with competition law and commercial confidentiality, will improve price transparency and choice for consumers; believes furthermore that more information should be available to consumers on the way final prices are formed;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that consumers want value for money and not only low prices; stresses that competition in the food retail chains should be both free and fair and that current concentration in the food market should not be at the cost of free choice for consumers; urges the Commission and Member States to fully and coherently enforce competition law and, where applicable at national level, unfair competition law in business-to-business relations;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 – a (new) 3a. Stresses that there is currently no effective legal system governing the payment of compensation for damage caused by violations of competition law to individuals in most of the EU countries; notes that the competition authorities punish breaches of competition law, and fines are paid to the state, whilst consumers directly affected by such breaches do not receive compensation; considers that an appropriate collective consumer redress mechanism should address this issue at EU-level; calls on the Commission to consider thoroughly the possibility of creating a European fund financed by a share of the fines imposed to sanction companies infringing EU competition law; proposes that such a fund could be used to cover the costs of cross-border collective actions having a European dimension, provided that the funds will be used for that purpose;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 – b (new) 3b. Welcomes that the Commission intends to revise Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of measures regulating the prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of national health insurance systems1 to improve transparency in the setting of minimum rules for pricing and reimbursement procedures;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes the increase in energy prices and the negative impact this has on consumers, especially the elderly
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes the increase in energy prices and the negative impact this has on consumers, especially the elderly and vulnerable; recalls its invitation to the Commission during the early steps of the implementation of the third energy package to closely monitor the level of competition since the three largest players still represent about 75 % (electricity) and above 60 % (gas) of the market despite the gradual opening of the markets in the mid-1990s; invites the Commission to issue guidelines in order to improve access of renewables to the energy network;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes the increase in energy prices and the negative impact this has on consumers, especially the elderly and vulnerable; stresses that access to affordable energy - as a universal service - should be guaranteed;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Points out that the temporary framework for state aid was very useful in supporting economic recovery; encourages the Commission to continue applying state aid rules in a pragmatic manner while ensuring that competition distortions are limited to a minimum;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes the increase in energy prices and the negative impact this has on
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Draws attention to the fact that the well-being of Union citizens and the competitiveness of Europe’s businesses depend on the energy markets; points out that energy market manipulation and insufficiently transparent prices artificially cause prices to be at a level not justified by actual availability and production costs, storage or transportation capacity, and demand;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the Regulation on wholesale
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Urges the Commission to meet the objective set in the Digital Agenda for Europe (COM(2010) 245 final/2) that differences between roaming and national tariffs should approach zero by 2015; notes the lack of competition on the roaming market and stresses the need for improved price transparency;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses that priority should be given to developing the renewable energy sector and energy savings, and that European competition policy, particularly in relation to state aid, must not have the effect of obstructing incentive measures introduced by the public authorities in this area;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the decision of the Council to support the long-awaited single EU patent system, which will reduce costs and time- consuming paperwork for entrepreneurs, thereby enhancing innovation
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the decision of the Council to support the long-awaited single EU patent system, which will reduce costs and time- consuming paperwork for entrepreneurs, thereby enhancing innovation, boosting the competitive advantage of
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Welcomes the Commission's objective to eliminate the differences between roaming and national tariffs by 2015;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Stresses that increased competition in the broadband sector is essential to achieve the Europe 2020 goal of full coverage for European citizens, bringing benefits to consumers and businesses; asks the Commission to look into possible cases where access to broadband services has been limited at national level;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Notes that also consumers often cannot comprehend decisions taken by the Commission relating to the fining of cartels; calls therefore on the Commission to incorporate the basis for calculating fines, along with new fining principles, into Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty1;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Urges the Commission to increase scrutiny of anti-competitive behaviour in all commercial sectors
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Urges the Commission to increase scrutiny of anti-competitive behaviour in all commercial sectors and to open formal proceedings where appropriate, especially when consumer rights are at stake;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 –a (new) Welcomes the dialogue between the Commission's DG Competition and Consumer Organisations; encourages the Commission to intensify these dialogues and to open them for additional stakeholders;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Recalls that services of general economic interest are subject to European competition rules only in so far as the application of such rules does not obstruct the performance, in law or in fact, of the particular tasks assigned to them;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Welcomes the existing exchange between the Commission and consumer associations in the field of European competition law and encourages both to further promote these exchanges;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Considers that all social services meeting basic needs, particularly as regards access to healthcare, child care, professional training, work, social housing and social inclusion for vulnerable persons, should be exempted from the competition rules;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Regrets the potentially detrimental effect of the total liberalisation of the postal sector on the quality of this service of general economic interest, and considers that a thorough and independent study should be carried out as quickly as possible to examine the impact of the postal services directives on the quality and universality of the service, the costs to consumers, and the level and quality of jobs in this sector;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7d. Recalls its invitation to the Commission to examine in its next annual report the extent to which the concentration of critical raw materials suppliers may be harmful to the activity of client sectors and a more eco-efficient economy since some of these are of paramount importance for the deployment of eco-efficient technologies such as photovoltaic panels and lithium-ion batteries;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 e (new) 7e. Deems that the forthcoming Commission proposal on EU 2020 Project Bonds could and should be a major vector for the development of services of general interest in the Member States as well as at the European Union level; underlines that procedures established with that purpose should be explicitly laid down in a project eligibility framework to be defined following the ordinary legislative procedure;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that improved price transparency is essential in stimulating competition in the single market and offering real choice to consumers; deems that competition policy should contribute to promoting and enforcing open standards and interoperability in order to prevent technological lock-in of consumers and clients by a minority of market players;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that improved price transparency is essential in stimulating competition in the single market
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that improved price transparency is essential in stimulating competition in the single market and offering real choice to consumers; welcomes in this regard the new EU telecom framework rules and the Commission's proposal for a Roaming III Regulation which proposes structural measures to improve wholesale competition, with expected benefits on retail competition, prices and choice for consumers;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Urges the Commission and all stakeholders to ensure that competition policy plays a role in a holistic approach to reinvigorating the internal market by placing the priorities of citizens, consumers and SMEs at the centre of decision-making and addressing the frustrations they face on a day-to-day basis;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the complexity of the food supply chain and the lack of transparency in food pricing; believes that an improved analysis of costs, origin, processes, added value, volumes, prices and margins across all sections of the food supply chain, in line with competition law and commercial confidentiality, will improve price transparency and choice for consumers;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the complexity of the food supply chain and the lack of transparency in food pricing; believes that an improved analysis of costs, processes, added value, volumes, prices and margins across all sections of the food supply chain, in line with competition law and commercial confidentiality, will improve price transparency and choice for consumers; recalls its demands to the Commission to carry out a competition inquiry in the agro-food industry to investigate the effect of the market power that major suppliers and retailers hold on the functioning of that market;
source: PE-475.792
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
events/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0328/COM_COM(2011)0328_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0328/COM_COM(2011)0328_EN.pdf |
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE470.074New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-PR-470074_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE472.269New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AM-472269_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE470.013&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TRAN-AD-470013_EN.html |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE473.723&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/IMCO-AD-473723_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/3 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20111215&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-7-2011-12-15-TOC_EN.html |
events/6 |
|
events/6 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs/4/body |
EC
|
events/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0328/COM_COM(2011)0328_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0328/COM_COM(2011)0328_EN.pdf |
events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2011-424&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0424_EN.html |
events/4 |
|
events/4/date |
Old
2012-02-02T00:00:00New
2011-12-15T00:00:00 |
events/5 |
|
events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-31New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2012-0031_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
ECON/7/05762New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/title |
Old
Annual report on EU Competition PolicyNew
Annual report on EU competition policy |
activities/1/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52011DC0328:EN
|
activities/1/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52011DC0328:EN
|
activities/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0328/COM_COM(2011)0328_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0328/COM_COM(2011)0328_EN.pdf |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|