Next event: Commission response to text adopted in plenary 2016/06/01 more...
- Results of vote in Parliament 2016/01/19
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading 2016/01/19
- End of procedure in Parliament 2016/01/19
- Debate in Parliament 2016/01/18
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading 2015/12/17
- Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading 2015/12/07
- Committee opinion 2015/11/20
- Committee opinion 2015/11/10
- Amendments tabled in committee 2015/10/21
Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | ECON | LANGEN Werner ( PPE) | SANT Alfred ( S&D), MESSERSCHMIDT Morten ( ECR), THEURER Michael ( ALDE), LÓPEZ BERMEJO Paloma ( GUE/NGL), REIMON Michel ( Verts/ALE) |
Committee Opinion | IMCO | COFFERATI Sergio Gaetano ( S&D) | Dennis de JONG ( GUE/NGL), Kaja KALLAS ( ALDE), Marcus PRETZELL ( ENF) |
Committee Opinion | INTA | SZEJNFELD Adam ( PPE) | Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ ( S&D), Sander LOONES ( ECR) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 500 votes to 137, with 73 abstentions, a resolution following the 2014 Annual report on EU Competition Policy.
Welcoming the report by the Commission, which underlines the importance of competition policy in the EU, Parliament called on the Commission not to implement internal EU competition policy in such a way as to restrict firms’ market strategies , so that they can compete on world markets with actors from outside the EU.
An effective and credible competition policy must not be directed exclusively towards bringing down prices for consumers, but must also be mindful of the strategic interests of the European economy , such as: the ability to innovate; investment; competitiveness and sustainability; the special competitive conditions for SMEs, start-ups and microenterprises; and the need to promote high labour and environmental standards.
The Commission was called upon to:
put a stop to social dumping , and ensure that competition policy decisions take particular account of the social impact; adapt its competition policy to the specificities of the digital economy sector , and support all initiatives connected with the development of e-government; complete the internal market in areas where it is still fragmented and incomplete, and to end unjustified market restrictions and distortions of competition as soon as possible wherever they are found; ensure that competition policy strengthens social cohesion in the Union; ensure that the Member States implement the new public procurement legislation in a timely manner, in particular as regards the deployment of e-procurement and e-administration, and the new provisions on consideration of social and environmental criteria and on the division of contracts into lots; promote better convergence of, and cooperation among, national competition authorities in the EU; safeguard competition in the telecommunication sector, including in the allocation of spectrum; scrutinise the unfair and unlawful clauses and practices employed by the banking sector in consumer contracts; examine ATM networks from the perspective of competition policy, given that this is a network infrastructure; ensure coherence between the Union’s trade and competition policies and the objectives of its industrial policy , and ensure at the same time that the Union’s competition policy should not hinder the emergence of European industrial champions in economy; review EU State aid rules for energy-intensive industries , guaranteeing effective carbon leakage protection and providing fair opportunities for EU industries.
Antitrust proceedings – cases of abuse of dominant position : in this regard, Parliament also asked the Commission:
to increase its efforts as regards investigations of instances of abuse of dominant market positions to the detriment of EU consumers; take action internationally against cartels and anticompetitive, oligopolistic and monopolistic practices that are damaging to competition; incorporate the rules on fines, such as those imposed in cartel proceedings, into a legislative instrument; the fines should be high enough to act as a deterrent; carry out, on the basis of new criteria, a comprehensive legal and economic assessment of fast-moving markets and ephemeral business models employed by digital undertakings, in order to obtain a clear understanding of the market structure and market trends, take appropriate measures to protect consumers; provide effective protection for standard essential patents (SEPs) and to exercise close supervision to ensure that patent users obtain licences in the proper way.
Parliament called into question the long duration of the investigations into US internet giant Google, and regretted the fact that these investigations have already dragged on for several years, with no transparency and creating uncertainty for all parties.
The Commission was asked to: ((i) conduct a thorough investigation into the Google practice whereby the ‘ Android ’ operating system is offered only in conjunction with other Google services, and whereby manufacturers may not pre-install rival products; (ii) examine in detail Google’s dominant market position in the area of direct hotel bookings .
The resolution noted that the Google case has triggered a general discussion on the power of dominant internet platforms such as eBay, Facebook, Apple, LinkedIn, Amazon, Uber, Airbnb, etc., their influence on markets and on the public sphere, and the need to regulate them to protect both.
State aid : Parliament:
called on the Commission, the Member States and the authorities at regional and communal administrative levels actively to promote compliance with EU competition policy and to explain its legal basis; emphasised the importance of addressing horizontal and vertical State aid in the same way but took the view that remote or outlying regions and islands should be given greater leeway than at present when it comes to applying rules on State aid; called on the Commission to examine evidence provided by the Member States more rigorously, and improve fact security, since there are regular attempts to circumvent the legal basis and the legal constraints, or to seek more or fewer borderline compromises; recalled that the structural funds may not be used in a way that directly or indirectly encourages the relocation of services or production to another Member State.
Members welcomed the introduction of new guidelines on State aid for risk financing , the primary purpose of which is to make it possible to promote more effectively SMEs, innovative midcaps and start-ups, which have a significant size disadvantage.
Financial aid and taxation : Members recalled that the temporary State aid in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totally removed and scrutinised, if the Banking Union is to be completed. They called on the Commission to: (i) clarify the rules and procedures under which State aid in the financial sector can be authorised; (ii) consider the possibility of linking State aid to banks to conditionality on credit to SMEs.
Unfair tax competition between Member States is another problem raised in the resolution, which brought to light the key importance of EU subsidy law in the fight against tax avoidance by multinational undertakings. Members welcomed the investigations initiated by the Commission in 2014 into unlawful State aid, through unfair tax competition, to the benefit of certain individual companies, which was extended to all the 28 EU countries in 2015. They called furthermore, on Member States in future to present to the Commission all relevant information about their tax practice, and, at long last, to comply with their obligation to disclose to the Commission and to Parliament details of any special arrangements that may have an impact on other Member States and SMEs. The Commission should use the findings of the current investigations as the basis for more precise and effective guidelines for tax-related State aid.
In view of studies estimating the annual value of tax fraud and tax avoidance to up to EUR one trillion (1 000 000 000 000), Member States must ultimately tackle and restrict this practice. Parliament called for an EU legislative framework to prevent distortions of competition by aggressive tax planning and tax evasion . It recommended the introduction of an automatic mandatory exchange of tax rulings, a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) and a guarantee that no profit leaves the EU untaxed.
Democratic strengthening of competition policy : Members welcomed the regular dialogue between the Competition Commissioner and Parliament, but considers that the right to a hearing on essential matters of principle is not sufficient. They considered that Parliament should have co-decision powers in competition policy, particularly with regard to fundamental legislative directives and binding guidelines. The Commission was asked to put forward proposals for a corresponding amendment to the Treaties to extend the scope of the ordinary legislative procedure to cover competition law as well.
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted an own-initiative report by Werner LANGEN (EPP, DE) following the 2014 Annual report on EU Competition Policy.
Welcoming the report by the Commission, which underlines the importance of competition policy in the EU, Members called on the Commission not to implement internal EU competition policy in such a way as to restrict firms’ market strategies , so that they can compete on world markets with actors from outside the EU.
An effective and credible competition policy must not be directed exclusively towards bringing down prices for consumers, but must also be mindful of the strategic interests of the European economy , such as: the ability to innovate; investment; competitiveness and sustainability; the special competitive conditions for SMEs, start-ups and microenterprises; and the need to promote high labour and environmental standards.
The Commission was called upon to:
put a stop to social dumping , and ensure that competition policy decisions take particular account of the social impact in remote or isolated regions; adapt its competition policy to the specificities of the digital economy sector , and support all initiatives connected with the development of e-government; complete the internal market in areas where it is still fragmented and incomplete, and to end unjustified market restrictions and distortions of competition as soon as possible wherever they are found; ensure that competition policy strengthens social cohesion in the Union; ensure that the Member States implement the new public procurement legislation in a timely manner, in particular as regards the deployment of e-procurement and e-administration, and the new provisions on consideration of social and environmental criteria and on the division of contracts into lots; promote better convergence of, and cooperation among, national competition authorities in the EU; safeguard competition in the telecommunication sector, including in the allocation of spectrum; scrutinise the unfair and unlawful clauses and practices employed by the banking sector in consumer contracts; ensure coherence between the Union’s trade and competition policies and the objectives of its industrial policy , and ensure at the same time that the Union’s competition policy should not hinder the emergence of European industrial champions in economy.
Antitrust proceedings – cases of abuse of dominant position : in this regard, Members asked the Commission:
to increase its efforts as regards investigations of instances of abuse of dominant market positions to the detriment of EU consumers; take action internationally against cartels and anticompetitive, oligopolistic and monopolistic practices that are damaging to competition; incorporate the rules on fines, such as those imposed in cartel proceedings, into a legislative instrument; the fines should be high enough to act as a deterrent; carry out, on the basis of new criteria, a comprehensive legal and economic assessment of fast-moving markets and ephemeral business models employed by digital undertakings, in order to obtain a clear understanding of the market structure and market trends, take appropriate measures to protect consumers; provide effective protection for standard essential patents (SEPs) and to exercise close supervision to ensure that patent users obtain licences in the proper way.
Members called into question the long duration of the investigations into US internet giant Google, and regretted the fact that these investigations have already dragged on for several years, with no transparency and creating uncertainty for all parties. The Commission was asked to: ((i) conduct a thorough investigation into the Google practice whereby the ‘ Android ’ operating system is offered only in conjunction with other Google services, and whereby manufacturers may not pre-install rival products; (ii) examine in detail Google’s dominant market position in the area of direct hotel bookings .
State aid: the report called on the Commission, on Member States and on authorities at regional and communal administrative levels actively to promote compliance with EU competition policy and to explain its legal basis. It emphasised the importance of addressing horizontal and vertical State aid in the same way but took the view that remote or outlying regions and islands should be given greater leeway than at present when it comes to applying rules on State aid. It recalled that the structural funds may not be used in a way that directly or indirectly encourages the relocation of services or production to another Member State.
Members welcomed the introduction of new guidelines on State aid for risk financing , the primary purpose of which is to make it possible to promote more effectively SMEs, innovative midcaps and start-ups, which have a significant size disadvantage.
Financial aid and taxation : Members recalled that the temporary State aid in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totally removed and scrutinised, if the Banking Union is to be completed. They believed that the Commission should consider the possibility of linking State aid to banks to conditionality on credit to SMEs.
Unfair tax competition between Member States is another problem raised in the report, which brought to light the key importance of EU subsidy law in the fight against tax avoidance by multinational undertakings. Members welcomed the investigations initiated by the Commission in 2014 into unlawful State aid, through unfair tax competition, to the benefit of certain individual companies, which was extended to all the 28 EU countries in 2015. They called furthermore, on Member States in future to present to the Commission all relevant information about their tax practice, and, at long last, to comply with their obligation to disclose to the Commission and to Parliament details of any special arrangements that may have an impact on other Member States and SMEs. The Commission should use the findings of the current investigations as the basis for more precise and effective guidelines for tax-related State aid.
In view of studies estimating the annual value of tax fraud and tax avoidance to up to EUR one trillion (1 000 000 000 000), Member States must ultimately tackle and restrict this practice. Members called for a EU legislative framework to prevent distortions of competition by aggressive tax planning and tax evasion . They recommended the introduction of an automatic mandatory exchange of tax rulings, a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) and a guarantee that no profit leaves the EU untaxed.
Democratic strengthening of competition policy : Members welcomed the regular dialogue between the Competition Commissioner and Parliament, but considers that the right to a hearing on essential matters of principle is not sufficient. They considered that Parliament should have co-decision powers in competition policy, particularly with regard to fundamental legislative directives and binding guidelines. The Commission was asked to put forward proposals for a corresponding amendment to the Treaties to extend the scope of the ordinary legislative procedure to cover competition law as well.
PURPOSE: presentation of the report on Competition Policy 2014.
CONTENT: 2014 was marked by the European elections and a new European Commission.
Following the European elections, the European Parliament gave its green light to the new European Commission on the basis of the priorities outlined in President Juncker’s Political Guidelines. The mission letter addressed to Margrethe Vestager, Commissioner for Competition, states that competition policy would “contribute, as appropriate, to our jobs and growth agenda, including in areas such as: (i) the digital single market, (ii) energy policy, (iii) financial services, (iv) industrial policy and (v) the fight against tax evasion”. Indeed, competition policy encompassed all these areas in 2014.
(1) Towards a connected digital single market : the Commission believes that competition policy can help building a genuine Digital Single Market:
in the knowledge based sectors, vibrant competition is essential to stimulate innovation and spread the benefits of technological development among Europe’s citizens; effective enforcement of antitrust and merger policy makes it easier for small businesses to thrive and gain access to markets in sectors dominated by network effects; the application of State aid rules to the broadband sector helps to provide good coverage at affordable prices.
The Commission seeks to:
promote infrastructure development and competitive markets for broadband and telecoms networks; ensures that broadband and mobile networks remain open and competitive, a sine qua non for building a vibrant Digital Single Market; ensure that competition policy actions focus on smart devices and online services.
In the increasingly important field of online services , the Commission continued carrying out its investigation into certain of Google’s business practice. It is investigating concerns that Google may be abusing its dominant position in the markets for web search, online search advertising and online search advertising intermediation (i.e. the display of Google search advertising on partner sites) in the European Economic Area.
An important feature of the area of smart mobile devices concern standard-setting procedures and interoperability. In this context, the Commission adopted two important decisions on the enforcement of standard essential patents (SEPs) in April: a prohibition decision against Motorola Mobility, and a commitment decision with regard to Samsung.
Lastly, in March, the Commission adopted new rules for the assessment of technology transfer agreements under EU antitrust rules.
(2) Making energy markets work better : In the energy sector, competition policy:
ensures that companies do not maintain or re-erect barriers to protect themselves from competition, hampering the establishment of a European Energy Union; helps to ensure fair and non-discriminatory access to energy infrastructure, removes obstacles to market integration, and fosters competition between and within Member States.
In April 2014, the Commission adopted the new Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy (EEAG). Moreover, the revised State aid rules on energy and environment assist Member States to better target their support for example to renewable energy sources, infrastructure investments, generation capacity or relief of electro-intensive users from the financing of renewables support.
Antitrust enforcement actions in the energy sector contributed in particular to tackling high energy prices by addressing segmentation of markets and abusive or collusive behaviour, especially in Eastern and Central European markets.
The Commission remains vigilant on energy markets also using its State aid and merger control tools . In particular, it makes sure that powerful upstream players do not attempt to integrate downstream and thereby excessively strengthen their control over the value chain.
(3) Fairer and more transparent financial sector : the Commission has been particularly vigilant in financial services with the main goal of bringing a stable and fairer financial sector back to its core function of lending to the real economy:
the creation of the Banking Union is increasing the confidence of European citizens and markets in the European banking system; enforcement actions coupled with regulatory efforts also focused on tackling anticompetitive practices in financial derivatives and in the payments sector.
In order to promote healthy competition in the payment sector to the benefit of European consumers, the Commission is continuing to tackling anti-competitive business models based on multilateral interchange fees (MIFs).
In February, the Commission rendered legally binding the commitments offered by Visa Europe to significantly cut its MIFs for credit card payments, as well as to reform its rules to facilitate cross-border competition.
(4) Boosting competitiveness of European industry : the new State aid framework is designed to channel government support where it matters most for growth and competitiveness.
New Risk Finance State aid Guidelines were adopted giving EU countries better tools to facilitate access to finance for European SMEs and midcaps in their early development stage. The Commission adopted new rules to facilitate the granting of aid in support of research, development and innovation. In the framework of the State Aid Modernisation, the Commission adopted a communication on Important Projects of Common European Interests (IPCEI) which opens new avenues for Member States to finance certain projects. In November, the Commission announced the creation of the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI), with the objective to enhance investment in Europe by generating EUR 315 billion investment. To maximise the impact of such investments, the Commission will formulate a set of core principles, for the purpose of state-aid assessments, which a project will have to meet to be eligible for support under the Fund. In 2014 the Commission also completed the revision of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty. In addition, in 2014 the Commission investigated and punished several cartels concerning input and intermediate products.
(5) Fight against tax avoidance and evasion : the new Commission will continue to focus on the fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion. In 2014, the Commission tightened its control of fiscal State aid , by using EU competition tools to make sure that EU countries do not help selected multinational companies avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2016)220
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0004/2016
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0368/2015
- Committee opinion: PE567.764
- Committee opinion: PE567.474
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE569.789
- Committee draft report: PE565.169
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2015)0247
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Committee draft report: PE565.169
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE569.789
- Committee opinion: PE567.474
- Committee opinion: PE567.764
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2016)220
Activities
- Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jean ARTHUIS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marie-Christine ARNAUTU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jonathan ARNOTT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Inés AYALA SENDER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Zoltán BALCZÓ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Burkhard BALZ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Bendt BENDTSEN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Hugues BAYET
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- José BLANCO LÓPEZ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marie-Christine BOUTONNET
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Steeve BRIOIS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Gianluca BUONANNO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Soledad CABEZÓN RUIZ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Alain CADEC
Plenary Speeches (0)
- James CARVER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Nicola CAPUTO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Salvatore CICU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- David COBURN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Alberto CIRIO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Therese COMODINI CACHIA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Javier COUSO PERMUY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Daniel DALTON
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Michel DANTIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Rachida DATI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Angélique DELAHAYE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Isabella DE MONTE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Mireille D'ORNANO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Georgios EPITIDEIOS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Edouard FERRAND
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ildikó GÁLL-PELCZ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Enrico GASBARRA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Elena GENTILE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Arne GERICKE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Bruno GOLLNISCH
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Enrique GUERRERO SALOM
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Takis HADJIGEORGIOU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marian HARKIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Hans-Olaf HENKEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Gunnar HÖKMARK
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Mary HONEYBALL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ian HUDGHTON
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Cătălin Sorin IVAN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Diane JAMES
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Petr JEŽEK
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ivan JAKOVČIĆ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Krišjānis KARIŅŠ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Philippe JUVIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Barbara KAPPEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Afzal KHAN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jeppe KOFOD
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Bernd KÖLMEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Elisabeth KÖSTINGER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Béla KOVÁCS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Werner LANGEN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Constance LE GRIP
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marine LE PEN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sander LOONES
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Bernd LUCKE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Monica MACOVEI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Vladimír MAŇKA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Andrejs MAMIKINS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Dominique MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Barbara MATERA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- David MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Morten MESSERSCHMIDT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jean-Luc MÉLENCHON
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Miroslav MIKOLÁŠIK
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Louis MICHEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Bernard MONOT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marlene MIZZI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sophie MONTEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Krisztina MORVAI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Alessia Maria MOSCA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Renaud MUSELIER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- József NAGY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Patrick O'FLYNN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Franz OBERMAYR
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Margot PARKER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ioan Mircea PAŞCU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Alojz PETERLE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Florian PHILIPPOT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marijana PETIR
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Salvatore Domenico POGLIESE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Franck PROUST
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Michel REIMON
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Julia REID
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sofia RIBEIRO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Robert ROCHEFORT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Liliana RODRIGUES
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Claude ROLIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Virginie ROZIÈRE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Fernando RUAS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Paul RÜBIG
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Lola SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Olga SEHNALOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jill SEYMOUR
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Maria Lidia SENRA RODRÍGUEZ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Siôn SIMON
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Monika SMOLKOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Davor ŠKRLEC
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Renato SORU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Joachim STARBATTY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Theodor Dumitru STOLOJAN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Davor Ivo STIER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Catherine STIHLER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Beatrix von STORCH
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Patricija ŠULIN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Eleftherios SYNADINOS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Adam SZEJNFELD
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Tibor SZANYI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Claudia ȚAPARDEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Isabelle THOMAS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Pavel TELIČKA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Mihai ŢURCANU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marco VALLI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ángela VALLINA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Derek VAUGHAN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marie-Christine VERGIAT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Daniele VIOTTI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Udo VOIGT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Miguel VIEGAS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Steven WOOLFE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sotirios ZARIANOPOULOS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Inês Cristina ZUBER
Plenary Speeches (0)
Amendments | Dossier |
60 |
2015/2140(INI)
2015/09/25
IMCO
60 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regards a transparent and competitive single market as a key factor for growth and for an effective recovery, and takes the view, therefore, that competition policy has a vital role to play in safeguarding the rights of consumers, citizens,
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Stresses that national and European competition authorities must ensure a level playing field by providing incentives for investment and innovation;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU rules on State aid must be geared to achieving the objectives of fairness and social cohesion and the goals of the Europe2020 strategy; regards it as important, therefore, that State aid should be used to invest in
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU rules on State aid must be
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU rules on State aid must be geared to achieving the objectives of fairness and social cohesion and the goals of the Europe2020 strategy; regards it as important, therefore, that State aid should be used to invest in the real economy and foster the concentration of resources in key sectors, such as research and innovation, particularly in the digital economy, infrastructure development and measures to achieve climate and energy policy objectives;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU rules on State aid must be geared to achieving the objectives of fairness and social cohesion and the goals of the Europe2020 strategy; regards it as important, therefore, that State aid should be used to invest in the real economy and foster the concentration of resources in key sectors, such as research and innovation, digitalisation, infrastructure development, in particular of cross-border projects, and measures to achieve climate and energy policy objectives with a long-term perspective;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recalls that in accordance with Protocol No. 26 to the EU Treaties, national, regional and local authorities play an essential role and have wide discretion in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest as closely as possible to the needs of the users; and that the diversity between various services of general economic interest and the differences in the needs and preferences of users that may result from different geographical, social or cultural situations has been explicitly recognised in the same Protocol; thus, requests the Commission to take these considerations into account, when looking into state aid in regard of services of general economic interest;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Considers that the rules on State aid should not constitute an obstacle to initiatives by the public authorities which are in the public interest, for example to reduce the digital divide and to equip white areas with efficient networks;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the overhaul of competition policy is needed partly in order to meet the challenges posed by the digital single market, a sector which is changing rapidly, hence the importance of
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regards a transparent and competitive single market as a key factor for growth and for an effective recovery, and takes the view, therefore, that competition policy has a vital role to play in safeguarding the rights of consumers
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the overhaul of competition policy is needed partly in order to meet the challenges posed by the digital single market, a sector which is changing rapidly, but which nevertheless has to obey the strict rules of existing copyright law which may never be violated by any trade agreement, neither TISA nor TTIP nor any other, while regarding these national copyright laws as integral parts of the principle of subsidiarity, but never as barriers to access to the market, hence the importance of overcoming the current fragmentation along national lines and doing away with barriers to access to the market;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the overhaul of competition policy is needed partly in order to meet the challenges posed by the digital single market, a sector which is changing rapidly, hence the importance of overcoming the current fragmentation along national lines and doing away with barriers to access to the market; recalls that a genuine Digital Single Market would generate growth in new sectors and create high-quality jobs;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the overhaul of competition policy is needed partly in order to meet the challenges posed by the digital single market, a sector which is changing rapidly, hence the importance of overcoming the current fragmentation along national lines and doing away with barriers to access to the market, while guaranteeing a high level of consumer protection;
Amendment 24 #
3. Takes the view that the overhaul of competition policy is needed partly in order to meet the challenges posed by the digital single market, a sector which is changing rapidly, hence the importance of overcoming the current fragmentation along national lines and doing away with barriers to access to the market, increasing the confidence of consumers and businesses in the sector and facilitating innovation and dynamism in it;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Considers that EU competition law should be detrimental neither to other EU policies nor to national policies; calls on all institutions of the European Union and the Member States to set up a framework for the promotion of the development of European players in growth-generating areas, such as the digital sector;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Commission to examine the possibility for independent retailers, who are allowed under competition law to work together through their brick-and- mortar shops, to also provide joint e- commerce offerings;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses that interoperability contributes to fair competition and should be encouraged and developed;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Considers that abusive dominant positions created by ‘first mover’ advantage and network effects in the digital sector are a key issue and should be subject to greater monitoring;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Regards it as essential to guarantee fair terms of competition on the digital market and to combat the abuse of dominant positions, aims which ultimately benefit consumers; considers it important, in particular, to make the on-line research and advertising market more open and transparent, and regards it as vital to guarantee
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Regards it as essential to guarantee fair terms of competition on the digital market
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Regards it as essential to guarantee fair terms of competition on the digital market and to combat the abuse of dominant positions; considers it important
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Regards it as essential to guarantee fair terms of competition on the digital market and to combat the abuse of dominant positions and impose appropriate penalties for them; considers it important, in particular, to make the on-line research and advertising market more open and transparent, and regards it as vital to guarantee an open and neutral net, particularly by prohibiting any discrimination and restriction of Internet traffic, in order to encourage competition and competitiveness in the digital sector;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Regards it as essential to guarantee fair terms of competition on the digital market and to combat the abuse of dominant positions; considers it important, in particular, to make the on-line research and advertising market more open and transparent and to improve competitive conditions there, and regards it as vital to guarantee an open and neutral net;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Regards it as essential to guarantee fair terms of competition on the digital market and to combat the abuse of dominant positions, thus supporting SMEs; considers it important, in particular, to make the on-line research and advertising market more open and transparent, and regards it as vital to guarantee an open and neutral net;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Welcomes the launch of investigations, and the fines imposed on operators who have infringed competition rules, and calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to promote a culture of competition which contributes directly to the better functioning of markets in the interests of consumers and businesses;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Considers it to be of fundamental importance that the Commission should continue to focus on, and step up the attention that it devotes to, the energy market, as energy is indeed a significant item of expenditure for households and businesses in Europe, in order to achieve better integration and greater affordability in that sector;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Recalls that the effective application of competition policy ought not to hamper the development of high-quality public services affordable to all, and full availability and public use of public goods;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. Points out the importance of the ongoing sector inquiry into the e- commerce sector; underlines the need to introduce changes to existing competition law rules, for instance the Block Exemption Regulation, in order to tackle unjustified geo-blocking, including undesirable re-routing and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Regards it as essential that Directive 2014/104/EU on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions should be implemented quickly and correctly
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regards a transparent and competitive single market based on subsidiarity and following the highest qualitative standards as a key factor for growth and for an effective economic recovery, and takes the view, therefore, that competition policy has a vital role to play in safeguarding the rights of consumers, citizens, businesses and workers in the broader context of a social market economy;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Regards it as essential that Directive 2014/104/EU on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions should be implemented
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Regards it as essential that Directive 2014/104/EU on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions should be implemented quickly and correctly; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take additional measures, if necessary, to facilitate collective actions of this kind;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Believes that the development of e- government, in particular electronic public procurement, is an important factor in supporting growth, including as regards the participation of SMEs; calls, therefore, on the Member States to use all the tools made available to them by the public procurement directive for promoting European growth, and calls on the Commission to support all initiatives connected with the development of e- government;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Points out that customers on the single market are being sold products containing different ingredients under the same brand name and in the same packaging; calls on the Commission to determine whether, in the context of EU competition policy, this is a practice that has negative repercussions for suppliers of local and regional produce, in particular small and medium enterprises;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses that efforts to preserve fair competition are in the interests of consumers and SMEs; reiterates that such efforts will enhance choice for consumers and develop an environment in which SMEs and micro-enterprises can display greater innovation and creativity;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Member States to implement the new EU public procurement rules, including the provisions on criteria linked to the subject-matter of the contract, including social, environmental and innovative characteristics, and on e-administration, e-procurement and division into lots, in order to boost fair competition and ensure best value for money in the use of public funds;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Believes that competition policy should play an important part in making financial markets more secure and transparent for consumers; welcomes, furthermore, the legislative measures adopted in the field of electronic payments and particularly the introduction of ceilings on interbank commissions for card payment transactions;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission to ensure the new EU public procurement rules are implemented in a timely manner, in particular the deployment of e- procurement and the new provisions encouraging the division of contracts into lots, which is essential to foster innovation and competition and to support SMEs in procurement markets;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses that the promotion and the implementation of e-governance systems in all Members States is instrumental for the efficient monitoring of infringements and for ensuring transparency in both the public and the private sector;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Supports the findings of the Commission’s study on the economic impact of modern retail on choice and innovation in the food sector; calls, in this respect, on the EU and national competition authorities to continue their work on the impact of private labels on consumer choice and innovation, bearing in mind the increased vertical integration in the food supply chain;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regards a transparent and competitive single market, including the digital single market, as a key factor for growth and for an effective recovery, and takes the view, therefore, that competition policy has a vital role to play in safeguarding the rights of consumers, citizens, businesses and workers in the broader context of a social market economy;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Considers it essential for the Commission to continue to promote better convergence and cooperation between national competition authorities in the European Union;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Agrees that, when traders decide to provide goods and services only to certain Member States, consumer choice is more limited and prices are higher due to the lower levels of competition on the internal market; calls on the Commission to eradicate all forms of discrimination on the basis of nationality or place of residence;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Welcomes the launch of the sectoral inquiry to examine possible obstacles to competition on European markets for e- commerce; stresses that a smoothly functioning e-commerce is not only important for economic growth but also means lower transaction costs, lower prices and a greater range of choice for consumers;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Considers that a genuine single market can function efficiently only in a more transparent, coordinated and cooperative fiscal context which ensures fair competition among the various businesses; deplores the fact that tax competition between Member States has created a form of unequal competition within the single market which places SMEs at a disadvantage in relation to large multinationals;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Welcomes the strong interplay between competition enforcement and the digital single market strategy, in particular in actions related to geoblocking practices and licensing agreements, to complete the digital single market; considers that a similar interplay is vital in the internal energy market to remove barriers to the free flow of energy across borders and to build the Energy Union;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Underlines that SMEs are the backbone of a competitive EU economy; regards it as essential to ensure that anti- competitive behaviour does not disproportionally hamper smaller businesses and start-ups in expanding and innovating;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Encourages the European Competition Network to discuss the growing network of retail buying alliances at national and European level;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Stresses the relationship between competition policy and consumer protection; points towards the consumer markets scoreboards and their findings;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Takes the view that the main condition towards the completion of the European Energy Union is a well-functioning internal energy market that is dependent on the effective and persistent enforcement of EU competition rules; emphasises that implementing the competition rules contributes to sustainability, competitiveness and security of supply;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Considers that competition in the telecommunications sector is essential not only to drive innovation and investment in networks, but also for affordable prices and choice in services for consumers; calls, therefore, on the Commission to safeguard competition in this sector, including in the allocation of spectrum;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regards a transparent and competitive single market as a key factor for growth and for an effective recovery, and takes the view, therefore, that competition policy has a vital role to play in safeguarding
Amendment 60 #
5c. Considers that national competition authorities must make full use of existing tools and enforce competition law with regard to unfair trading practises in the food supply chain; stresses the need for them to cooperate with each other in order to ensure cost-effectiveness, transparency, diversity and consumer choice;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that effective EU competition policy has to be in place in order to enable consumers to benefit from the digital single market; notes that consumers are at the heart of the digital single market, with consumer spending accounting for approximately 56% of EU GDP;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Considers that competition policy should be capable of creating an environment which promotes the spirit of enterprise and the development of SMEs, which are drivers of growth and employment;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Highlights that competition authorities must ensure free choice and diversity of products and services at competitive prices;
source: 567.792
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
docs/4/body |
EC
|
events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0368&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2015-0368_EN.html |
events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0004New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0004_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
ECON/8/03568New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/4/docs |
|
activities/5/docs |
|
activities/5/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
activities/4/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/3/docs/0/text |
|
procedure/title |
Old
Annual report on EU Competition PolicyNew
Annual report on EU competition policy |
activities/3/docs |
|
activities/3 |
|
activities/4/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
activities/5 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities/2/committees |
|
activities/2/type |
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
activities/2/date |
Old
2015-12-01T00:00:00New
2015-12-07T00:00:00 |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fbNew
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000ee |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2/name |
Old
TREMOSA I BALCELLS RamonNew
THEURER Michael |
committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fbNew
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000ee |
committees/0/shadows/2/name |
Old
TREMOSA I BALCELLS RamonNew
THEURER Michael |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000eeNew
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2/name |
Old
THEURER MichaelNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000eeNew
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
committees/0/shadows/2/name |
Old
THEURER MichaelNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52015DC0247:EN
|
activities/0/commission/0 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
activities/1/committees/2/date |
2015-09-21T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
committees/2/date |
2015-09-21T00:00:00
|
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
other/0 |
|
activities/0/docs/0/text |
|
activities/1 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
ECON/8/03568
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|