2018/0095M(NLE) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

- having regard to the pending Opinion of the Court of Justice of the European Union in procedure 1/17 on the compatibility of the Investment Court System provided for in the EU Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) requested by the Government of Belgium on 6 September 2017

Amendment 10 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas there are currently more than 3 000 international investment treaties in force and EU Member States are party to some 1 400; ~~whereas such treaties are inconsistent in their scope, procedures, transparency standards and safeguards for the right to regulate;~~

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

D a. whereas there is no empirical evidence of the need of such systems for the protection of investors and of the positive link with foreign direct investment flows;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

~~I. whereas it is arguable whether developed economies with properly functioning judiciary systems should need to avail themselves of investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms;~~deleted

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~it is arguable whether developed economies with~~while properly functioning judiciary systems should ~~need to avail themselves of~~lessen the need for investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms, the establishment of an independent multilateral investment court would give greater certainty to all parties;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~it is arguable whether developed economies with properly functioning judiciary systems should need to avail themselves of investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms~~the establishment of a multilateral investment court would enhance trust and legal certainty;

Amendment 15 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas i~~t is arguable whether developed economies with properly functioning judiciary systems should need to avail themselves of investor-state dispute settlement mechanism~~nvestor-state dispute settlement mechanisms still has a role between developed economies with properly functioning judiciary systems as to ensure speedy and foreseeable resolution of disputes;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~it is arguable whether~~ developed economies with properly functioning judiciary systems should n~~eed t~~ot avail themselves of investor- state dispute settlement mechanisms;

Amendment 17 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. whereas non-discriminatory treatment of foreign investors can be achieved without the inclusion of an ISDS/ICS mechanism; Given the EU’s and the Singapore´s developed legal systems such a mechanism is not necessary;

Amendment 18 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

I a. whereas it is arguable whether investment protection helps attract Foreign Direct Investment or is a determining factor for investors when making investment decisions;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the Parties committed to pursuing a multilateral investment court, an initiative strongly supported by Parliament if ambitious transparency, ethical and fairness requirements are met;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU and Singapore share ~~the same~~some important fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights, cultural and linguistic diversity and a strong commitment to the multilateral trading system while diverging in the fundamental value of press and political freedoms and civil liberties;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the Parties committed to pursuing a multilateral investment court~~, an initiative strongly supported by Parliament~~;

Amendment 21 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the growing public rejection of special courts for foreign investors which have enabled transnational corporations to wield undue power over public policy-making; notes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has re~~plac~~formed the ~~highly controversial~~ investor- to- state dispute settlement (ISDS) regarding some of its procedural short-comings; underlines that these reforms do not extend to the substantive provisions in the new ICS mechanism, which are at the centre of public rejection;

Amendment 22 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which ~~has replaced~~is in essential the same as the highly controversial investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS); notes that several studies have shown that ICS would bring no changes to the extremely far-reaching rights that are afforded to foreign investors in current investment treaties.

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has replaced the highly controversial investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in order to address some of its procedural flaws;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which ~~has replaced the highly controversial investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS~~improves the individual approaches, followed by the EU Member States, in existing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs);

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which ~~has repla~~enhanceds the ~~highly controversial investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS)~~quality of individual approaches of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) concluded by Member States;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Notes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has replaced the highly controversial investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS);

Amendment 27 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has replaced the ~~highly controversial~~ investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS);

Amendment 28 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the agreement will ensure a high level of investment protection while safeguarding the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental protection;deleted

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the agreement will ensure a high level of investment protection ~~while safeguarding t~~; regrets that a similar level of ambition has not been reached for the enforcement of sustainable development provisions; Expects that the right oft he Parties~~’ right~~ to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental protection; will be fully safeguarded; stresses that if a party regulates in a manner that negatively affects an investment or interferes with an investor’s expectations of profits this does not amount to a breach of investment protection standards and hence does not require any compensation

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU and Singapore share the same fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights, cultural and linguistic diversity and a strong commitment to rule-based trade in the multilateral trading system;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the Singapore investment protection agreement will ~~ensur~~perpetuate a high level of investment protection w~~hile safeguarding~~ithout corresponding investor obligations, on the base of substantive investor rights which systemically weaken the Parties’ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives, such as public health and environmental protection;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Notes~~Considers it essential that the agreement will ensure a high level of investment protection while safeguarding the ~~Parties’~~ right to regulate and pursue legitimate public policy objectives~~, such as public health and environ~~ of both the EU and Singapore, and stresses that the new EU approach to investmental protection should ensure these principles in future agreements.;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 35 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that Singapore is a global financial centre; is therefore alarmed by the fact that the Financial Services chapter of the Free Trade Agreement with Singapore will be fully covered by the investment protection agreement, including investment and profit expectation in highly speculative areas, such as futures, derivatives and transferable securities, and in any kind of new financial products;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that there is no evidence for a parallel judicial system in trade and investment deals between highly developed legal systems; Stresses that existing levels of protection in the EU and Singapore should offer enough legal guarantees for investors

Amendment 37 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes that there are no safeguards foreseen that would prevent this ICS system from creating regulatory chill effect by threatening a government with an ICS case to prevent unwanted legislation from being developed or passed.

Amendment 38 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Ana GOMES, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Warns that equity participations held by European companies in Singapore could provide the possibility for EU companies to challenge pending new EU legislation regarding prudential financial service regulations, such as on Single Parent Undertakings or on central counterparties for derivatives in third countries' liabilities;

Amendment 39 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Acknowledges the right of both parties to introduce legislation on all governmental levels and to pursue public policy objectives.

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas Singapore is the eighth largest destination for EU foreign direct investment and the first in the ASEAN region; whereas,according to expert NGOs such as the Tax Justice Network Singapore continues to offer a range of secrecy offerings; full tax exemption for foreign-sourced income received in Singapore by any individual not resident in Singapore; absence of capital gains, gift or estate taxes; quasi-territorial tax system that exempts from individual income tax all foreign-sourced income not remitted to Singapore; wide array of tax treaties with other countries and, partly, as a result of this, has become a major turntable for so-called "round tripping" with India;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Stresses that the~~Underlines that Singapore is ranked 13th for the rule of law and 2nd for regulatory enforcement globally, making it the top Asian nation out of 113 countries in the 2017-2018 Rule of Law Index compiled by the World Justice Project (WJP); stresses that therefore no need arises for a special agreement guaranteesing that EU investors in Singapore will not be discriminated vis-à- vis Singaporean investors and properly protectsing them from illegitimate expropriation; reminds that Singapore has never been the responding state in an investor dispute under ICSID, UNCITRAL or the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Regards the ratification of the agreement as ill-timed in view of the pending Opinion of the CJEU on Belgium’s request of 6 September 2017 on the compatibility of CETA’s ICS provisions with the EU Treaties; calls on the Council to suspend the ratification procedure until the CJEU has delivered its Opinion in Summer 2019;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that the ICS envisages the establishment of a Permanent Investment Tribunal of First Instance and an Appellate Tribunal, whose members will have to possess comparable qualifications to those held by judges of the International Court of Justice, including expertise in public international law and not just commercial law, and will have to satisfy strict rules of independence, integrity and ethical behaviour through a binding code of conduct designed to prevent conflicts of interests; underlines that ICS fails to reform the most contentious substantive provisions of foreign investment protection, in particular the principles of “indirect expropriation” and of “fair and equitable treatment”;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before the tribunals, which will help to instil public trust in the system. Additionally welcomes the clarity regarding the grounds on which an investor can challenge, which ensures additional transparency and fairness of the process;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before the tribunals, ~~which~~case documents will be publically available and hearings will be held in public; believes that increased transparency will help to instil public trust in the system;

Amendment 45 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before the tribunals~~, which will help to instil public trust in the system~~;

Amendment 46 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before ~~the tribunals, which will help to instil public trust in the system~~any and all tribunals;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations can contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs; Demands that investor rights should be balanced by an equivalent legal mechanism accessible by trade unions and other stakeholders to enforce the investors obligations; Points out that the amicus curiae does not seek to address this imbalance; Underlines that the investment court still constitutes a separate system for foreign investors only;

Amendment 48 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Stresse~~Regrets that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations can only contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs; urges the EU and Singapore to make it possible for these organizations to join the proceedings as parties affected.

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations have no legal standing in front of the tribunal but can contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas Singapore is one of the most important global centres for financial and insurance services, the eighth largest destination for EU foreign direct investment and the first in the ASEAN region; whereas many European financial companies have equity stakes in companies under Singaporean law which would be enabled to challenge EU existing or future regulations regarded as curtailing their profits through the Investment Court System;

Amendment 50 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Underlines that forum shopping will not be possible and that multiple and parallel proceedings will be avoided;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls that the agreement represents an improvement on the investment protection provisions in CETA, as it incorporates provisions on obligations for former judges, a code of conduct to prevent conflicts of interests and a fully functioning Appellate Tribunal at the time of its conclusion; Regrets that the European Parliament was not involved in defining the detailed rules of conduct applicable to candidates for appointment as members of the tribunal or the appellate tribunal and the sanction mechanism in the event of non- compliance with the rules of conduct in order to fully respect independence of their judicial power

Amendment 52 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls that the agreement represents an nominal improvement on the investment protection provisions in CETA, as it incorporates provisions on obligations for former judges, a code of conduct to prevent conflicts of interests and a fully functioning Appellate Tribunal at the time of its conclusion;

Amendment 53 #

Seán KELLY, Iuliu WINKLER, Christophe HANSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls that the agreement ~~represents an improvement~~builds on the investment protection provisions in CETA, as it incorporates provisions on obligations for former judges, a code of conduct to prevent conflicts of interests and a fully functioning Appellate Tribunal at the time of its conclusion;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Emphasises that the long-term objective should be the establishment of an independent international court and therefore welcomes the Council mandate for the establishment of a multilateral court for the settlement of investment disputes(MIC) and encourages the Commission to continue its efforts reaching out to third countries to establish this Court as soon as possible;

Amendment 55 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Recalls that the Investment Court System as introduced in CETA is currently pending before the European Court of Justice for an Opinion on its compatibility with the EU treaties and that therefore a signal from the EP on the ICS is at this moment highly counterproductive.

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Welcomes Singapore’s commitment to the~~Remains entirely unconvinced about the need for the agreement in light of the EU’s strive to establish a multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; ~~consi~~recalls that the establishment of the ICS unders the agreement ~~a crucial stepping stone towards that end~~is immediately and permanently cost- effective;

Amendment 57 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes Singapore’s commitment to the multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties~~, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime~~; considers the agreement a crucial stepping stone towards that end;

Amendment 58 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of Singapore’s commitment to the multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; considers the agreement a crucial stepping . Regrets the fact that there is no respect for domestic courts to hear disputes first. Furthermore, this multilateral investment court is contrary to customary international law and international human rights law, which requires the exhaustion~~e towards that end;~~ of local remedies.

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of Singapore’s commitment to the multilateral investment court, a public international court which sh~~ould~~all be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal ismust be to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; ~~considers the agreement a crucial stepping stone towards that end;~~

Amendment 6 #

Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas Singapore is by far the EU’s largest partner in the region, accounting for slightly under one-third of EU-ASEAN trade in goods and services, and roughly two-thirds of investments between the two regions. Notes that over 10.000 European companies have their regional offices in Singapore and operate normally in a context of legal security and certainty;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes Singapore’s commitment to the establishment of this multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; considers the agreement a crucial stepping stone towards that end;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes Singapore’s commitment to the establishment of the multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; considers the agreement a crucial stepping stone towards that end;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes Singapore’s commitment to the multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced, costly and fragmented investment protection regime; considers the agreement a crucial stepping stone towards that end;

Amendment 63 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Welcom~~Notes Singapore’s commitment to the multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current~~, unbalanced and fragmented~~ investment protection regime; considers the agreement a ~~crucial~~ stepping stone towards that end;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Underlines that there is no empirical evidence of the need of such systems for the protection of investors or of the positive link with foreign direct investment flows; therefore no correlation between foreign direct investment and investment protection is found;

Amendment 65 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Welcomes the Council’s decision to make public the negotiating directive of 20 March 2018 on the multilateral investment court and calls on the Council to make public all previous and future trade and investment agreement negotiating directives immediately after they are adopted in order to increase transparency and public scrutiny;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the controversial ISDS; considers that this constitutes an important step in reforming global rules on investment dispute settlement and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties;

Amendment 67 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 68 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 7 #

Seán KELLY, Iuliu WINKLER, Christophe HANSEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. Whereas Singapore is the number one location for European investment in Asia, with bilateral investment stocks reaching €256 billion in 2016;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the controversial ISDS; underlines that functional national courts is a first option to solve investor disputes but considers that thise agreement constitutes an important step in reforming global rules on investment dispute settlement and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, thereby providing greater coherence in comparison to BITs, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the controversial ISDS; considers th~~at this constitute~~is an important step intowards the reform~~ing~~ of global rules on investment dispute settlement ~~and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties~~;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the controversial ISDS; considers that this constitutes an important step ~~in reforming global rules on investment dispute settlement and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties~~towards the modernisation of the approach to investment protection globally through an independent international court;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the ~~controversial~~ ISDS; considers that this constitutes an important step in reforming global rules on investment dispute settlement and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Welcomes the agreement’s commitment by the EU and Singapore to sustainable development, workers’ rights and environmental standards. Highlights generally the importance of the Sustainable Development Chapters in free-trade agreements and considers them suitable and effective tools to promote international standards in labour and environmental protection, human rights, and good governance, while avoiding red tape for EU companies;

Amendment 75 #

Christophe HANSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Welcomes the agreement’s commitment by the EU and Singapore to sustainable development, workers’ rights and environmental standards. Highlights generally the importance of the Sustainable Development Chapters in free-trade agreements and consider them suitable and effective tools to promote international standards in labour and environmental protection, human rights, and good governance.

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Regrets the lack of provisions on investors’ obligations, including binding corporate social responsibility standards; calls on the Commission to propose legislation laying down mandatory due diligence standards in sectors other than conflict minerals and timber, such as the garment industry; stresses the responsibilities of investors according to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;

Amendment 8 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pier Antonio PANZERI, Ana GOMES

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the agreement is based on a wide definition of what constitutes a covered investment, including portfolio investments, bonds, goodwill and IPR;

Amendment 80 #

Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Regrets the lack of provisions on investors’ obligations, including binding corporate social responsibility standards; calls on the Commission to propose legislation laying down mandatory~~Believes that corporate social responsibility is essential and complementary to legislation; calls on the Commission to consider due diligence standards in sectors other than conflict minerals and timber, such as the garment industry;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Regrets the lack of provisions on investors’ obligations, including binding corporate social responsibility standards; calls on the Commission to~~Calls on the Commission to refrain from proposeing legislation laying down mandatory due diligence standards in sectors other than conflict minerals and timber~~, such as the garm~~ unless for imperative and urgent reasons and when multilateral solutions are provent in~~dustry~~adequate;

Amendment 83 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Warmly welcomes the work initiated in the UN by the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights on the establishment of a binding UN instrument; calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to engage constructively in the negotiations;deleted

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Regrets that a global approach to corporations’ compliance with human rights law and the availability of remedy mechanisms are lacking; Warmly welcomes the work initiated in the UN by the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights on the establishment of a binding UN instrument; cCalls ~~on the Commission and~~for a binding treaty to include mechanisms for coordination among states on investigating and prosecuting cross- border cases, and proposes companies are accountable for human rights violations in the forum where the harm was caused, or the forum where the parent company or subsidiary is incorporated. Urges the EU and Member States to engage genuinely and constructively in the negotiations;

Amendment 85 #

Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. ~~Warmly welcomes~~Takes note of the work initiated in the UN by the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights on the establishment of a binding UN instrument; calls son the Commission and the EU Member States to ~~engage~~apply a constructive~~ly in the nego~~ approach to this initiati~~ons~~ve;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. W~~armly w~~elcomes the work initiated in the UN by the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights on the establishment of a binding UN instrument; calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to engage constructively in the negotiations;

Amendment 87 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

~~13. Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making ICS more accessible to SMEs;~~deleted

Amendment 88 #

Seán KELLY, Iuliu WINKLER, Christophe HANSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

~~13. Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making ICS more accessible to SMEs;~~deleted

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making ICS more accessible ~~to SME~~, particularly for SMEs and smaller companies;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas all investments covered in the Financial Services chapter of the Free Trade Agreement with Singapore will be covered by the agreement, including investment and profit expectation in highly speculative areas, such as futures, derivatives and transferable securities;

Amendment 90 #

Karoline GRASWANDER-HAINZ, Ana GOMES, Pier Antonio PANZERI, Maria ARENA, Agnes JONGERIUS, Dietmar KÖSTER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Encourages the Commission to continue its work on making ICS more accessible, especially to SMEs;

Amendment 91 #

Anne-Marie MINEUR, Emmanuel MAUREL, Eleonora FORENZA, Matt CARTHY, Patrick LE HYARIC, Stelios KOULOGLOU, Helmut SCHOLZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission and Singapore to agree stronger sanctions in the event that a member of the tribunals does not comply with the code of conduct, and to ensure that they are in place ~~as soon as~~before this agreement enters into force;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Considers that the approval of this agreement will give the EU more leverage to negotiate similar agreements with the other ASEAN countries with a view to establishing similar rules on investment protection throughout the region;deleted

Amendment 93 #