2020/2216(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Subheading -1 (new)

A. whereas ‘non-personal data’ means data other than personal data as defined in point (1) of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Maintains that SMEs need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources; ~~invites, therefore,~~calls on the Commission to pursue a fitness check for SMEs before ~~publish~~introducing legislation and to keep administrative burdens to a minimum ~~by, inter alia, developing standards~~; asks the Commission to pay specific attention to the needs of start- and scale- ups, which play an important role in the uptake of new technologies in Europe;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Maintains that SMEs need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources; invites, therefore, the Commission to pursue a fitness check for SMEs before publishing legislation and to keep administrative burdens to a minimum by, inter alia, developing standards; highlights the necessity to remove unnecessary legal barriers to access to data;

Amendment 12 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Maintains that SMEs need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources; invites, therefore, the Commission to pursue a fitness check for SMEs before publishing legislation and to keep administrative burdens to a minimum ~~by, inter alia, developing standard~~while at the same time achieving the underlying policy objectives;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Acknowledges that market imbalances exist in relation to digital businesses that enjoy a significant market power, enabling them to impose their business practices on consumers and customers, and makes it increasingly difficult for other players, especially SMEs and start-ups, to compete and for new businesses to even enter the market;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Considers that the efforts undertaken by the EU legislator to improve consumer cross-border access to digital content must be pursued, notably through extending the scope of the Geo- blocking Regulation, which could in turn trigger growth in pan-EU licensing and thus reduce unjustified geo-blocking to content online;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that true access to justice for SMEs requires expertise in the area of law and technology, which is scarce and expensive; calls upon the Commission to integrate the promotion of legal technological expertise in Europe in its digital skills strategy;

Amendment 16 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that many small and medium-sized enterprises are not aware of the value of the data they create, lack the tools to process them and are not sufficiently prepared to operate in a digital economy;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Welcomes the launching of a new financing instrument, in the form of a co- investment facility of up to €150 million, to support artificial intelligence companies across Europe and asks to pay special attention to support SMEs and start-ups;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to base proposals and initiatives on the right balance avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and on the other hand a fragmentation of the market through national approaches on the other; calls on the Commission to work closely with the Member States on the design, implementation and enforcement of European ethical and safety standards for AI;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to base proposals and initiatives on the right balance, supporting innovation on the one hand and ensuring consumer safety and protection on the other, with a view to introducing harmonised statutory framework provisions, avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and on the other hand a fragmentation of the market through national approaches on the other;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Subheading -1 a (new)

B. whereas data sets can be composed of both personal and non-personal data, where personal and non-personal data in a data set are inextricably linked, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies;

Amendment 20 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to base proposals and initiatives on the right balance avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and on the other hand a fragmentation of the market through national approaches ~~on the other~~and through unnecessary layers of sectorial barriers to access to non- personal data;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to ~~base~~ propos~~als and initiatives on the right balance avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and on the other hand a fragmentation of the market through national approaches on the other~~e an harmonised and future-proof regulatory framework that is inspired by a humanistic and human-centric approach in technological development;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to ~~base~~put forward proposals and initiatives ~~on the right balance avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and~~that avoid a fragmentation onf the ~~other hand a fragmentation of th~~digital single market through divergent national approaches oin the ~~other~~field of AI;

Amendment 23 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to base proposals and initiatives on the right balance avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and on the other hand aeveloping rapidly; highlights the importance therefore of a flexible, future-proof and proportionate European approach; underlines that a new framework should prevent fragmentation of the single market through different national approaches ~~on the other~~, whilst avoiding becoming one-size-fits-all approach;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that a new regulatory framework for AI is needed focusing o~~rder to deal with~~n guaranteeing fundamental rights and establishing clear ethical principles, legal safeguards and liability in order to harness the potential risks of autonomous behaviour and to maximise the trust of and the benefit for users~~; invites~~, while safeguarding the best interests of EU citizens; invites, therefore, the Commission to propose a risk-based and innovation-friendly robust legislative framework for AI that focuses on identifying and closing gaps within existing legislation and ~~being coherent with the~~without prejudice to existing sector- specific legislation;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that a new regulatory framework for AI is needed in order to deal with the potential risks of auto~~nomous behaviour~~mated decision making and to maximise the trust of and the benefit for users; invites the Commission to propose a risk-based and innovation-friendly legislative framework for AI that focuses on identifying and closing gaps within existing legislation and being coherent with the existing sector-specific legislationprecautionary approach to the development and use of AI and automated decision making systems as well as a more gradual establishment of risks and corresponding legal requirements including preventive impact assessment in order to allow the banning of highly dangerous technologies;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that a new harmonised regulatory framework for AI is needed in order to deal with the potential risks of autonomous behaviour ~~and to~~, maximise the trust of and the benefit for users and ensure an adequate level of protection; invites the Commission to propose a risk-based and innovation-friendly legislative framework for AI that focuses on identifying and closing gaps within existing legislation and being coherent with the existing sector- specific legislation;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that a new regulatory framework for AI is needed ~~in order to deal with the potential risks of autonomous behaviour and to maximise the trust of and the benefit for users; invites the Commission to~~to maximise the trust of users in the technology; invites the Commission to present a thorough impact assessment which identifies legal gaps in existing laws, followed by a proposeal for a risk- based and innovation- friendly legislative framework for AI that ~~focuses on identifying and closing gaps within existing legislation and being~~is coherent with ~~the~~ existing sector-specific legislation;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that it is important that this framework is based on solid principles such as fairness, transparency, security, which should govern the development and use of AI technology. Recognises that while legal obligations should be gradual depending on the risk, the scope of the regulatory framework should not be exclusively limited to ‘high- risk’ applications; calls for unethical applications such as aiming at mass surveillance to be banned;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that the lack of clear European rules on the attribution of responsibility in the event of a malfunction or accident is one of the key barriers to the implementation of AI- based technologies for widespread use;

Amendment 3 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recognises the importance of a functioning digital single market and the profound impact that the use of AI, robotics and related technologies ~~for EU citizens~~can have on our markets and society, since they can help tackle the challenges societies face, in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic; highlights the need to ensure full respect of fundamental rights, transparency, access to code and the thorough consideration the protection consumer rights;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Is of the firm view that harmonised future-proof definitions of ‘AI’ and ‘high- risk’ ~~should be future- proof to~~ ensure legal clarity for consumers and businesses ~~and should consider human oversight for high-risk AI applications;~~ ; recalls that the risk based approach should take into account the potential that these technologies entail to breach fundamental rights and to cause any prejudice or harm to individuals or society at a whole; reminds that the development, deployment and use of any high-risk AI applications should guarantee full human oversight at any time and must include principles of transparency, safety, accessibility and accountability, non-discrimination and fairness, protection of privacy and personal data, good governance and be socially and environmentally sustainable;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Is of the firm view that definitions of ‘AI’ and ‘high-risk’ should be future- proof to ensure legal clarity for consumers and businesses, including for the purposes of pursuing claims in connection with a malfunction or an accident, and should consider human oversight for high-risk AI applications;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Is of the firm view that the definitions of ‘AI’ and ‘high-risk’ ~~should be future- proof to ensur~~are crucial to provide legal clarity ~~for~~to consumers and businesses ~~and should consider human oversight for high-risk AI applications~~;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Is of the firm view that definitions of ‘AI’ and ‘high-risk’ should be future- proof to ensure legal clarity for consumers and businesses and should consider human oversight for ~~high-risk~~all AI applications;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Is of the firm view that ~~definitions of ‘AI’ and ‘high-risk’ should be future- proof to ensure legal clarity for consumers and businesses and should consider human oversight for high-risk AI applications~~a methodology and criteria are necessary to define the level of risk of an application, and that this process shall be subject to human oversight and control;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is convinced that existing legislation needs to be adapted ~~to new~~in view of long-term technology developments, among which those enabled by AI technologies; asks the Commission to adjust inter alia the Product Liability Directive1 , in particular by redefining the terms ‘product’ and ‘defect’ and considering adjustments to the concept of ‘burden of proof’, which should mirror the modifications to the General Product Safety Directive2 while bearing in mind the vulnerability of AI users and consumers, as well as the need to ensure fair compensation to victims when damage occurs; _________________ 1 OJ L 210, 7.8.1985, p.29. 2 OJ L 11, 15.1.2002, p. 4.

Amendment 36 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is convinced that existing legislation needs to be ~~adapted to~~modernized to adjust to the introduction of new technologies; asks the Commission to adjust inter alia the Product Liability Directive1 , in particular by redefining the terms ‘product’ and ‘defect’ and considering adjustments to the concept of ‘burden of proof’, which should mirror the modifications to the General Product Safety Directive2 ; _________________ 1 OJ L 210, 7.8.1985, p.29. 2 OJ L 11, 15.1.2002, p. 4.

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is convinced that existing legislation needs to be adapted to new technologies; ~~ask~~urges the Commission to ~~adjust~~update inter alia the Product Liability Directive1 , in particular by redefining the terms ‘product’ ~~and~~, ‘damage’, ‘defect’ and ~~consid~~reversing ~~adjustments to the concept of~~the ‘burden of proof’, which should mirror the modifications to the General Product Safety Directive~~2 ; _________________ 1 2~~; OJ L 210, 7.8.1985, p.29. OJ L 11, 15.1.2002, p. 4.

Amendment 38 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Asks the Commission to follow-up on the recommendations of the European Parliament regarding the introduction of a new liability framework for AI- operators and following the results of the impact assessment, consider introducing a strict liability regime for high-risk AI- systems that would guarantee effective protection of consumers across the EU;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to make a proposal for the introduction of a liability regime that is based on the proportion of control the party holds over the risk of the operation taking into account the development and the deployment phase and ensure compensation for non-material damages caused by AI;

Amendment 4 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recognises the importance of a functioning digital single market and the ethical use of AI, robotics and related technologies for EU citizens, since they have the potential to tackle the challenges societies face~~, in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic~~ in line with our social and democratic values, as it was demonstrated in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic; considers however, socio- economic, legal and ethical impacts have to be carefully addressed;

Amendment 40 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Outlines that society, including consumers, should benefit from the responsible development ~~and~~, deployment ~~of AI which~~and use of AI technologies that benefit citizens, generate opportunities for businesses and serves the good of society; asks the Commission, therefore, to define ethical rules for the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies t~~aking into account the principles of better regulation~~hat respect fundamental rights guaranteeing human dignity, autonomy and safety taking into account the principles of better regulation, emphasising on evidence and transparent processes involving citizens and stakeholders, including trade unions and consumers’ associations;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Outlines that society, including consumers, should benefit from the responsible development and deployment of AI which serves the good of society; asks the Commission, therefore, to define ethical ~~rule~~norms for the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies taking into account the principles of better regulation; believes that these norms should guarantee the effective protection of European citizen's fundamental and consumer rights;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Outlines that society, including consumers, should benefit from the responsible development and deployment of AI which serves the good of society, providing sufficient user protection guarantees; asks the Commission, therefore, to define ethical rules for the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies taking into account the principles of better regulation;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Outlines that society, including consumers, should benefit from the responsible development and deployment of AI which serves the good of society; asks the Commission, therefore, to define ~~ethical rule~~legal rights and obligations for the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies taking into account eth~~e principles of better regulation~~ical standards;

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Outlines that society, including consumers, should benefit from the responsible development and deployment of AI ~~which serves the good of society~~; asks the Commission, therefore, to ~~define~~consider ethical ~~rul~~guidelines for the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies taking into account the principles of better regulation;

Amendment 45 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Points out that private operators generate a significant amount of data in connection with the provision of services of general interest or when carrying out tasks that are co-financed by public funds, such as public transport services; stresses that, given their importance and high value for society, such data should be made available free of charge for re-use in the general interest, while guaranteeing a high level of personal data protection where necessary;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines that, for the training of AI, the free flow of data within the common data spaces of the digital single market is essential and this should be underpinned by ~~the~~a solid underlying legal framework which promotes trust among businesses and includes, where necessary, appropriate and fair contractual rules addressing existing power or market imbalances, and ensuring a consumer- friendly approach to data access and control;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines that, for the ~~trai~~functioning of the digital single market and the development of AI, the free flow of data within the digital single market ~~is essential and this should be underpinned by the appropriate contractual rule~~, as well as with third countries, is essential; welcomes Commission’s commitment to build a genuine European single market for data, allowing businesses to start up and scale up, to innovate and compete or cooperate on fair terms;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines that, for the training of AI, the free flow of data within the digital single market is essential and this should be underpinned by ~~the~~ appropriate ~~contractual rule~~and non- discriminatory contractual rules and effective and proportional liability provisions;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines that, for the training of AI, the free flow of data within the digital single market in line with applicable legislation such as the GDPR is essential and this should be underpinned by the appropriate contractual rules;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recognises the importance of a functioning digital single market and the use of AI, robotics and related technologies for EU citizens, since they have the potential to tackle the challenges societies face, in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic; and underlines that AI-based applications raise new, so far unresolved, legal questions that affect consumers;

Amendment 50 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Points out that the most efficient way of reducing bias in data based systems is by ensuring that the maximum of non-personal data is available to train them, for which it is necessary to limit any unnecessary barrier, notably to text-and- data mining, and to facilitate cross-border uses; notes in addition that public domain or freely licensed open data are often used by AI and machine learning developers when selecting training data, which creates a particular form of selection bias in training data, which can often lead to other forms of more harmful bias in results, such a situation calling for increased flexibility for the use of IPR protected data in order to make AI and machine learning less biased, and more in line with ethical standards, with the ultimate goal of better serving humanity;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Calls on the Commission to support the development of international standards to govern the~~Recalls the global dimension of the opportunities and risks implicit in AI technologies; calls on the Commission to promote consistent international cooperation that contributes to create synergies on AI between European entities as well as other multilateral fora to align efforts and to better coordinate the development of AI; urges the Commission to support multilateral efforts to discuss in relevant fora an effective international regulatory framework to guide the development, deployment and use of AI;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Calls on the Commission to support~~Firmly believes that the European Union should be a frontrunner globally when it comes to the development of AI, and at the same time, should work closely with like-minded countries to coordinate efforts internationally; Welcomes in this respect the ambition to introduce A Global Digital Cooperation Strategy and a Transatlantic AI Agreement; Calls on the Commission to promote the development of international standardization processes to govern the use of AI;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to support the development of international standards to govern the use of AI; underlines that the EU should position itself as a global leader in the development of ethical and legal norms and standards for the use of this technology;

Amendment 54 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that consumers should always be informed in a timely clear and intelligible manner about the existence, process and rationale of algorithmic systems and that while consumers are already benefiting from strong data protection rules such as the GDPR3 and ePrivacy Directive4 it should be considered whether additional regulatory measures may be needed to address the power asymmetries between individuals and businesses arising from the growth of digital devices and the expansion of digital data that they generate; appreciates that the Commission foresees measures to empower individuals to exercise their rights, which must at least partly be based on civil law; _________________ 3 OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 1. 4 OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p.37.

Amendment 55 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that consumers are already benefiting from strong data protection rules such as the GDPR3 and ePrivacy Directive4 ; calls for the swift adoption of a strong ePrivacy Regulation and the efficient enforcement of GDPR; appreciates that the Commission foresees measures to empower individuals to exercise their rights, which must at least partly be based on civil law; _________________ 3 OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 1. 4 OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p.37.

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that citizens, as users and consumers, are already benefiting from strong data protection rules such as the GDPR3 and ePrivacy Directive4 ; appreciates that the Commission foresees measures ensuring full coordination and avoiding duplication of the data protection existing legislations to empower individuals to exercise their rights, which must at least partly be based on civil law; ~~_________________ 3 4~~OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 1. OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p.37.

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights that consumers are already benefiting from strong data protection rules such as the GDPR3 and ePrivacy Directive4 ; appreciates that the Commission foresees measures to empower individuals to exercise their rights~~, which must at least partly be based on civil law~~; _________________ 3 OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 1. 4 OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p.37.

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls on the Commission to propose restrictions to the use of systems building on consumers’ commercial surveillance and to encourage the deployment of consumer-centric systems based on fair and non-discriminatory practices;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Maintains that any new legislation shall abide with the principles already provisioned in GDPR, namely privacy by design and by default, data minimisation and purpose limitation;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Recogni~~Stresses the importance of a fully functioning digital single market and the ~~use~~benefits of AI, robotics and related technologies for EU citizens, since they help to effectively tackle the challenges societies face, in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Asks the Commission to propose measures to ensure that users have control over their choices, by always safeguarding their consent through an opt-in framework and the possibility to opt-out, avoiding any lock-in effects;

Amendment 61 #

10c. Asks the Commission to propose measures to ensure that, in the same spirit, consumers can still use a connected device for all its functions, even if consumers withdraw or do not give their consent to share non-operational data with the device manufacturer or third parties; reiterates the need for transparency in contract terms and conditions regarding the possibility and scope of data sharing with third parties;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Asks the Commission to ensure that users are properly informed and that their rights are effectively guaranteed when they interact with automated decision-making systems and urges the Commission to concretise these rights in its future legislative proposal by translating them into enforceable rules so that automaticed decision- making ~~systems do not~~powered technologies serve consumers and do not harm them nor generate unfairly biased outputs for consumers in the single market;

Amendment 63 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

11. Asks the Commission to ensure that users are properly informed ~~and that their rights ar~~when they interact with AI, about the data that it collects and for which use; underlines that their rights offline should also be effectively guaranteed online when they interact with automated decision-making systems ~~and~~; stresses that automatic decision- making systems shouldo not generate ~~unfairly~~ biased outputs leading to discriminatory decisions for consumers in the single market;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Asks the Commission to ensure that ~~users~~citizens, as users and consumers, are properly informed and that their rights are effectively guaranteed when ~~they interact with automated decision-making systems and that~~a system uses AI, when AI systems personalise a product or service for its users, and when they interact with automaticed decision- making systems ~~do not generate unfairly biased output~~or are subjected to autonomous processes for ~~consumers in the single market~~decisions that influence their experience with digital products and services;

Amendment 65 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Recalls that bias in and discrimination by software, algorithms and data is unlawful; urges the Commission to propose measures to assure that automatic decision-making systems do not generate subjective, unjustifiable, unreasonable or illegitimate biased outputs for consumers in the single market;

Amendment 67 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Asks the Commission to propose clear definitions of the rights of the consumer which should include the right to object to being subject to decisions, right to have explanations and human intervention, rights to redress in case of harm;

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. Urges the Commission to ensure a strong protection for fundamental rights and users’ civil law rights in the ~~forth-coming~~ proposal for a Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Market Act (DMA), particularly in order to protect, inter alia, the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to provide services, and to protect users from ~~harmful micro-targeting~~illegal content and harmful business practices based on targeting or the exploitation of data;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. Urges the Commission to ensure a strong protection for users’ ~~civil law~~ rights in the forth-coming proposal for a Digital Services Act (DSA), particularly in order to protect, inter alia, the freedom of expression, the right to access information and the freedom to provide services, and to protect users from ~~harmful~~ non-consensual micro- targeting;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that the use of self- learning algorithms enables businesses to gain a comprehensive insight about consumer’s personal circumstances and behaviour patterns, allowing them to tailor their advertising and contract terms to specific profiles thus exploiting consumer’s willingness to purchase goods and services as well as deploying scoring systems to decide whether a specific consumer can purchase a product or take up a service;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. Urges the Commission to ensure a strong protection ~~for users’ civil law right~~of the rights of users in the forth-coming proposal for a Digital Services Act (DSA), particularly in order to protect, inter alia, the freedom of expression and the freedom to provide services, and to protect users ~~from~~against harmful micro-targeting;

Amendment 71 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Outlines that it is unacceptable that consumers are exposed to unsafe products and therefore ~~increased~~clear responsibilities for online marketplaces are needed; asks the Commission to set up clear rules for the responsibility of content hosting platforms for goods sold or advertised on them in the DSA proposal in order to inter alia close the legal gap in which the buyers failed to obtain the satisfaction to which he or she is entitled according to the law or the contract for the supply of goods for example because of the inability to identify the primary seller;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Outlines that it is unacceptable that users and consumers are exposed to ~~unsafe~~illegal content as well as unsafe and counterfeit products ~~and~~; therefore, increased responsibilities for ~~online marketplaces are needed~~content hosting platforms and online marketplaces are needed to reinforce the digital single market; asks the Commission to set up clear rules for the responsibility of content hosting platforms, for the illegal content and for the goods sold or advertised on them in the DSA proposal in order to consider the consumer safeguards in place, which should be observed at all times, and the concomitant redress measures for retailers and consumers by inter alia close the legal gap in which the buyers failed to obtain the satisfaction to which he or she is entitled according to the law or the contract for the supply of goods, for example because of the inability to identify the primary seller (know your customer business principle);

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Outlines that it is unacceptable that consumers are exposed to unsafe products, counterfeit goods and products which infringe intellectual property rights, and therefore increased responsibilities for online marketplaces are needed; asks the Commission to set up clear rules for the responsibility of content hosting platforms for goods sold or advertised on them in the DSA proposal in order to inter alia close the legal gap in which the buyers failed to obtain the satisfaction to which he or she is entitled according to the law or the contract for the supply of goods for example because of the inability to identify the primary seller;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Outlines that it is unacceptable that consumers are exposed to unsafe products and therefore increased responsibilities for online marketplaces based on the principle of proportionality are needed; asks the Commission to set up clear rules for the responsibility of content hosting platforms for goods sold or advertised on them in the DSA proposal in order to inter alia close the legal gap in which the buyers failed to obtain the satisfaction to which he or she is entitled according to the law or the contract for the supply of goods for example because of the inability to identify the primary seller;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Outlin~~Stresses that it is unacceptable that consumers are exposed to unsafe products and therefore increased responsibilities for online marketplaces are needed; ~~asks~~calls upon the Commission to ~~set up~~ clear ~~rules for~~ify the responsibility of content hosting platforms for goods sold or advertised on them in the DSA proposal in order to inter alia close the legal gap in which the buyers failed to obtain the satisfaction to which he or she is entitled according to the law or the contract for the supply of goods for example because of the inability to identify the primary sellerto ensure that consumers can effectively exercise their right to redress; Proposes that this should include an obligation for digital services from third countries that are active in the European single market to establish a legal representative within the European Union;

Amendment 76 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Stresses the need to guarantee greater transparency in the internal rules of internet platforms, as well as their compliance with European consumer protection standards; calls for full transparency in the functioning of digital platforms, especially for entities registered in third countries, as regards algorithms affecting the availability of services, prices offered and user profiling for advertising;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. C~~onsiders that the use of smart contracts in the digital single market must be firmly founde~~alls on the Commission to assess the development and use of distributed ledger technologies including blockchain, namely smart contracts in the digital single market, provide guidance to ensure legal certainty for businesses and con ~~civil and contract law in order to ensure the rights of businesses and consumers~~sumers, in particular the question of legality, enforcement of smart contracts in cross border situations, and notarisation requirements where applicable, and make proposals for the appropriate legal framework;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that large platforms with significant network effects resulting from for example the data that they possess could act as de facto ‘online gatekeepers’ of the digital economy ~~and urges the Commission to analyse the impact that the power of these large platforms have on the rights of consumers and SMEs.~~, which creates unfair competition disproportionately impacting SMEs; urges the Commission to introduce measures to protect the rights of consumers and SMEs by restoring the level playing field in the internal market;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that large platforms with significant network effects ~~could~~ act as de facto ‘online gatekeepers’ of the digital economy and urges the Commission to analyse the impact that the power of these large platforms have on the rights of consumers and SMEs. and to tackle this through clear obligations for interoperability and transparency that would allow the user to make an informed choice;

Amendment 8 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Maintains that SMEs need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources; in particular, with a view to maintaining balance in the internal market and a level playing field for all platform holders or operators, regardless of their size; invites, therefore, the Commission to pursue a fitness check for SMEs before publishing legislation and to keep administrative burdens and any obstacles to a minimum by, inter alia, developing fair and effective standards;

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that large platforms with significant network effects could act as de facto ‘online gatekeepers’ of the digital economy and urges the Commission to analyse the impact that the power of these large platforms have on the rights of users, consumers, start-ups and SMEs.;

Amendment 81 #

Amendment 82 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Stresses that limited competition in the market for advanced digital services using AI technology creates significant barriers for small and medium-sized enterprises; recommends that the Commission’s proposed legislation should take into account the differences in potential between operators in the single market in terms of the administrative or financial burdens that they face;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Maintains that SMEs and start-ups need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources; invites, therefore, the Commission to pursue a fitness check for SMEs before publishing legislation and to keep administrative burdens to a minimum by, inter alia, developing standards; as they are the backbone of Europe's economy; invites, therefore, the Commission to assess a proportionate approach to enable them to develop and innovate, including specific measures for the digitalisation of SMEs and start-ups in future legislation and to keep administrative burdens to a minimum by, inter alia, taking into account their position in every step of the digital transformation;

source: 662.129

2020/12/21 ITRE 160 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Robert HAJŠEL, Josianne CUTAJAR, Csaba MOLNÁR, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Ismail ERTUG, Eva KAILI, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that ~~European leadership can be a reality~~the EU must ensure its digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy in the digital field by leading the way in developing and using trustworthy and human-centric AI technologies and applications that benefit people and society as a whole, while at the same time ensuring a high level of transparency, data protection, ethical standards, digital and fundamental rights protection, and defining global standards in these areas; notes that a second wave of digitalisation based on industrial data lies ahead; underlines that a common EU ~~approach can make Europe the most innovative region in the world by 2030~~sustainable approach to technologies creates a competitive edge and can make Europe the most innovative region in the world by 2030 by developing and deploying cutting-edge, transparent, ethical and secure AI technologies and applications on the basis of the Union's values; underlines that tackling the digital divide and digital literacy is key for Europe to be at the forefront of this second digitalisation wave; stresses that the EU can only reap the full benefits of AI technologies if it is available and accessible to all;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Demands that digital connectivity should be a key element to address; calls to the Commission to urgently address the existing digital divide and analyse the impact of digital technologies with regards to unequal access to technology, on the depopulation phenomenon and disparities in connectivity across the Member States;

Amendment 100 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment is key to European competitiveness in the digital era; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach ~~is needed to avoid internal market fragment~~based on a human- centric approach to AI, transparency and clear liability rules is needed to avoid internal market fragmentation; highlights the potential for European added value and the current cost of non-Europe in the field of AI and digital regulation;

Amendment 101 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment is key to European competitiveness in the digital era; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach is needed to avoid internal market fragmentation; underlines that only a fully harmonised trustworthy and human-centric AI regulatory framework will have the potential to become a legislative benchmark at an international level;

Amendment 102 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment ~~is key to European competitiveness in the digital era~~of trustworthy and human-centric AI is key to European competitiveness of European businesses in the digital era, enabling them to bring innovative solutions to the market and scale up globally; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach is needed to avoid sin~~ternal~~gle market fragmentation;

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment is key to European competitiveness in the digital era; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach is needed to avoid internal market fragmentation, whilst at the same time exploiting the specific features of the centres of excellence in various Member States;

Amendment 104 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Underlines that interoperability facilitates cross-border cooperation, promoting European standards as well as successful implementation of policies, and has the potential to decisively contribute to avoid cross-border electronic barriers, further securing the emergence of new, or the consolidation of developing, common public services at the Union level; recalls that in order to eliminate fragmentation of European services, to support fundamental freedoms and operational mutual recognition in the EU, a holistic cross-sector and cross-border approach to interoperability should be promoted in the manner that is the most effective, and the most responsive to end-users;

Amendment 105 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. States that increased digitalisation will bring new energy needs but also contribute to bring efficiency with providing better understanding of processes and leading to their improvements; recognises that AI can help to identify where energy improvements can be made for energy and costs savings; furthermore AI can better help to measure energy efficiency, improve energy management and access to renewable storage;

Amendment 106 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Recognises that Artificial Intelligence is one of the key-technologies for future innovation, sustainable economic growth, and welfare. Emphasis that in a globalized economy, Europe must take on a leading position in the research of Artificial Intelligence and development of Artificial Intelligence applications to stay competitive and become digitally sovereign;

Amendment 107 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Recalls that the digitalisation of public administrations and services is crucial to reducing administrative burden on EU industry, including SMEs, and on citizens in general by making their interactions with public authorities faster, more convenient and less costly, as well as by increasing the efficiency, transparency and the quality of the services provided, while at the same time increasing the efficiency of public spending; recommends, in line with the principle of strategic autonomy, the use of Open- Source Software or EU software in public administrations of the EU; stresses that common standards, modular architectures and the use of Open-Source Software in the public sector are facilitators for deploying and developing strategic digital tools and capacities while increasing trust and secure transparency; stresses that software, data and tools generated by the public sector or publicly funded should be reusable and openly accessible as long as this is compliant with fundamental rights;

Amendment 108 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Stresses the importance of avoiding creating uncertainty about how AI technologies can be used; recognises that stakeholders in research, industry politics and society need a clear and easily comprehensible legislative framework that regulates the use of AI where needed;

Amendment 109 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9 c. Calls for the creation of an digital ecosystem in which SMEs can participate in the technological innovation around AI; emphasises that SMEs will need clear guidelines and legal certainty on how to adopt the new regulations; recalls that any new regulatory burden is much more difficult and more expensive for SMEs and therefore SMEs must be relieved twice as much of administrative burden;

Amendment 11 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Emphasizes that out of the three key objectives defined in the Communication on Shaping Europe’s Digital Future, digital competitiveness and economic growth are irreplaceable prerequisites for building an open, democratic, and sustainable society, powered by technology that works for people;

Amendment 110 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Jessica STEGRUD, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)

9 d. Underlines the significance of a common European approach. remindes that according to an estimate by the European Parliamentary Research Service, a common European approach to ethical aspects of AI has the potential to create up to 294.9 billion euros in additional GDP and 4.6 million jobs in the EU by 2030;

Amendment 111 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that access to big data ~~is key for the development of AI; calls for a new approach to data regulation~~, cloud services and computing capacities is key for the development of AI;

Amendment 112 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Tomas TOBÉ, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that access to bihigh quality training data is key for the development of AI; ~~calls for a new approach to data regulation~~stresses that businesses and researchers should be given greater freedom to use data, with less regulatory interference; calls for a new approach to data regulation; that gives higher priority to innovation and competitiveness by giving businesses greater freedom to the use of data when it is not considered to be high risk, along with clear and balanced rules on IPR and protection of business secrets;

Amendment 113 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that access to big data is key for the development of AI; calls for a new approach to data regulation; emphasises the need to ensure that any future AI legislation should take into account and comply with already existing rules enshrined in Union law and the CJEU’s case law; stresses that data localisation in the EU represents an important step towards strategic autonomy and reduction of emissions of the EU; strongly believes the regulation on data governance should include an obligation to process data in the EU, including an obligation of establishment within the EU for intermediaries; recalls the Court of Justice of the European Union ruling on the Schrems II case C- 311/18, from July 16, 2020;

Amendment 114 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that access to big data is key for the development of AI; calls for a new approach to data regulation; considers therefore that data should be at the heart of digitisation; considers that a balanced approach is needed when it comes to access to data, which will foster innovation and data sharing through voluntary means, while protecting other legitimate interests, such as IPR, privacy and trade secrets; considers that further developing data regulation beyond the concept is key in order to unleash the potential of AI; calls therefore for a new data regulation taking into account the legal principle of property rights; considers that any future data regulation needs to put a specific focus on access to data by research and SMEs in a balanced approach which bests supports innovation;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that access to big data is key for the development of AI; ~~calls for a new approach to data regulation~~reiterates the need for a new approach to data ownership by data subjects in the context of AI-enabled systems to ensure privacy and control of aggregated data or metadata built on data points containing information including, but not limited to, time, location, transactions; calls for a new approach to data regulation; stresses that privacy and data protection must be guaranteed at all stages of the AI system’s life cycle and notes that any big data processing operation should be subject to an ex-ante and extensive Data Protection Impact Assessment;

Amendment 116 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Robert HAJŠEL, Josianne CUTAJAR, Csaba MOLNÁR, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Ismail ERTUG, Eva KAILI, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that access to big data is a key for the development of AI; calls for a new approach to data regulation; underlines the importance of level playing field and EU wide interoperability when using the exponentially increasing amount of the industrial and public data; recalls that success of the Union’s data economy as well as AI development and deployment primary depends on the wider ICT ecosystem, closing the digital divide, upskilling and reskilling of workforce, developing the IoT, fibre, quantum, block;

Amendment 117 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Points out that the most efficient way of reducing bias in data based systems is by ensuring that the maximum of non-personal data is available to train them, for which it is necessary to limit any unnecessary barrier to text-and-data mining,and to facilitate cross-border uses; notes in addition that public domain or freely licensed data are often used by AI and machine learning developers when selecting training data, both for ease of access and to avoid potential infringement liability exposure, which creates a particular form of selection bias in training data, which can often lead to other forms of more harmful bias in results; emphasises the need to address remaining uncertainties related to the legal performance of text and data mining that developers may still face;

Amendment 118 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Suggests that public and private sector actors should develop and document internal processes to ensure that their design, development and ongoing deployment of algorithmic systems is transparent, explainable, auditable and continuously evaluated and tested, not only to detect possible technical errors but also identify possible legal, social and ethical impacts that the systems may generate;

Amendment 119 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Acknowledges the current success of the European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking, an initiative of the EU engaging both Member States and private partners; welcomes the recently published Commission proposal on its continuation to maintain and advance Europe’s leading role in supercomputing and quantum computing strongly needed for the development of AI in Europe;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Welcomes the seven key principles and the objectives put forward by Member States in the Berlin Declaration on Digital Society and Value-based Digital Government which represent an important step towards fair, inclusive and cooperative digital modernisation of the public sector, as well as their commitment to strengthen digital participation and digital inclusion so as to foster a value- based digital transformation by promoting fundamental rights and democratic values, encouraging digital empowerment and literacy, and ensuring security, sustainability, and technological sovereignty in the digital sphere; emphasises that public authorities and institutions of Member States must lead by example to strengthen the tenets of the European Union by implementing the principles of the Berlin Declaration in the digital sphere; calls on the Commission to support, promote and extend the principles and objectives of the Berlin Declaration with policy initiatives at the European level; calls on the Commission to support the achievement of these key principles and the implementation of the actions and measures by means of funds provided by the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and by Next Generation EU (NGEU)for digital transformation;

Amendment 120 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Recalls that access to data must result from a transparent trade-off with citizens; recognises that when citizens authorize the use of the data, receiving as counterpart better services of general interest and a more competitive offer from the market; states that transparency and monitoring of the use of data must be ensured;

Amendment 121 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Stresses that it is imperative that workers be properly trained in how to exercise their right to respect for their personal data; calls on the Commission to present a revision of the GDPR in order to adopt more specific measures to ensure the protection of workers' rights and freedoms;

Amendment 122 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10 b. Demands that any artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies system, shall be developed, deployed or used with "privacy by default" and in a manner that prevents the possible identification of individuals from data that were previously processed based on anonymity or pseudonymity, and the generation of new, inferred, potentially sensitive data and forms of categorisation through automated means (metadata). Calls the Commission to develop robust anonymisation and pseudonymisation techniques and identify best practices that will meet the processing requirements of the GDPR;

Amendment 123 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10 b. Highlights that the sharing of data should be used to enhance competition; emphasises the need for adequate safeguards against market failures on data markets; suggest that the Commission takes advantage of the review of horizontal and vertical competition guidelines to introduce new tools to counter excessive market concentration, inherent to data markets, including, inter alia ongoing monitoring for at-risk- markets and, where necessary, ex-ante regulation;

Amendment 124 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10 b. Stresses that privacy and data protection must be guaranteed at all stages of the AI system’s life cycle; emphasises that any future AI legislative initiative should allow individuals to have full control over their own data and that data concerning them will not be used to harm or discriminate against them on the basis of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, language, religion, sexual orientation, political view or belief;

Amendment 125 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10 c. Underlines the specificity of the health sector; agrees with the Commission that citizens should have secure access to a comprehensive electronic record of data concerning their health and that they should retain control over personal data concerning their health and be able to share it securely with authorised third parties, while unauthorised access should be prohibited, in compliance with data protection legislation; furthermore affirms that data should be stored on secure local servers and processed by independent bodies; stresses that insurance companies or any other service provider should not be allowed to use data from e-health applications for the purpose of discriminating in the setting of prices, as this would violate the fundamental right of access to health;

Amendment 126 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10 c. Strongly emphasises the need to protect consumers from microtargeting practises and suggests that it should be flagged and coupled with their right to request a report on the use of behavioural analytics that were used to achieve consumers targeting. Is of the opinion that targeted advertisement practises should be explainable and offer to consumers options of choosing the desired personalization level/percentage of microtargeting. (ex. on a scale 0-100%). Strongly considers that the use of these practices should be subject to specific safeguards such as the informed and explicit consent of their owner, who should have the right to access effective remedies in case of misuse;

Amendment 127 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10 c. Considers that at all times, protection of private data should remain a priority. Data minimization should be the principle followed by purpose limitation, in full compliance with GDPR;

Amendment 128 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Warns against overregulating AI; recalls that regulation must be balanced, agile, permanently evaluated, and based on soft regulation except for high-risk~~Is of the view that in such a disruptive sector which could potentially have a great impact on people, it is important to establish a well-defined, balanced regulatory framework in which operators can work under hard and fast rules which affect people's lives in a reasponsible manner;

Amendment 129 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Warns against overregulating AI and discourages any "one-size-fits-all" approach to regulation; recalls that regulation must be balanced, agile, p~~ermanently evalu~~roportionated , and based on ~~soft regulation except for high-risk areas~~the current legislative instruments and best practices except for high-risk areas where a new regulatory approach should be devised;

Amendment 13 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Calls on the Commission to adopt a balanced approach, based on the principle of subsidiary, technology- neutrality, and thorough impact assessments, when it presents the multitude of legislative and other initiatives outlined in the Communication on Shaping Europe’s Digital Future;

Amendment 130 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Warns against overregulating AI~~Highlights the need to ensure that AI be developed and applied within an appropriate EU common regulatory framework which promotes innovation and respects the Union's values and fundamental rights as well as ethical principles such as accountability and transparency; recalls that regulation must be proportional, balanced, agile, future- proofed, permanently evaluated~~, and based on soft regulation except for high-risk area~~; calls for an appropriate level of regulation, especially for high-risk areas; stresses that legal certainty fosters technological development and public confidence in new technologies which is essential for the rapid digitalisation of the EU industries, economy and society; points out that an ambitious regulatory framework can stimulate innovation in the AI sector by setting clear limits and standards, in particular for SMEs; considers that the risk based approach shouldn't be limited to 'high risk' and 'low risk' AI applications but should rather be proportionally scaled to the level of risks to coincide with the variety of AI applications, the sector concerned and related risks;

Amendment 131 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Jessica STEGRUD, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Warns against overregulating AI; recalls that regulation must be balanced, agile, permanently evaluated, and based on soft regulation except for high-risk areas; emphasis that any regulation must be flexible enough to not over-regulate and therefore slow down the current and future progress in AI – especially in areas with very little risk of negative impact; Stresses that the regulation of AI has to be proportional to the risk it is aiming to reduce;

Amendment 132 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Warns against overregulating AI; recalls that regulation must be balanced, agile, permanently evaluated, and based on soft regulation except for high-risk areas; calls for a regulatory approach that is not based on a snapshot of what technological development looks like at the moment, but strives for the rules to be applicable to future technological breakthroughs and phenomena; calls for all AI regulation to be technology-neutral and proportionate;

Amendment 133 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Warns against overregulating AI; demands that risk-based approach towards AI should be applied as a leading principle; recalls that regulation must be balanced, agile, permanently evaluated, and based on soft regulation ~~except for high-risk areas;~~ , particularly on self-regulation and voluntary practices such as voluntary labelling; acknowledges however that a legislative framework might be necessary for a strictly limited categories of high-risk AI;

Amendment 134 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Warns against overregulating AI; recalls that regulation must be balanced, agile, permanently evaluated, and based on soft regulation except for high-risk areas; recognises that a regulatory approach to the definition of risk focusing only on high-risk sectors (healthcare, transport, energy and parts of the public sector) and high-risk uses or purposes can lead to potential loopholes;

Amendment 135 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Recommends that determining the risk level and the classification of sectors as high or low-risk, should always derive from an impartial, regulated, inclusive, independent and external assessment that considers ethical harms that can arise from artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies in society, either because of poor (unethical) design, inappropriate application, or misuse; Such an assessment needs to balance attention to abstract principles with specificity; Recommends that determining the risk level and the classification of sectors as high or low-risk, should always derive from an impartial, regulated, inclusive, independent and external assessment that considers ethical harms that can arise from artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies in society, either because of poor (unethical) design, inappropriate application, or misuse; Such an assessment needs to balance attention to abstract principles with specificity; Strongly recommends that a broad and inclusive debate and stakeholder consultation will contribute to creating trust among citizens regarding the assessment and classification of risks;

Amendment 136 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Reminds that AI and other digital technologies are always developed in an international context; notes that unclear and fragmented regulation will drive innovative companies to develop their products and services outside of Europe; underlines the importance of free flow of data across borders; supports the Commission’s aim to address unjustified obstacles to international data flows as well as the restrictions European companies are facing in third countries;

Amendment 137 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Considers that biometric data should be classified in the highest category of the risk level scale proposed by the Commission given its specific and extremely sensitive nature as well as its potential misuses; strongly believes that the use of biometric data should be subject to specific safeguards such as the informed and explicit consent of their owner, who should have the right to access effective remedies in case of misuse of such data;

Amendment 138 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Patrizia TOIA, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, Josianne CUTAJAR, Csaba MOLNÁR, Ismail ERTUG, Eva KAILI, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Calls to safeguards meant to ensure that we will always having human control on algorithms and ensure that proper and effective redress mechanisms are in place; To that regard, calls to ensure that algorithms are openly auditable; Calls for a ban on facial recognition algorithms for the wide damage they poseto fundamental rights of individuals;

Amendment 139 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Notes that data-driven technologies, including AI are becoming the dominant force in the digital economy; states that any regulatory framework will need to address the question of production and use, interoperability, access to and sharing of data, reskilling of workforce and data management, in particularly SMEs;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. The shaping of a fair digital sector must go hand-in-hand with educational aspects, socialisation, fair working conditions, work-life balance, democracy, good governance and strong public services;

Amendment 140 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Underlines that existing regulation in critical areas such as automotive, Finance, healthcare, aviation, transport should be applied wherever possible; suggests that these regulations should be reviewed and updated if necessary to include recent technological advancements;

Amendment 141 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11 b. Requests the Commission to determine the risk level of sectors by taking into account non-quantifiable risks and pay particular attention to the identification and characterisation of the hazard, the assessment of the likelihood of its occurrence and the characterisation of risk. Asks the Commission to pay particular attention to carefully evaluate all the uncertainties and transparently report on them, even when these cannot be modelled or expressed in quantitative terms. Requests the Commission to apply the Ethical Requirements put forward by the High Level Expert Group at the risk management level and consider the need for introducing a precautionary approach towards high level or potentially irreversible risks;

Amendment 142 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11 b. Suggests that AI should be distinguished by categories of use cases; suggests that new use cases that are not covered by existing regulations should be classified by their potential risk which is based on a clear and transparent framework; calls that only AI systems that bear high risk shall be topic for a potential regulation;

Amendment 143 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11 b. Supports the creation of "ecosystem of trust" as stated in the Commission's White paper on AI that should give citizens sufficient confidence to take up AI applications and provide to companies and public organisation the legal certainty to innovate in AI deployment;

Amendment 144 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Cătălin Sorin IVAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 c (new)

11 c. Considers it necessary to create an ecosystem which allows AI research from public and private institutions to develop the next Generation of AI in an environment of “regulatory sandboxes”, which would allow AI Research even in potentially high-risk use cases;

Amendment 145 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

~~12. Calls for a European Disruptive Innovation Agency which concentrates on first stage research.~~deleted

Amendment 146 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Jessica STEGRUD, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

~~12. Calls for a European Disruptive Innovation Agency which concentrates on first stage research.~~deleted

Amendment 147 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. CStresses that the Union's sovereignty and strategic autonomy require massive investment in research and innovation, in particular high-quality public research and development and innovation, namely in key enabling technologies and disruptive innovative solutions; recalls that the Member States must uphold their commitment to invest 3% of their GDP in research and development, in order to ensure the Union’s strategic autonomy in the digital field; calls for a European Disruptive Innovation Agency which concentrates on first stage research. ;

Amendment 148 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. Calls for a European Disruptive Innovation Agency which concentrates on first stage research.; in this context very much appreciates the plans to further develop the European Innovation Council under Horizon 2021-2027 into a full Council offering a “one stop shop” for start-ups, offering improved funding instruments and a Business Acceleration Service, learning from its pilot phase;

Amendment 149 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. Calls for the assessment of the real need for a European Disruptive Innovation Agency which concentrates on first stage research. to be postponed until this technology has reached a more advanced stage of maturity, and for all the funds to be used to boost support for SMEs;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Recognizes that trust is essential for the development and implementation of AI technologies and applications; underlines that clear regulatory requirements need to ensure algorithmic transparency of AI technologies and applications which often comprise potential risks, such as opaque decision- making black box effects and biased data sets; underlines that black-box algorithms that entail inexplicable decisions are unacceptable in any sector, especially in a context where AI decision-making has an impact on life or death and the consequences of algorithmic failure could be grave; stresses that the traceability of AI systems should be ensured and that explainability of the algorithmic decision- making process and human oversight should be provided, especially concerning high risk applications of AI; recalls that humans must always be able to review and reverse automated decisions;

Amendment 150 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Stresses that cybersecurity is an essential element of the digital transformation of EU industry and society; underlines that the protection of networks and essential infrastructures is crucial and that strong measures must be taken and highest cybersecurity standards should be established to prevent security breaches, data leaks, data poisoning, cyber-attacks and the misuse of personal data; underlines that effective protection requires EU and national institutions to work together with the support of ENISA to ensure the security, integrity, resilience and sustainability of critical infrastructures and electronic communication networks, in particular 5G networks; calls for the need to implement a coordinated approach, based on the relevant key measures recommended in the 5G cybersecurity toolbox to address the security challenges related to these technologies and to identify effective common methodologies and tools to mitigate risks related to 5G networks; stresses the importance of European technological sovereignty when it comes to cybersecurity of future electronic communication networks; calls for the application, when necessary, of all relevant restrictions on high-risk suppliers for key assets defined as critical and sensitive in the Union’s coordinated risk assessments; reaffirms the importance for the Member States to consider the need to diversify suppliers in order to avoid or limit major dependency on a single supplier; calls on the Commission to explore the use of blockchain-based cybersecurity protocols and applications to improve the resilience, trustworthiness and robustness of AI infrastructures;

Amendment 151 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider the creation of a European regulatory agency for AI and algorithmic decision-making tasked with 1) Auditing the AIAs of high-level impact systems to approve or reject the proposed uses of algorithmic decision-making in highly sensitive and/or safety-critical application domains (private health-care, for instance) 2) Investigating suspected cases of rights violations by algorithmic decision-making systems, for both individual decision instances (singular aberrant outcomes, for example) and statistical decision patterns (discriminatory bias, for instance) 3) Assessing compliance with the proposed Ethics Requirements and conduct periodical ethics reviews and audits;

Amendment 152 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Calls to avoid encouraging a business model based on restricting access to data and knowledge, which is especially harmful to SMEs; Therefore we would caution against pushing for new IPR limitations and the use of trade secrets as a barrier, while advocating for removing restrictions on databases and ensuring that public data maintains it's open character and cannot be privatised; Reminds that according to the first evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases, the introduction of a new “sui generis right” has led to a decrease in the production of European produced databases; therefore encourages the Commission to repeal Directive 96/9/EC;

Amendment 153 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Highlights that EU continues its international cooperation on AI with like- minded countries and global players with the approach of EU rules and values; calls on the Commission to closely monitor international level playing field in AI development and deployment;

Amendment 154 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12 b. Welcomes the intention of the Commission to expand the sectoral scope of the services to be covered by the bloc’s cybersecurity rules and to set clear-cut requirements to determine which entities are to be covered within the sectors falling in the NIS scope, as part of the review of the Network and Information Security directive; emphasises the need to transform the directive into regulation, as a means to address the problems of fragmentation that has occurred across Member States, to confront increased cyber threats across the bloc and to bridge the gaps between member state implementation;

Amendment 155 #

Eva KAILI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12 b. Highly recommends that platforms should enforce "privacy by default" offering users more "cookies" options than simply accept or refuse and not exclude anyone from accessing a site or app. Is of the opinion that apps should offer more options to consumers when requesting access to auxiliary services (microphones or cameras etc.) without limiting such options to "on and off" and always including the option "while using the app"; Suggests that platforms and third parties developing or deploying AI- enabled systems should be audited during the entire lifecycle of such systems;

Amendment 156 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12 b. Calls for further support for European trade competition regulation making sure that European market will be active, highly competitive and resistant to foreign take overs;

Amendment 157 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 c (new)

12 c. Recognises that the increased usage of products and industrial devices connected to the internet will give rise to new risks for privacy, information and cybersecurity; points out that Union product safety legislation does not generally provide for specific mandatory essential requirements against cyber- threats affecting the safety of users; stresses that cybersecurity should be acknowledged as an essential requirement in product innovation, the production and development processes, including the design phase (security by design), and should be ensured by new cybersecurity standards throughout a product’s life cycle as well and across its supply chain; highlights that explicit provisions in this respect should be considered for the scope of the relevant EU legislation in order to ensure that the rapid uptake of these products comes with appropriate security and privacy safeguards, to provide better protection of users and increased legal certainty;

Amendment 158 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 c (new)

12 c. Calls for further support on screening procedures for further investment, with special scrutiny to be given to take overs of technological companies including startups;

Amendment 159 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 d (new)

12 d. Underlines that to reap the full benefits of digitalisation, the Union must address digital literacy and skills for all; underlines that broad social inequality and exclusion are the fundamental cause of some of the AI sector's key challenges; calls on the Commission and the Member States to align the measures shaping the EUs digital transition with the Union’s goals on gender equality; recalls the need to address the gender gap in STEM in which women are still under-represented; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide appropriate funding to programmes aimed at attracting women to study and work in STEM, to develop strategies aimed at increasing women’s digital inclusion, in fields relating to STEM, AI and the research and innovation sector, and to adopt a multi- level approach to address the gender gap at all levels of education and employment in the digital sector;

Amendment 16 #

1 c. Emphasizes that European data and AI regulation should aim to build a borderless digital single market and a competitive, innovation-friendly, human- centric, trustworthy and secure data society and economy, which supports the development and deployment of AI, access to data, interoperability, and data portability; highlights the importance of right to privacy, civil liberties, protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and information, and cyber security;

Amendment 160 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 e (new)

12 e. Recognises that the non- governmental sector plays an essential role in the digital transformation of EU society, as it represents an important part of the European economy and the digital market supporting acceptance, inclusion, poverty reduction, equality, protection of rights and harm reduction;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Highlights that science, innovation and R&D will be indispensable to attain the objectives of inclusive digital transformation and European digital sovereignty;

Amendment 18 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Points out that this third industrial revolution will depend on raw materials, much like the first revolution did on coal and the second on oil; notes that in a high demand scenario, the EU would need 18 times more lithium by 2030 and 60 times more by 2050; stresses that demand for raw materials will increase sharply and that EU industries need to respect a binding due diligence mechanism; stresses that mining activities in third countries can be the source of intense pollution, affecting the quality of water, air and soil, and causing deforestation and loss of biodiversity; underlines that strategic autonomy is particularly relevant in the field of digitalisation and AI; stresses that data localisation in the EU is very important for its strategic autonomy and for the reduction of emissions of the EU;

Amendment 19 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Angelika NIEBLER, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Reminds the Commission of its commitments to one-in-one-out principle and reducing regulatory burden; notes that the future legislative proposals need to address both fragmentation of the Digital Single Market as well as the amount of red tape and regulatory uncertainty currently faced by European industry and innovators; highlights the importance of clear market approval processes and European wide market access policies;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that European leadership in digital transition can be a reality; notes that a second wave of digitalisation lies ahead; underlines that a common EU approach can ~~make~~contribute to making Europe the most competitive and innovative region ~~in the~~respected worldwide by 2030;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1 e. Recognises the complexities of the digital sphere and the broad impact of the digitalisation process on the society, the economy and the environment of the EU, as well as the need for an ex-ante broad dialogue and democratic scrutiny in order to develop principles, frameworks and instruments that combat potential dangers associated with these technologies in full respect of human rights, and to confront disinformation and technophobia; calls for the reinforcement of the digital policy dialogue with citizens to promote social cohesion and active participation of civil society in democratic political discourse;

Amendment 21 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1 e. Takes note of the regulatory oversight agencies and mechanisms that are already in place in sectors such as healthcare, manufacturing, and transport; considers that both reinforcing sector-specific regulators as well as a complementary horizontal approach is needed; highlights the importance of industry-specific strategies and approaches;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)

1 f. Recognises that 5G is expected to give rise new opportunities for citizens and businesses, through faster browsing, streaming, downloading, as well as better connectivity, which will play a fundamental role in achieving a European gigabit society by 2025; regrets, however, that the Commission has failed to conduct an ex-ante health and environmental impact assessment report on 5G so far, despite warnings being highlighted by many members in the scientific community; underlines the need to bring together researchers from different disciplines, in particular medicine and physics or engineering, to conduct further research into the potential effects of 5G; recalls that the EU should adhere to its own commitments by exercising the precautionary principle with regards to the future deployment of 5G across the bloc, which involves potentially taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty or possible risk; points out that a broad and inclusive debate will ultimately contribute to creating trust among citizens regarding the actions towards continuous development of the mobile networks; calls for an EU communication strategy that provides EU citizens with reliable information as well as awareness raising campaigns regarding 5G and EMF; stresses the importance of counteracting the spread of disinformation related to 5G networks, in particular to false claims that such networks are linked to COVID-19;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)

1 g. Stresses that the quality of the data sets used is paramount to the performance of AI technologies; is concerned about the risks of biases and discrimination in the development, deployment and use of AI technologies, especially in high risk sectors; highlights that biases inherent to underlying datasets are inclined to gradually increase and thereby perpetuate and escalate existing socially constructed discrimination against women, ethnic minorities, or racialized communities; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take any possible measure to avoid such biases and to ensure the full protection of fundamental rights; stresses that those data sets should be auditable by national supervisory authorities whenever called upon to ensure their conformity with clear quality standards; stresses that human oversight infrastructure must be developed before the implementation of AI technologies in high risk sectors, especially in health and include gender equality experts;

Amendment 24 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Jessica STEGRUD, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the EU has an enormously strong SME sector; recalls that this second wage of digitalisation could lead to a strong industrial development of SMEs; calls for a goal of 500 digital unicorns within 10 yearSMEs are the backbone of the European economy and play a key role in developing and implementing digitalisation of the EU industries, economy and society; recalls that this second wage of digitalisation could lead to a strong industrial development of SMEs; regrets that only 17 % of SMEs have so far successfully integrated digital technology into their businesses; calls on the Commission to further support the European Digital Innovation Hubs, which could constitute an effective way to reduce the digital divide, namely by assisting SMEs and start-ups in simplifying access to funding and using digital technology to improve their business operations, production processes, products and services, as well as by supporting testing, match making, industry mapping, providing training and business intelligence, increasing awareness, supporting standard development and networking; points out that the network of European Digital Innovation Hubs should ensure a broad geographical coverage across Europe, including remote, rural and island areas; highlights the need to increase opportunities for SMEs as regards their capacity to adopt innovative technologies and to reduce digital imbalances in terms of capabilities and infrastructure in smaller cities and rural and remote areas; suggests that, like climate mainstreaming, a digital roadmap could be elaborated, to plan a digital transition in a fair, redistributive way for companies and territories;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the EU has an enormously strong SME sector; notes that the successful digital transformation of European SMEs is vital for economic growth, job-creation, and social cohesion; recalls that this second wagve of digitalisation could lead to a strong industrial development of SMEs; calls for ~~a goal of 500 digital unicorns within 10 yea~~comprehensive measures, such as access to finance, introduction of the EU Start- up Visa, and reduction of regulatory burden, to better facilitate the growth of digital unicorns in Europe; notes that these measures should be developed in constant dialogue with relevant stakeholders;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the EU has an enormously strong SME sector, which creates a backbone to the EU economy and competitiveness; recalls that this second wage of digitalisation could lead to a strong industrial development of SMEs; ~~calls for a goal of 500~~emphasises the importance to support the emergence of a significant number of digital unicorns within 10 years;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the EU has an enormously strong SME sector; recalls that this second wagve of digitalisation could lead to a strong industrial development of SMEs; reinforces the need to accelerate the digitalisation of SMEs and help them overcome barriers in adopting AI applications; calls for a goal of 500 digital unicorns within 10 years;

Amendment 28 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Jessica STEGRUD, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises that the EU has an enormously strong SME sector; recalls that this second wage of digitalisation could lead to a strong industrial development of SMEs; calls for a goal of 500 digital unicorns within 10 years; recognises that SMEs are the backbone and the future of European economy;recognises the role of SMEs in skilling, reskilling and upskilling employees; calls that any new laws and regulations reduce the administrative burden on small and medium-sized businesses;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses that any legislative proposals related to digital area should be based on in-depth impact assessment to avoid unnecessary administrative or regulatory burden that could hamper the emergence of high-tech unicorns, start- ups and SMEs in Europe in order to unleash their potential at the global scale; invites therefore the Commission to come forward with a comparative analysis of regulatory environment in third countries;

Amendment 3 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Tomas TOBÉ, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that European leadership can be a reality; establishes the ambition to make the EU a world leader in digital innovation and Artificial Intelligence (AI) development; notes that a second wave of digitalisation lies ahead; underlines that a common EU approach can make Europe the most innovative region in the world by 2030; highlights that digital transformation encompasses all policy areas and is boundless by nature; emphasizes that AI deployment by European industries is key to economic growth and innovations, enhances security and resilience, and strengthens the geopolitical and strategic relevance of the EU;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Points out that SMEs and other economic actors should use cooperation as much as possible, working in an ecosystem that benefits citizens and is able to support growth. The use of open source is a path towards open and sustainable digital transformation, both through open source software and open hardware - progressing towards European strategic autonomy in digital;

Amendment 31 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Robert HAJŠEL, Josianne CUTAJAR, Csaba MOLNÁR, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Welcomes the Commission's proposal for a Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act which includes an ambitious reform of the digital space, a comprehensive set of new rules for all digital services, including social media, online market places, and other online platforms that operate in the European Union:

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recognizes that the less digitally mature sectors are facing both internal and external barriers to the adoption of the AI that need to be clearly identified; stresses that for the most part, and especially for SMEs, barriers to the adoption of AI are similar to those hindering digitalisation;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Emphasises that the AI development in the EU needs to remain "human-centric", people should always be responsible for decision-making; stresses that when citizens are interacting with an automated system they should always have the possibility of human control in order to ensure that an automated decision can be verified and corrected; stresses that in order for citizens to understand, trust, examine and oversight the decision made, the transparency of AI systems and the logic of the algorithms is utmost important when the technology is used in public services;

Amendment 34 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Patrizia TOIA, Josianne CUTAJAR, Csaba MOLNÁR, Ismail ERTUG, Eva KAILI, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses that an innovative and competitive data economy is built on openness ; stresses in this context the need to avoid service provider or technological lock-in for public data collection processes and calls for all Union public procurement processes and funding programmes to include open data access, mandatory interoperability and portability requirements, as well as to promote the use of open-source software and hardware;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Stresses that the successful development and deployment of AI in Europe is dependent on increasing the availability of high-quality data; highlights that using biased data sets can inadvertently lead to biased AI applications and notes especially the risk for reproducing gender, cultural, ethnic, social, disability or sexual orientation biases; underlines the need to acknowledge and address all bias in data- based systems both in their development and use;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; ~~calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets;~~ therefore calls for accelerating the completion of the digital single market by pushing ahead a European-wide gigabit- broadband network;by further developing the existing data protection law into a modern data law, which at the same time enables innovative digital future technologies and business models and protects the personal rights of citizens;by guaranteeing the right to encryption of citizens to protect data that may be obtained through foreign intelligence activities or cyber-attacks;by further fostering cybersecurity by supporting a European research strategy in the field of quantum computing in order to be able to guarantee secure encryption of data in the future and to invest in the cyber security of the systems and technologies that support the internet as such and the networked systems derived from it; calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets; underlines the importance of trade and globalisation for prosperity and peace, therefore calls for efforts to be made to ensure that COVID does not lead to a re- nationalisation of trade and therefore proposes an action plan to help European companies to become geographically active in new markets;

Amendment 37 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to ~~speed up digitalisation; calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets;~~ increase the resilience of the EU supply chains and speed up technology dissemination and digitalisation of the EU industries, economy and society; emphasises, however, that the COVID-19 pandemic has also exposed digital divides among EU countries and among social groups within the same country by putting many citizens at risk of being left behind in the transition towards a digitalised society; highlights that the level of digitalisation of EU industry varies across sectors, particularly among high tech areas and more traditional ones, and also among Member States and regions; calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets; expresses concern regarding the difficulties in accessing EIB funding lines faced by most SMEs and start-ups, particularly those with limited capitalisation, and calls for access requirements to consider the need for improving the digital and AI capabilities of SMEs; recalls the importance of the Digital Europe Programme and other EU Programmes such us Horizon Europe in improving the digital and AI capabilities of SMEs and accelerating the adoption of AI technologies in EU industries;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets; calls for new and open frameworks of access to data for European SMEs and start-ups in order to support their growth by empowering the training, testing and development of AI-enabled systems and applications. Calls for an inclusive digitisation of our societies that will serve the interests of the citizens by taking into account accessibility and affordability considerations. Calls for coordinated actions to address Europe’s digital divide that has been worsened due to the COVID and for a fair and cooperative digital modernisation of the public sector that would aim at a value-based digital transformation by promoting fundamental rights and democratic values.

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; calls for ~~financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new market~~public-private partnerships and financial incentives for innovative digital SMEs, mid-caps, and start-ups that want to enter new markets; calls for the reinforcement of and clearer strategy for the European Digital Innovation Hubs in order to help widespread uptake of new technologies by SMEs; recognizes the potential of intermediaries in the SME ecosystem, such as accountants, chambers of commerce and insurance experts, in helping to foster the digital transition of SMEs;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that European leadership can be a reality; notes that a second wave of digitalisation lies ahead; underlines that a common EU approach can make Europe the most innovative region in the world by 2030; stresses that digital revolution must contribute to sustainable development and benefit all citizens, while balancing the economic, ethical and environmental dimensions; further recognises that AI is an engine for sustainable transformation;

Amendment 40 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Carlos ZORRINHO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation while reinforcing activities of strategic importance to the Union in relation to critical infrastructure, including cybersecurity technology and research and risk prevention with reference to the deployment of 5G networks; calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; calls for financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets; recognises the concern that large firms have better capabilities to take advantage of the opportunities provided by AI which could lead to overconcentration in the market of large firms and multinationals;

Amendment 42 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis, together with the EU's special financial response, provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; calls for traditional and innovative financial incentives for SMEs that want to enter new markets;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; ~~calls for financial incentiv~~underlines the importance of financial incentives and opportunities through different EU programmes for SMEs that want to enter new markets;

Amendment 44 #

Patrizia TOIA, Eva KAILI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that the COVID crisis provides an opportunity to speed up digitalisation; calls for financial incentives for SMEs, start - ups and for companies and subjects of the social economy that want to enter new markets;

Amendment 45 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Carlos ZORRINHO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses that enabling sharing and access to essential and well-defined data sets will be key to fully unlock the potential of the Green Deal; calls on the Commission to assess which datasets are essential for the ecological transition in the context of sustainable products and services, inter alia in product manufacturing, transportation, carbon, energy and biodiversity impact, as well as their end-of life handling; calls on the Commission to consider extending the scope of the high value datasets defined in Directive (EU) 2019/1024 on Open Data to private actors;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Recognises that the EU is lagging behind in the AI global competition; emphasises that the focus on services for citizens and businesses creates a global market segment in which the EU can lead, respecting its structural principles and values , including our Digital Identity, which are focusing on upholding fundamental rights, strong ethical aspects, legal safeguards and liability, thus protecting our democratic societies and citizens;

Amendment 47 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Highlights that current market imbalances between gatekeeper platforms and SMEs and limited access to data continue to pose challenges to European SMEs; emphasizes the need to enhance SME access to data; calls for enabling approach to data sharing practices on predominantly voluntary basis, including the provision of incentives to enable data sharing;

Amendment 48 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Angelika NIEBLER, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Notes that investing in High- Performance Computing (HPC) is crucial to reap the full potential of AI and other emerging technologies; highlights the role of connectivity, especially gigabit connectivity powered by 5G and fibre infrastructures, as a vital building block for a competitive digital society; calls for bridging the connectivity investment gap through Next Generation EU, as well as national and private funding, in order to complement the insufficient EU investments deployed in the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF);

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Calls for Commission to develop innovative and proportionate rules for a trustworthy digital society, ensuring it should be fully inclusive, fair and accessible for all;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 50 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Stresses that the deployment of very high capacity networks such as 5G will open new ways of working in areas such as manufacturing, transport, automotive and healthcare, allowing for both increased productivity and completely new user experiences; notes that very high capacity networks will allow Europe to take a quantitative leap benefiting an entire ecosystem of technologies, such as virtualization, cloud computing, edge computing, artificial intelligence, machine learning, network slicing, and automation;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Highlights that we need a European legal framework on AI, robotics and related technologies that addresses ethical principles and fundamental rights in their development, deployment and use; notes that such framework should agree on ethical and technical standards to govern the use of new technologies, such as AI;

Amendment 52 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Patrizia TOIA, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, Josianne CUTAJAR, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Csaba MOLNÁR, Ismail ERTUG, Eva KAILI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3 d. Stresses that AI products and services may deliver different experiences to different consumers; highlights the importance of gender and ethnic diversity in digital careers to achieve digital products and services that fully address and represent the diverse set of experiences and needs of European consumers;

Amendment 53 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

~~4. Calls for special economic digital zones to promote structural change and create development cores for new digital economic structures;~~deleted

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

~~4. Calls for special economic digital zones to promote structural change and create development cores for new digital economic structures;~~deleted

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for special economic digital zones to promote structural change and create development cores for new digital economic structures; therefore, proposes the creation of a special EU start-up zone with less bureaucracy, excellent infrastructure, a special taxation Regime, a n Environment of "regulatory sandboxes" and best support for top research; suggests full scholarships with the aim of bringing together the best minds in Europe worldwide in order to drive innovation, technology and prosperity of the future; believes that this is where the future opportunities lie, especially for Europe's economically weaker regions;

Amendment 56 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for special economic digital zones to promote structural change and create development cores for new digital economic structures, while maintaining incentives that are equally valid for all EU territories;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for special economic digital zones to promote structural change and create development cores for new digital economic structures across Europe in order to support a swift digital transition;

Amendment 58 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Jessica STEGRUD, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Believes that there is an urgent need to incentivise access to the data that is currently locked in the private sector, while ensuring that the use of public money always result in public data. To that regard, calls for the establishment of a "public money, public data" principle and call for incentives meant to give SMEs access to non personal data produced by other private stakeholders in a voluntary and mutually benefiting process;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Emphasises that future-proof connectivity and cybersecurity represent a prerequisite of Union’s success in digital transition;

Amendment 6 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recommends that Europe must analyse the challenges for consumers created by AI and make the EU’s consumer rights standards fit for the 21st century. Therefore it must establish an AI European Certificate of Compliance with Ethical Principles to ensure European citizens trust on AI; This Certificate should be granted by an independent, public certification organisation after a thorough assessment of compliance with the Ethical Requirements put forward by the High Level Expert Group on AI. The certification criteria and requirements for assessing the compliance will be drawn by this body in cooperation with the Commission and the Member States. Suggests that certification and auditing mechanisms at both the national and EU levels for automated data processing and decision-making techniques should be developed to ensure their compliance with ethical principles and values. Monitoring of compliance should be proportionate to the nature and degree of risk associated with the operation of the artificial intelligence application or system;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 61 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to ~~stop funding big companies and distributing the~~prioritize funding of SMEs; remain~~ing funds by a shotgun approach; calls for winners to be picked and grown larger; suggests prioritising future areas for digital economic structure~~ds in this regard that mid-caps and bigger companies are contributing to creating a value chain for SMEs;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to stop funding big companies and distributing the remaining funds by a shotgun approach; calls for ~~winner~~beneficiaries to be picked and grown larger; suggests prioritising future areas for digital economic structures; recognises that there are still significant disparities between large companies and SMEs regarding the integration of digital technologies in their business operations; regrets the current lack of innovative capacity of SMEs due to a lack of necessary risk capital, the costs and complexities of administrative procedures, a shortage of adequate skills and lack of access to information; suggests in this regard to undertake actions in order to strengthen access to credit for SMEs including for micro-enterprises and start- ups;

Amendment 63 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to stop funding big companies and to distribut~~ing~~e the remaining funds ~~by a shotgun approach; calls for winners to be picked~~in accordance with a methodically studied priority system; calls for winners to be picked according to their expected value, calculated through the standard methods for valuing start-ups, and grown larger; suggests prioritising future areas for digital economic structures;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to stop funding big companies and distributing the remaining funds by a shotgun approach; ~~calls for winners to be picked and grown larger; suggests prioritising future areas for digital economic structures~~highlights that large technology companies and platforms with strategic market status in the DSM may leverage their positions not only in terms of the market but also in terms of access to and control of data, resulting in possible concentration of AI innovation and future imbalances in the DSM; calls for winners to be picked and grown larger; suggests prioritising future areas for digital economic structures; Highlights the need to support SMEs to master the twin transition to sustainability and digitalisation by safeguarding that they have access to the right skills, expertise and funding. Highlights the need for this support to acquire abroad geographical coverage across Europe, including remote, rural and island areas and aim at strengthening the digital capabilities and infrastructure in smaller places at the periphery of Europe;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to stop funding big companies and distributing the remaining funds by a shotgun approach; calls for winners to be picked and grown larger; suggests prioritising future areas for digital economic structures; believes that the current funding policy needs to be developed further more efficiently and needs to overcome any silo culture of research funding;

Amendment 66 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Stresses that Tourism is a strategic economic sector for Europe as it generates more that 10% of European GDP and represents more than 9% of total employment in the EU; notes however that it remains among the less digitised sectors in the Union and that there is a large untapped potential for the digital transformation of the sector; highlights the need for further investments in intelligent tools and techniques which can improve costumer experience and foster the transition towards a more digital and sustainable tourism ecosystem, by inter alia improving destination management for the benefit of local societies and economies and tourists, help direct touristic flows to less developed regions and across seasons and better preparing and managing crises, such as pandemic, extreme weather conditions and other natural or manmade disasters; points out that coordinated efforts to foster an innovative digital culture in tourism SMEs, which are 90% of the tourism ecosystem, is crucial to ensure the global competitiveness of Europe as a destination; recalls the importance of improving access to digital technologies and supporting programmes for SMEs in the cultural and creative sectors, which are highly intertwined with tourism; criticises the fact that the Commission has not included tourism in the European Data Strategy and considers that the inclusion of tourism in the Data Governance Act can enable tourism businesses to fully commit to innovation and digitalisation; believes that the digitalisation of cultural heritage would create useful and beneficial synergies with the tourism sector; highlights that the digital transformation in the tourism sector should protect the quality of services in the sector, such as services provided by qualified tourist guides, which are illegally being substituted in same cases by the collaborative economy and calls on the Commission to effectively address this issue at the European level;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Warns against the use of predictive technologies or perception manipulation techniques for market purposes from Big tech companies and pledges to safeguard that sensitive personal data, transactions data and metadata will not be used for profit by big corporations without citizens awareness and clear consent. Calls for these techniques to be classified in the highest category of the risk level scale proposed by the Commission given their specific and extremely sensitive nature as well as their potential misuses Calls the European Data Protection Board to issue Guidelines on this issue and highlights the need to safeguard algorithmic transparency of AI technologies and applications. Stresses the need for the establishment of a thorough system of traceability of AI systems that will be under human oversight, understandable by the consumers and which meets data subjects’ reasonable expectations;

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Demands~~ Highlights the lack of European ven~~d to the exodus of start-ups that do not receive follow-up- funding~~ ture capital funding, the disproportionately large role of public entities in the funding that currently exists, and the significant differences in start-up ecosystems and available financing between Member States; calls for a comprehensive European approach, based on competitive taxation and investor-friendly regulation, to ensure access to finance for promising Europe ~~but find it elsewhere~~an start-ups in all growth stages;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Demands a~~n end to the exodus of~~ more careful assessment of the start-up~~s tha~~ market dto ~~not receive follow-up- funding in Europe but find it elsewhere~~prevent the best newcomers from developing outside European borders;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights that market fragmentation prevents companies to scale up rapidly and to create synergies and economies of scale, underlines that more harmonisation with a high level of protection of consumers across all Member States is also the best way to build trust to Europeans when using services of buying goods cross border and facilitate the development of technologies. Reminds that according to estimates of the European Parliament Research Service in its 'Costs of non-Europe in the Single Market' study that completing the SingleMarket would entail economic gains ranging from 651 billion to 1.1 Trillion EURO per year, equivalent to a range of 5 %to 8.63% of EU GDP;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Demands an end to the exodus of start-ups that do not receive follow-up- funding in Europe but find it elsewhere; calls for improving the taxation frameworks for venture capital in Europe; calls to stop the Exodus of young companies in Europe which leave the EU because they do not receive funding after entering the market.

Amendment 71 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. DHighlights the substantial investment gap faced by digital innovations which represents an important obstacle for the successful scale-up of digital startups; demands an end to the exodus of start-ups that do not receive follow-up- funding in Europe but find it elsewhere; takes note of the Digital Innovation and Scale-up Initiative which is setting up the first regional investment facility that specifically targets digital innovations and the scale-up of digital startups in the CESEE region; calls for the development of similar EU initiatives aiming to leverage funding and competencies, to enhance financing and the access to advisory services for early stage and scale-up of innovative, high- risk deep tech startups with high growth potential, to offer technical assistance to public agencies, to strengthen their capacity to design, develop and implement digital innovation programs and to strengthen strategic investments in the enabling environment for digital innovations and entrepreneurship, with a focus on cross border digital infrastructure and digital skills projects;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Reiterates the necessity to fully exploit all funding facilities and to benefit out of synergies provided for digital technologies by EU funding programmes, namely Horizon Europe, Digital Europe, CEF-Digital and Space Programme;

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for massive investment in clusters of excellence; therefore, supports the Commission's proposal to promote the establishment of centers of excellence and testing to increase synergies and networks between AI research centers, with the aim of promoting excellence, attracting and keeping the best researchers and developing the level of technology; suggests that in addition to the centers, efforts should be made to create and support flexible network-based structures based on cooperation between higher education institutions and industry in the development of artificial intelligence;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for massive investment in clusters of excellence; calls to the Commission to facilitate the development of digital innovation hubs across the Member States in order to ensure the capacity-building, sharing of best practices in AI development and deployment and to mobilise the research and innovation along the entire value chain; recognises that such digital innovation hubs can also contribute to attract the access to talent and research capabilities in AI;

Amendment 75 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for massive investment in clusters of excellence; calls on the Commission and Member States to facilitate European excellence in AI research and development by increasing research investments and facilitating additional cooperation between innovative companies, higher education, and research institutions; recognises that sharing and reusing AI application components increases use and uptake of AI solutions;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for massive investment in clusters of excellence through which smart industry initiatives can be researched, developed, implemented and monitored in an organized and trackable manner;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for ~~massive investment in clusters of excellence~~an assessment of the best clusters in which to invest as a matter of priority;

Amendment 78 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Emphasizes the need to allow comprehensive research into all AI applications and technologies; calls for legislative solutions, such as regulatory sandboxes with a path to scale up for successful pilots, that will ensure the right of both public and private institutions to research and develop AI for potentially high-risk use cases;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls to the Commission to initiate cross-sectoral dialogues, giving priority to healthcare, rural administrations and public service operators in order to present an action plan to facilitate the development, research and adoption of AI applications;

Amendment 8 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ, Elżbieta KRUK, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Calls on the Commission to assess the environmental impact of data sharing and the infrastructures required to ensure a sustainable digital deployment in line with the Green Deal.; Stresses that, despite the current high carbon footprint of development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including automated decisions and machine learning, those technologies can contribute to the reduction of the current environmental footprint of the ICT sector; calls for the introduction of an EU digital sustainability index based on an analysis of product life cycles;

Amendment 80 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Highlights the importance of fundamental research into the foundations of AI; notes that current commercial AI applications are based on research that was initiated decades earlier;

Amendment 81 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Calls for more investment in research, innovation, science and the scientific community, which is the driving force of the technological and digital revolution;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Demands ~~measures to end to the brain drain and~~that the conditions for EU's digital ecosystem composed of universities, research centers, business incubators and entreprises should be enhances to prevent the brain drain of European experts and to attract the best minds to the EU;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Demands measures to ~~end to~~address the brain drain and attract the best minds to the EU without prejudice to the national labour market systems and the competencies of the social partners;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Demands measures to put an end to the brain drain ~~and~~in order to make the most of the human capital of EU citizens who can afford to be intellectually independent, completing the picture by attracting further experience from people from non-EU countries, and to attract the best minds to the EU;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Demands measures to end to the brain drain and attract the best minds to the EU; considers that the new Skills Agenda for Europe must address the challenges of adapting and raising new qualifications that reinforce the green and digital transition, including ethical aspects of AI;

Amendment 86 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Demands measures and strong incentives to end to the brain drain and attract the best minds to the EU; recommends sufficient investments in public research, in particular for salaries of researchers;

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Recognizes the need to protect the citizens and workers potentially at risk of displacement due to AI; calls to the Commission to develop strategies to manage digital transition by supporting reskilling programs, improving professional education, ensuring greater access to talent and provide long-life trainings for the current and future workforce with particular focus on SMEs; notes that education and transparency of new data driven technologies is important for the workforce to be able to understand, and be part of, the fair implementation; stresses the right of employees to know where and how their data is collected; Calls on social partners to explore the potential of digitalisation, data and AI to increase sustainable productivity, improve the well-being of their workforces while respecting workers’ rights as well as investing in awareness rising and digital literacy schemes;

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Suggests that the EU must ensure minimum standards of fair working conditions for platform workers in line with the European Pillar of social rights as a requirement to allow access of platforms to the EU Digital single market. Suggests that the EU should introduce rules that control the growing digitisation of workplace monitoring and also to introduce mechanisms and methodologies that assess the relevant risks that have been augmented due to the increasing blurring between office and home environments. Calls for the EU to establish collective bargaining agreements and umbrella protection mechanisms for all platform workers;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Calls for impact assessments on the consequences of a digital future on people. Recalls that those without digital skills are left behind and digital infrastructure cannot evolve and function without proper operators. Calls for mitigation of negative impact through reskilling and upskilling. Underlines that the gender dimension needs to be taken into account, given the insufficient representation of women in STEM and digital companies;

Amendment 9 #

Carlos ZORRINHO, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI, Josianne CUTAJAR, Csaba MOLNÁR, Patrizia TOIA, Ismail ERTUG, Eva KAILI

1 a. Emphasizes the need to further support the uptake by the public sector and the EU industry, notably SMEs and start-ups, of advanced digital and related technologies, including in particular high performance computing, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity as well as other leading edge and future technologies, such as distributed ledgers;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Stresses that Europe’s growth potential will be determined by the digital skills of its population and businesses; takes note of the skills gap currently visible in the European job market and the need bridge this gap through upskilling and reskilling; calls for increased focus on reskilling and upskilling of digital skills and competences in national education systems;

Amendment 91 #

Patrizia TOIA, Eva KAILI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Calls for measures aimed to increasing and supporting training projects and actions for women in the digital sector, as well as projects and actions for the employment and career paths of women in the digital sector;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Calls for a whole-of-society approach towards cybersecurity; highlights that new approaches to cybersecurity should be designed based on resilience and adaptability to stresses and attacks; emphasizes the role for cybersecurity as a framework where everything from system design and usability to the education and training of citizens must work in tandem; emphasizes the need to include cybersecurity elements in all sectorial policies;

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Stresses that 90% of jobs require basic digital skills while 42% of EU citizens lack basic digital skills1a; _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single- market/en/digital-economy-and-society- index-desi

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Calls for promoting the creation and expansion of digital knowledge and support the research programmes and networks created among European universities in order to help European businesses and entrepreneurs attract the best talent and become the vanguard of digital innovation worldwide. Skills shortages and mismatches can be prevented by improving and facilitating connections between the education and training systems and the needs of companies to innovate;

Amendment 95 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN, Sven SCHULZE, Pernille WEISS, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Eva MAYDELL, Pilar del CASTILLO VERA, Edina TÓTH, Cristian-Silviu BUŞOI, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Ivan ŠTEFANEC, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Fully supports the Commission’s aim to increase the number of women in tech;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)

8 d. Stresses that in order for new digitalisation wave to be successful, one of the crucial challenges is to provide sufficient digital skills for European digital sector; recalls that women are under-represented at all levels in the digital sector in Europe, from students (32% at Bachelor, Master or equivalent level)up to top academic positions (15%) and that the gap is largest in ICT specialist skills and employment, where only 18% are women in the EU2a _________________ 2a https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single- market/en/news/digital-economy- scoreboard-shows-women-europe-are- less-likely-work-or-be-skilled-ict

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment is key to European competitiveness in the digital era; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach is needed to avoid internal market fragmentation; calls for promoting AI technologies aimed at improving public services with collective benefits; stresses that AI can help to break down the silos by linking and streamlining public services to improve administration for the benefit of citizens and businesses as well as provide real- time data bases for services and decision making;

Amendment 98 #

Eva KAILI, Robert HAJŠEL, Patrizia TOIA, Marina KALJURAND, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Ivo HRISTOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment is key to European competitiveness in the digital era; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach is needed to avoid internal market fragmentation; is convinced that creating a clear European regulatory framework and long-term legal certainty will increase trust of consumers, public sector and businesses in AI, which will accelerating the uptake of AI throughout different sectors;

Amendment 99 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Recognises that AI deployment is key to European competitiveness in the digital era; highlights that to facilitate the uptake of AI in Europe, a common European approach is needed to avoid internal market fragmentation, ensure the safety of data of Europeans and guarantee that they will not be processed by non-EU bodies for profit-making and/or political purposes or used to train algorithms shared with authoritarian regimes;

source: 662.046

2021/01/19 EMPL 163 amendments...

Amendment 10 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas greater challenges are posed on the synergies between labour market and education system as the education system should better foresee the future needs of the labour market and be able to adapt accordingly;

Amendment 100 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 102 #

Antonius MANDERS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure appropriate protection of workers’ rights and well- being, such as non-discrimination, privacy, human dignity and protection against exploitation by employers in the use of AI in the workplace, including prediction and flagging tools to predict employees behaviour and identify or deter rule-breaking or fraud, remote monitoring and time tracking software, and including algorithmic management of work activities, such as automated nudges, real-time progress monitoring and monitoring of performance metrics and decision-making with the help of AI, which can allow employers to compromise on what constitutes paid work time and can put excessive pressure on workers;

Amendment 104 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Encourages the Commission, Member States and companies to assess and balance the potential risks of algorithmic management of people and workers, in particular its lack of transparency, the potential feeling of loneliness and isolation and the potential challenges to workers’ right to privacy3a against the potential benefits such the early identification of stress, health problems and fatigue, the reduction of the exposure to harassment and violence, and the overall support of evidence-based prevention, risk assessment and targeted occupational safety and health (OSH) and inspections;3b __________________ 3aM van Rijmenam (2020), Algorithmic Management: What is it (and what's next)?, available at https://vanrijmenam.nl/algorithmic- management-what-is-it-whats-next/; M Möhlmann and L Zalmanson (2017), Hands on the wheel: Navigating algorithmic management and Uber drivers' autonomy, proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2017), December 10-13, Seoul 3bOSHA (2021), Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Occupational Safety and Health, Policy Brief

Amendment 105 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a regulatory body with expertise in analysing algorithmic systems and conducting a risk assessment study to classify algorithm types and application domains by impact on the workers;

Amendment 106 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to regulate algorithms, to avoid too much power on internet platforms to judge (il) legality and to protect the European fundamental right of freedom of expression;

Amendment 107 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Underlines that the EU should position itself as a global leader in the development of ethical and legal norms and standards for the use of AI;

Amendment 108 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Reiterates its call for a prohibition of the use of AI in recruitment processes;

Amendment 109 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Notes that managerial decisions suggested by AI should be subject to checks by human beings who should remain legally responsible for the decision and the outcomes; stresses the need to work out the enforceability of the “right not to be subject to a decision which is based solely on automated processing and which produces legal effects or significantly affects data subjects” as well as of the right to obtain an explanation of the decision based solely on automated processing where the data subject has given his or her explicit consent recognised in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 recital 71;

Amendment 11 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas the use of AI holds potential for safer and more inclusive workplaces and labour markets;

Amendment 110 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Reiterates that any use of AI at work must respect and adequately safeguard the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing enshrined in Article 22(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), which means there must be human oversight; Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure a form of legitimate trust in employer-employee relations, where in case of divergence between AI results affecting an employee’s position and statements made by managerial staff that affect an employee’s position, the latter prevails;

Amendment 111 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Notes the considerable potential of the small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operating on the digital single market; stresses the need for sufficient financial and organisational support for innovations and improving the digital skills of employees in this sector;

Amendment 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Underlines that AI must not reinforce gender inequalities and stereotypes by transforming analogue biases and prejudices into digital ones through algorithms;

Amendment 113 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Stresses in case of use of AI in the workplace employers must be transparent about the fact they use AI, the parameters the algorithms take into account and the way AI is used;

Amendment 114 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5d. Points out the potential of digital solutions, such as teleworking and AI applications, to support the integration of people with disabilities in the labour market;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Re~~iterates its call for legal protection for platform workers and tele~~calls the adoption of the Council Recommendation on Access to social protection for workers and the self- employed and strongly reiterates the need to ensure platform workers, as well as ~~recognition of their status as such, to ensure that their entitlement to full social security protection is uphel~~workers in the gig economy have access to adequate to and coverage from social protection; considers that a legislative framework that has the aim of regulating telework conditions across the Union should be introduced;

Amendment 116 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its call for legal protection ofor platform workers ~~and teleworkers~~, as well as the recognition of their status as such~~, to ensure that their entitlement~~; calls on the Member States to ensure full access to full social security protection ~~is upheld~~for platform workers;

Amendment 117 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its call for legal protection for platform workers and teleworkers, as well as recognition of their status as such, to ensure that their entitlement to ~~full social security protection is upheld~~labour rights and social protection is upheld; Labour-intensive platforms exerting the prerogatives of employers should abide to all the legal obligations that this entails in terms of payment of income tax, financing of social protection, responsibility for health and safety, due diligence and corporate social responsibility and the employee status of their workers should be acknowledged through the rebuttable assumption of an employment relationship;

Amendment 118 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its call for legal protection for platform workers and teleworkers, as well as recognition of their status as such, to ensure that their entitlement to ~~full~~ social security protection is upheld, and stresses that the situation where decisions on platform workers are defined mostly by algorithms based on AI, as a result of the ever increasing application of AI, must be dealt with appropriately;

Amendment 119 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its call for legal protection for platform workers and teleworkers, as well as recognition of their status as such, to ensure that their entitlement to full social security protection is upheld; calls on the Commission to propose a legislative framework with a view to regulating telework conditions across the EU and ensure decent working and employment conditions in the digital economy;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas ~~these developments B. plausibly facilitate human-machine synergies, thereby producing a combined effec~~AI potentially offers economic and societal benefits as well as new opportunities for businesses and workers, while at the same time giving rise to a number of ethical, legal and employment grelate~~r than the sum of their separate outcomes, but~~d challenges; whereas the application of AI at the workplace can contribute to inclusive labour markets and impact occupational health and safety, while it can also ~~pos~~be use~~rious challenges in terms of workforce reorganisa~~d to monitor, evaluate, predict and guide the performance of workers with direct and indirect consequences for their careers; whereas AI should have a positive impact on working conditions and ~~the potential elimination of more sectors and employment t~~be guided by respect for human rights as well as the fundamental rights and values of the Union; whereas AI should be human centric, enhance the ~~new forms they create~~well-being of people and society and contribute to a fair and just transition;

Amendment 120 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its call for legal protection for platform workers ~~and~~, teleworkers and workers in the gig economy, as well as recognition of their status as such, to ensure that their entitlement to full social security protection is upheld;

Amendment 121 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Highlights the potential of artificial intelligence to mitigate the inequalities in society and stresses the need to focus on the solutions provided by the artificial intelligence that can help the most vulnerable groups like persons with disabilities or persons living in remote or rural areas to improve their opportunities on the labour market;

Amendment 122 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses the need to ensure that people from diverse backgrounds, including women, young people, people of colour and people with disabilities are included in the development, deployment and use of AI; recalls that AI-based technologies at the workplace must be accessible for all, based on the design for all principle;

Amendment 123 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission and the Members States to define and regulate on new forms of digital services in order to prevent and fight undeclared work and shadow market;

Amendment 124 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Recalls that the process of machine learning needs to be based on a sufficient amount of quality and diverse data that prevent the incidence of biased algorithms; calls therefore on the Commission and the Member States to cooperate in the collection of quality and diverse data ensuring the unbiased AI to avoid possible collateral deepening of inequalities in the society;

Amendment 125 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ~~improve labour~~research and distribute good practices in ensuring adequate social protection and adequate working conditions for platform workers in its upcoming legislative proposal in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, ~~quality employment and~~decent wages, the right to disconnect, ~~the obligation of employers to offer perpetual digital retrain~~options for skilling, and ~~full, transparent checks of employees’ online identity~~re-skilling, including digital skills;

Amendment 126 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to improve ~~labour~~the working and employment conditions for platform workers in its upcoming legislative proposal in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, quality employment and decent wages, the right to disconnect, the obligation of employers to offer perpetual digital retraining~~, and full, transparent checks of employees’ online identity~~;

Amendment 127 #

Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Ilana CICUREL, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Samira RAFAELA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to improve labour conditions for platform workers in its upcoming legislative proposal in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, quality employment and wages, the right to disconnect, the obligation of employers to offer perpetual digital retraining, and full, transparent checks of employees’ online identity;

Amendment 128 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to improve labour conditions for platform workers in its upcoming legislative proposal in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, ~~quality employment and wages, the right to disconnect, the obligation of employers to offer perpetual digital retraining, and full, transparent checks of employees’ online~~ access to adequate social protection, fair and transparent working conditions, decent wages, right to collective representation, right to disconnect, training offers enabling skilling and re-skilling, as well as reliable verification processes of the platform user's identityies;

Amendment 129 #

Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Loucas FOURLAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to impro~~ve labour conditions for platform~~pose a directive on decent working conditions and rights in the digital economy, covering all workers, in ~~its upcoming legislative proposal~~cluding non-standard workers on atypical contracts, workers in platform companies and the self-employed, in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, quality employment and wages, the right to disconnect, the obligation of employers to offer ~~perpetual~~lifelong digital retraining, and full, transparent checks of employees’ online identity as well as their right to organise, to be represented by trade unions and to negotiate collective agreements; Calls on the Commission to ensure mandatory human oversight for managerial decisions, such as hiring and or firing employees and appraisals;

Amendment 13 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas these developments plausibly facilitate human-machine synergies, thereby producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate outcomes, ~~but also pose serious challenges in terms of workforce reorganisation and the potential elimination of more sectors and employment than the new forms they create~~and can lead to greater workforce access to previously excluded social groups such as people with disabilities, while risks linked to employment sector disappearance must mitigated by ensuring more and better jobs are created than are lost;

Amendment 130 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to improve labour conditions for platform workers in its upcoming legislative proposal with full respect of their labour rights in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, quality employment and wages, the right to disconnect, the obligation of employers to offer perpetual digital retraining, and full, transparent checks of employees’ online identity;

Amendment 131 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Calls on the Commission~~Given that the cross-border nature of platform-based companies and the ensuing uncertainty in connection with rights and obligations, as well as the lack of transparency in the algorithm-based governance of the workforce makes it harder for employees to exercise their rights, calls on the Commission to handle the issue of uncertain labour conditions and insufficient social protection at an EU level with due consideration of the national labour market models of Member States in order to improve labour conditions for platform workers in its upcoming legislative proposal in order to guarantee healthy and safe working environments, quality employment and wages, the right to disconnect, the obligation of employers to offer perpetual digital retraining, and full, transparent checks of employees’ online identity;

Amendment 132 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Recalls that the flexibility and self- organisation of workers must not be synonymous with disproportionate surveillance or the misuse of digital technology in a way that causes or fuels discrimination or exploitation;

Amendment 133 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that platform workers can exercise an effective right to data portability, their consumer-sourced ratings being included in the data;

Amendment 134 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to update the European Skills Agenda and the Digital Education Action Plan, so that workers can upskill and become qualified for the challenges of the future world of work; calls on the Member States to update their national vocational and professional training and upskilling programmes so as to ensure digital literacy and promote digital inclusion (οn average, 16 % of EU workers fear that digitalisation will render their skills outdated2 ); ~~__________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3.~~ stresses that 90% of jobs require basic digital skills3a and women only represent 17% of people in ICT4a studies and careers in the EU5aand only 36% of STEM6a graduates7a, despite the fact that girls outperform boys in digital literacy8a; highlights the importance of education and skills development to address gender bias and support gender equality and calls for increased efforts on both the national and European level to break this gender imbalance; __________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3. 3aEuropean Commission, ‘ICT for Work: Digital Skills in the Workplace’, 2017. 4aInformation and Communications Technology. 5a https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/product s-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20180425-1. 6a Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. 7ahttps://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/9540ffa1-4478-11e9- a8ed-01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 8a 2018 International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS).

Amendment 135 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to update the European Skills Agenda ~~and~~, the Digital Education Action Plan, so that workers can upskill and become qualified for the challenges of the future world of work; calls on the Member States to update their national vocational and professional training and upskilling programmes so as to ensure digital literacy and promote digital inclusion (οn average, 16 % of EU workers fear that digitalisation will render their skills outdated2 ) as well as national vocational and professional training and upskilling programmes, to better address the challenges of adapting and acquiring qualifications and knowledge, in view of the ecological and digital transition, including ethical aspects of AI; underlines the need to make ethical aspects of AI and the development of skills for ethical purposes an integral part of any education and training curricula for developers and people working with AI; recalls that developers, programmers, decision-makers and companies dealing with AI must be aware of their ethical responsibility; considers it likewise important to ensure that end users and consumers are provided with comprehensive information and that there are regular exchanges between all relevant stakeholders in this regard; __________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3.

Amendment 136 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Calls on~~Welcomes the Commission ~~and the Member States to~~'s update ~~the~~d European Skills Agenda and the new Digital Education Action Plan~~, so that workers can upskill and become qualified for the challenges of the future world of work;~~ (2021- 2027), which will help workers to up and re-skill and become qualified for the future world of work and manage the digital wave; further welcomes the recently adopted Council Recommendations on VET and calls on the Member States to swiftly implement it by updateing their national vocational and professional training and upskilling programmes so as to en~~sur~~hance digital literacy and promote digital inclusion (οn average, 16 % of EU workers fear that digitalisation will render their skills outdated2 ); __________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3.

Amendment 137 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. CStresses the urgent need for adaptation if Europe wants to satisfy emerging learning needs, and wants to enter the digital era, and since a more comprehensive and systematic approach to education and training is necessary to establish an environment enabling continuous and life-long learning, calls on the Commission and the Member States to update the European Skills Agenda and the Digital Education Action Plan, so that workers can upskill and become qualified for the challenges of the future world of work; calls on the Member States to update their national vocational and professional training and upskilling programmes so as to ensure digital literacy and promote digital inclusion (οn average, 16 % of EU workers fear that digitalisation will render their skills outdated2); __________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3.

Amendment 138 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to update the European Skills Agenda and the Digital Education Action Plan, so that ~~workers can upskill and~~skills and qualifications needed to enhance employability, work efficiently and effectively alongside machines and boost digital skills are looked into and promoted and workers given a speedy access to training and retraining that allows them to become qualified for the challenges of the future world of work; calls on the Member States to update their national vocational and professional training and upskilling programmes so as to ensure digital literacy and promote digital inclusion (οn average, 16 % of EU workers fear that digitalisation will render their skills outdated2 ); __________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3.

Amendment 139 #

Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Loucas FOURLAS, Ádám KÓSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas these developments plausibly facilitate ~~human-machine synergies, thereby producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate outcomes, but also pose~~the use of machines by humans in their interest and for their benefit, posing serious challenges in terms of workforce reorganisation and the potential elimination of more sectors and employment than the new forms they create;

Amendment 140 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 141 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to update the European Skills Agenda and the Digital Education Action Plan, so that workers can reskill or upskill and become qualified for the challenges of the future world of work; calls on the Member States to update their national vocational and professional training ~~and upskill~~, reskilling, upskilling and lifelong learning programmes so as to ensure digital literacy and promote digital inclusion (οn average, 16 % of EU workers fear that digitalisation will render their skills outdated2 ); __________________ 2 Cedefop, ‘Artificial or human intelligence? Digitalisation and the future of jobs and skills: opportunities and risks’, p. 3.

Amendment 142 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Recalls that women are under- represented at all levels in the digital sector in Europe, from students (32% at Bachelor, Master or equivalent level) up to top academic positions (15%). The gap is largest in ICT sector, where only 18% are women in the EU.[1] Highlights that participation of girls and women in the field of science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEM) must be actively promoted through concrete policy action to foster their full participation and inclusion in the digital economy, as they only represent 36% of STEM graduates[4], despite the fact that girls outperform boys in digital literacy[5]; [1] https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single- market/en/news/digital-economy- scoreboard-shows-women-europe-are- less-likely-work-or-be-skilled- ict[4]https://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/9540ffa1-4478-11e9- a8ed-01aa75ed71a1/language-en [4] https://op.europa.eu/en/publication- detail/-/publication/9540ffa1-4478-11e9- a8ed-01aa75ed71a1/language-en [5] 2018 International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS).

Amendment 143 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Takes note of the skills gap currently visible in the European labour market and the need for upskilling and reskilling; calls for increased focus on reskilling and upskilling of digital dexterities and competences in national education systems; Recalls the necessity for training projects on supporting employment and career paths of women and persons with disabilities in the digital sector. Calls on the Commission to strongly support the achievement of these key principles and the implementation of the actions and measures for this purpose by means of funds provided via the Just Transition Fund and the Digital Europe Programme;

Amendment 144 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Reiterates the need to fully involve women in the process of digitising work and society in order to close the current gender gap, both through a large-scale digital literacy operation designed to spread knowledge and awareness of the opportunities and risks linked to the use of new technologies and by promoting initial and further study of STEM subjects by young women;

Amendment 145 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Underlines the need to design education and training modules for mid- career professionals to allow themselves to re-skill and prepare for job transitions;

Amendment 146 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Stresses the need to integrate STEM courses in different education levels as well as transversal and horizontal soft skills and critical thinking;

Amendment 147 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8c. Stresses the importance of mobilising available EU funds in order to boost the uptake of AI by SMEs and enable them to have better access to datasets of good quality, as well as attract talent;

Amendment 148 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve occupational health and safety regulations in the context of human-machine synergies ~~and to safeguard workers’ psychological and mental balance through expert support and an EU directive on work-related stress~~.

Amendment 149 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 15 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas these developments plausibly facilitate human-machine synergies, thereby producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate outcomes, but also pose serious challenges in terms of workforce reorganisation and the potential elimination of ~~more sectors and employment than the new forms they create~~some employment sectors while at the same time creation of new employment opportunities;

Amendment 150 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve occupational health and safety regulations in the context of ~~human-machine synergi~~the use of machines and to safeguard workers’ psychological, emotional and mental balance through expert support and an EU directive on work-related stress.

Amendment 151 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission ~~and the Member States~~ to improve occupational health and safety regulations in the context of human- machine synergies and to safeguard workers’ psychological and mental balance through expert support and an EU directive on work-related stress.

Amendment 152 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve occupational health and safety regulations in the context of human-machine synergies and to safeguard workers’ psychological and mental balance through expert support and an EU directive on ~~work-related stress.~~the prevention of psychosocial risks; in this context, stresses the need for employees in the digital sector reviewing content moderation notifications or decisions to be well trained and have access to psychological support;

Amendment 153 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 154 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve occupational health and safety regulations in the context of human-machine synergies and to safeguard workers’ psychological and mental balance ~~through expert support and an EU directive on work-related stress.~~by, inter alia, communicating with transparency about the changes in business needs, through expert support and an EU directive on work-related stress; calls on EU-OSHA to include these aspects in the EU-wide Healthy Workplaces Campaign dedicated to digitalisation and OSH to be launched in 2023;

Amendment 155 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve occupational health and safety regulations in the context of human-machine synergies and to safeguard workers’ work-life balance as well as their psychological and mental ~~balanc~~welfare through expert support and an EU directive on work-related stress.

Amendment 156 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Highlights the importance of funding and delivering digital literacy programmes for persons with disabilities and calls on Member States to facilitate the access of persons with disabilities to assistive devices and connectivity, as well as digital upskilling and reskilling programmes;

Amendment 157 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Recalls the importance of education in values and the cultivation of human virtues, making it possible to go beyond individual interests and to safeguard the common good in relation to both work and civil society.

Amendment 158 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Points out that access to AI solutions is closely linked to access to high speed internet and therefore broadband coverage should be apriority in order to avoid discrimination and unequal access to these technologies;

Amendment 159 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to work on a legal framework for liability in situations when workers co-operate with robots or are coordinated by AI in “smart factories” and “smart manufacturing”;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas these developments ~~plausibly facilitate~~may allow human-machine synergies~~, thereby producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate outcome~~ capable of leveraging the productivity of production factors, but also pose serious challenges in terms of workforce reorganisation and the potential elimination of more sectors and employment ~~than the new forms they create~~and real threats to one of the most fundamental rights, namely the right to work;

Amendment 160 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the European Labour Authority to take leadership in facilitation of the transformation process towards a social-digital economy;

Amendment 161 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Urges the Commission and the Member States to provide the necessary resources by means of funds delivered by MFF and NGEU, in order to accommodate structural and regional changes in all sectors heavily hit on employment and social protection systems by digital transition - such as industries, services, public administration or agriculture - to prevent those sectors and/or regions from being plagued with mass-unemployment;

Amendment 162 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Invites Member States to extend the application of the Directive on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies to “private entities that offer facilities and services which are open or provided to the public” as stated in recital 34 of said Directive.

Amendment 163 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Calls for structurally targeted policies and programs that will accompany the digital transformation for workers and citizens, with appropriate consideration for rural and border areas and islands; Points out that the digital infrastructure must be developed in such a way, that workers and citizens may improve upon their skills on digitalisation;

Amendment 164 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)

9d. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote - in regard to the yielding benefits of digitalisation, robotisation and AI - the general reduction of weekly working hours, with no effect on wages, so that production remains proportionally distributed to the current human work force and redundancies are averted;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas these developments plausibly facilitate human-machine synergies, thereby producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate outcomes, but also pose serious political, economic, social, ethical and legal questions as well as challenges in terms of workforce reorganisation and upskilling and the potential elimination of more sectors and employment than the new forms they create;

Amendment 18 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas these developments plausibly facilitate human-machine synergies, thereby producing a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate outcomes, but also pose serious challenges in terms of workforce reorganisation and the potential elimination of more sectors and employment than the new forms they create, and the creation of new ones;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas AI constitutes a strategic priority, the full potential of which can only be exploited if users and consumers are aware of the potential benefits and challenges it brings; whereas enterprises as well as workers and their representatives are often aware of neither AI applications nor of their underlying functions and data; whereas there are cases of AI applications in breach of existing regulations, such as data protection;

Amendment 2 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the Fourth Industrial Revolution, digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) are leading to fundamental and structural changes toin the labour market, ~~the~~ workplaces and ~~the~~ work profile ~~of every worker~~s but also in consumer behaviour and the way people live in general;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the full potential of AI can only be exploited if users are aware of the potential benefits and challenges that this technology brings; whereas it is necessary to incorporate this issue into the education process, including in terms of combating digital exclusion, and to conduct information campaigns at European level that give an accurate representation of all aspects of AI development;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas technology-enabled surveillance, monitoring and control in the workplace, such as prediction and flagging tools, remote monitoring and time-tracking and algorithmic management can generate excessive speed and efficiency pressure for workers, track employees’ behavioural patterns, exacerbate discriminatory practices and entail significant risks for privacy and human dignity;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the demand for specific AI skills and for high-level expertise is increasing in the labour market, all European citizens need to have the necessary understanding of AI to be able to conduct their everyday lives;

Amendment 23 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Radan KANEV, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the fast technological change is often accompanied by the spread of false information, hoax and misinterpretation that can undermine the positive aspects and opportunities brought by the development;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas General Protection Data Regulation (EU) 2016/679 recital 71 recognises the right to not be subjected to e-recruiting practices where there is no human intervention;

Amendment 25 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. Acknowledging the potential of AI to increase productivity, improve jobs’ quality and allow workers to focus on more gratifying and less dangerous tasks;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. Whereas the digital divide has specific socio-economic gender, age, geographic and accessibility aspects which must be addressed;

Amendment 27 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)

Bb. Whereas the COVID-19 pandemic underlined the importance of digital solutions, including teleworking, as well as its technical and social implications; whereas there are no common provisions at Union level, as regards the application of AI at the workplace, which could lead to market distortions and competition disadvantages; whereas AI should be subject to an appropriate regulatory framework;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas algorithmic management can create power imbalances and obscurity about decision-making and must be fully transparent in order for workers to effectively challenge these decisions;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas according to the 2019 Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI), 43 % of the EU population had an insufficient level of digital skills in 2017;

Amendment 3 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the Fourth Industrial Revolution, digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) are leading to fundamental and structural changes to the labour market, the workplace and the work profile of every worker; whereas by accelerating decision-making, improving processes and personalising services, AI has a remarkable potential for boosting our economy, increasing our well-being and making our society more inclusive and sustainable;

Amendment 30 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas artificial intelligence (including high risk AI) is increasingly used not only in the work place but also in the recruitment and other administrative processes;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas the OECD has drawn up recommendations on AI[1]; [1] OECD, "Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence”, 2019, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instr uments/OECD-LEGAL-0449

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas the workers have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing enshrined in Article 22(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), which means there must be human oversight;

Amendment 33 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas human oversight and transparency are an essential element in ensuring that AI systems are in conformity with the relevant legislation;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Recital B d (new)

Bd. whereas the Council of the European Union encourages the promotion of an ethical and human- centred approach with regard to AI[1]; [1] Council of the European Union “Council Conclusions on Shaping Europe’s Digital future”, June 2020

Amendment 35 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital B e (new)

Be. whereas social partners at Union level concluded a framework agreement on digitalisation, which amongst others includes a chapter on “Artificial intelligence and guaranteeing the human in control principle”[1]; [1] European Social Partners Framework Agreement on Digitalisation, June 2020

Amendment 36 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Recital B f (new)

Bf. whereas efforts to tackle gender bias and inequality in the digital sector are insufficient; whereas the gender gap persists across all digital technology domains and especially with regard to AI, thereby solidifying a male-biased trajectory for the digital sector in the foreseeable future;

Amendment 37 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Points out that AI solutions have the potential to improve working conditions and the quality of life, including improved work-life balance and better accessibility for people with disabilities, to predict labour market development and to support human resource management in preventing human bias, yet they can also raise concerns as regards privacy and occupational health and safety, such as the right to disconnect, and lead to disproportionate and illegal surveillance and monitoring of workers and consumers, infringing their dignity and privacy, as well as discriminatory treatment, including in recruitment processes, due to biased algorithms, including gender or racially and ethnically biased algorithms[1] and algorithms to the detriment of vulnerable groups; is concerned, furthermore, that AI can undermine the freedom and autonomy of people and contribute to mental health problems of workers, such as burnout, “techno stress”, psychological overload and fatigue; stresses that AI solutions in the work place must be transparent, fair and avoid any negative implications for the workers; [1] European Parliament: “Education and employment of women in science, technology and the digital economy, including AI and its influence on gender equality”, April 2020.

Amendment 38 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses th~~at the future~~e importance of a common European approach with regard to the ethical aspects of AI; underlines that regulatory framework for AI in the European Union ~~should~~must ensure that consumers' and workers’ rights are fully respected ~~and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs~~in digital economy, and contribute to better working and iemp~~roves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment~~loyment conditions, including a better work-life balance; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework ~~should~~must respect European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 39 #

Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Loucas FOURLAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union should ensure that workers’ rights are fully respected and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation~~, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment~~; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should respect European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights; and should be based on the High-level Expert Group Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI1a; __________________ 1ahttps://ec.europa.eu/digital-single- market/en/news/ethics-guidelines- trustworthy-ai

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the Fourth Industrial Revolution, digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) are leading to fundamental and structural changes to the labour market, the workplace and the work profile of every worker; whereas these changes are expected to benefit citizens and society by improving the quality of life and creating new employment opportunities and more sustainable business models;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union should address the specificity of the workplace, including the bargaining inequality between workers and employers and ensure that workers’ rights are fully respected and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should be based on the respect of European values, ~~Union rules~~Treaties of the European Union, and the Charter of fundamental rights of the EU, the European Social Charter of the Council of Europe, and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that during the design, development, deployment and application of AI, fundamental rights and effective legal norms must be fully respected, the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union should ensure that workers’ rights are fully respected and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should respect European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union should ensure that fundamental human rights and workers’ rights are fully respected ~~and adapted to~~within the framework of the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should ~~respect~~be founded upon European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights; , based on a human- centred approach in which humans are the guiding principle and beneficiaries of this process;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union should ensure that workers’ rights are fully respected and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment; ~~stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should respect European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights;~~

Amendment 44 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union ~~should~~must ensure that workers’ human dignity and rights are fully respected and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment as well as workers´ work-life balance; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should respect European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights and set clear and predictable rules for civil liability connected to AI;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the future regulatory framework for AI in the European Union should ensure that it is human-centred and that workers’ rights are fully respected and adapted to the new forms of work relations and work organisation, in a way that secures jobs and improves upon wages and working conditions, while safeguarding the quality of employment; stresses, in addition, that the European AI framework should respect European values, Union rules and the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 46 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recognises the challenges of the digital era and the broad impact of the digitalisation process in society, the economy and employment in the EU. Stresses the need for an ex-ante broad and democratic dialogue in order to develop principles, frameworks and instruments that combat potential dangers for the workers; calls for the reinforcement of the digital policy dialogue with citizens, trade unions and stakeholders;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Welcomes the positive impact AI can have on European labour markets, leading to job creation, safer and more inclusive workplaces, combating discrimination in recruitment and pay and promoting better skill-matching and work-flows, as long as risks are mitigated and regulatory frameworks updated with regularity as the digital wave progresses;

Amendment 48 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that the employment and social acquis of the Union fully applies to AI and calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure proper enforcement and to address any potential legislative gaps; notes that the Union can become a global leader in promoting a socially responsible use of AI;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Believes that the evolution and development of technology and AI pose an ethical and moral challenge to the protection of the essence of human life, making it necessary to lay down the limits of these advances;

Amendment 5 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the Fourth Industrial Revolution, digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) are leading to fundamental and structural changes to the labour market, the workplace and the work profile of every worker and whereas these processes have been accelerated by the pandemic, which has exacerbated many pre-existing work and social problems;

Amendment 50 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the urgent need to recognize the ethics-by-default principle as a leading principle for the design and use of artificial intelligence;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Underlines that AI has to be human-centric, transparent, safe and secure and must comply with fundamental rights and applicable laws and regulations, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), throughout the system’s entire life cycle, especially when it is deployed at the workplace; calls for the development of a robust certification system, based on test procedures and guided by the precautionary principle, which would allow businesses to demonstrate that their AI products comply with fundamental rights and Union standards;

Amendment 52 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Points out that a comprehensive risk assessment should come before the development, deployment and implementation of AI systems, evaluating its impact on fundamental rights and working conditions, including in terms of occupational health and safety, as well as its social consequences; assessments should cover risks related to human decision-making and social discrimination, as well as the evaluation of occupational risks arising;

Amendment 53 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Underlines that competent authorities should have access to all information concerning the data used for training, statistical models and theoretical principles related to AI solutions as well as the empirical validity of their outcomes;

Amendment 54 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1e. Calls for the application of the precautionary principle with regard to new technologies based on AI; underlines the fundamental principle that humans must always be in control of machines and AI and that AI decision making must be accountable and contestable and where relevant reversible; stresses that safety and security standards for AI must be respected and highlights the importance of regular checks and controls in this regard to prevent erroneous AI output; recalls that liability with regard to the use of AI must be clearly defined, both in the event of occupational accidents and damage caused to third parties;

Amendment 55 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)

1f. Underlines that the digital transition must be better reflected in education and training systems and go hand-in-hand with improvements as regards democracy at work, good governance and strong public services;

Amendment 56 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)

1g. Reiterates the importance of education and continuous learning to develop the qualifications necessary in the digital age and to tackle digital exclusion; calls on the Member States to invest in high quality, responsive and inclusive education, vocational training and life- long learning systems as well as re- skilling and up-skilling policies for workers in sectors that are potentially severely affected by AI; highlights the need to provide people with the necessary literacy, numeracy and digital skills as well as competences in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and cross-cutting soft skills, such as critical thinking, creativity and entrepreneurship; underlines that special attention must be paid to the inclusion of disadvantaged groups in this regard;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that AI must ~~serve exclusively as an aid to~~complement and augment human performance and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including the protection of personal data and privacy, ~~and the prohibit~~including the relevant GDPR provisions o~~f arbitrary~~n the automated individual decision-making, including profiling;

Amendment 58 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. uUnderlines that ~~AI must serve exclusively~~since AI is performing better and better in routine tasks, which might help humans concentrate on the things they are best at, AI must primarily serve as an aid to human performance and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including the protection of personal data and privacy, and the prohibition of arbitrary profiling, and employees must be ensured the same level of protection in the digital and the physical world too;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that AI must serve ~~exclusively~~foremost as an aid to human ~~performance~~development and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including the protection of personal data and privacy, and the prohibition of arbitrary profiling, with sufficient access to information available to all those workers and employers who will be affected;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas what some sectors term the Fourth Industrial Revolution, digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) are leading to fundamental and structural changes to the labour market, the workplace and the work profile of every worker;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that AI systems and algorithms must serve exclusively as an aid to human performance and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including the protection of personal data and privacy, and the prohibition of arbitrary profiling; stresses that in no way must AI undermine autonomous rational choice by using data to manipulate behaviour and deceit;

Amendment 61 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that AI must always be human-centric and thus serve exclusively as an aid to human performance and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights with human dignity at the forefront, including the protection of personal data and privacy, and the prohibition of arbitrary profiling;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that AI must serve exclusively as an aid to human performance and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including freedom of expression, the protection of personal data and privacy, and the prohibition of ~~arbitrary~~ profiling;

Amendment 63 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that AI must serve exclusively as an aid to human performance and comply with all rules ensuring respect for fundamental rights, including the protection of personal data and privacy, and the prohibition of arbitrary profiling and undue surveillance;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that AI and any related legislation must not in any way affect the exercise of fundamental rights as recognised in the Member States and at Union level, including the right or freedom to strike or to take other action covered by the specific industrial relations systems in Member States, in accordance with national law and/or practice, or affect the right to negotiate, to conclude and enforce collective agreements, or to take collective action in accordance with national law and/or practice;

Amendment 65 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Considers that a main priority for research and investment in the use of AI should be the creation of opportunities for people previously excluded from employment to have access to labour markets, such as working aid tools, mobility solutions or intelligent sensors systems for people with disabilities or visually impaired, fostering social inclusion and fighting poverty;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Considers that, in order to guarantee the proper and full operation of the digital single market, legal certainty must be re-established by codifying the new rights of a digitalised society, ensuring a level playing field for all stakeholders involved and plugging the current legislative gaps that often give rise to abuse, discrimination and unfair competition;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Emphasizes that it is imperative for workers to be properly informed on how to protect their personal data; calls on the Commission and the Member States to adjust the GDPR in order to adopt more specific measures and therefore ensure the protection of workers' rights in the new digital environment, especially in the context of teleworking;

Amendment 68 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recalls that many workers and SMEs need to have access to social media and internet platforms. The right to access an account of an online platform must be a legal right, unless the user is in breach by law;

Amendment 69 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that new technologies including AI should be used to improve labour market functioning and produce sustainable and inclusive labour market matches between workers and businesses;

Amendment 7 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital A

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Urges that AI and Big Data be used responsibly in such a way that their regulation always and in all cases respects fundamental rights and ensures they are not placed at the service of individual interests;

Amendment 71 #

Antonius MANDERS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Underlines that AI can help to facilitate active and healthy ageing, so that elderly people can remain active in our society and on the labour market longer, if they wish so;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

b. Stresses the importance of addressing the digital gender gap and ensuring the participation of women and girls in the development and implementation of digital technologies and AI to ensure that existing inequalities are not exacerbated or replicated; further underlines the importance of women and girls' equal access to STEM and digital education and subsequent employment in the digital, STEM and ICR sectors;

Amendment 73 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the implementation of AI enforces the dialogue between social partners and to allow trade unions access to the work floor, albeit in digital form, in order to promote collective bargaining and guarantee a human-centred approach to AI at work;deleted

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Urg~~Stresses the ~~Commission~~need for social dialogue as regards the implementation of AI in general and tahe ~~Member States to ensure that the implementation of AI enforces the dialogue between social partners and to allow~~ad of any AI deployment at company level in particular; considers indispensable that workers and their representatives be consulted and receive sufficient information right from the start of the decision making process; underlines that the deployment of AI needs to be transparent and that AI systems at the workplace must respect the privacy and dignity of workers; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure trade unions access to ~~the work floor~~workplaces, albeit in digital form, in order to promote collective bargaining and guarantee a human-centred approach to AI at work;

Amendment 75 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the implementation of AI enforces the dialogue between social partners and to allow~~Believes that dialogue between social partners is an essential prerequisite for the establishment of the new legislative framework and that against a background of changing industrial relations it is necessary to ensure that trade unions have access to the work floor, albeit in digital form, in order to promote collective bargaining and guarantee a human-centred approach to AI at work;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the implementation of AI ~~enforces~~is included in the dialogue between social and economic partners, and t~~o allow trade unions access to the work floor, albeit in digital form, in order~~hat digital solutions are employed to promote collective bargaining and guarantee a human-centred approach to AI at work;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the implementation of AI ~~enforces~~should neither impede the dialogue between social partners ~~and to allow~~nor prevent trade unions' access to the work floor, albeit in digital form, in order to promote collective bargaining and guarantee a human-centred approach to AI at work;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the implementation of AI enforces the dialogue between social partners and, by complying with EU and Member State legislation, to allow trade unions access to the work floor, albeit in digital form, in order to promote collective bargaining and guarantee a human-centred approach to AI at work;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 8 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas new opportunities brought by digital transformation and digital single market should empower and allow to prosper all EU citizens;

Amendment 80 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls that AI systems will not undermine human autonomy. The objective of trustworthy, ethical and anthropocentric AI can only be achieved by ensuring an appropriate involvement by human beings in relation to high-risk AI applications. Urges the Commission to strongly support an anthropocentric approach based on Communication, on Building Trust, as well as take into account the input obtained during the piloting phase of the Ethics Guidelines prepared by the High-Level Expert Groupon AI;

Amendment 81 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underlines that special attention must be paid to data collected at the workplace with the help of AI, in particular if it is used for human resources decisions; calls on social partners at company level to jointly analyse and monitor the deployment of AI; calls on the Commission and social partners to analyse the need for special provisions on data protection at the workplace in the context of AI; stresses that workers are the owners of their data, even after the end of an employment relationship;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Urges the Commission and the Member States to develop specific institutional support programmes to boost the digital transformation of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMS) and the self-employed, especially for the lowest paid categories where jobs can be routinized or where technical expertise lies elsewhere, as they are potentially at highest risk for computerisation;1a __________________ 1aTerri L.Griffith, Chester Spell and Katerina Bezrukova (2019), The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Self- Employment, CRSE.

Amendment 83 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt communication strategies in order to enable smooth transposition of the changes brought by the development of AI. Calls on the special attention to be paid to providing detailed information on the changes to the workers, trade unions and social partners and thus prevent the spread of misinformation and hoaxes;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up investments in quality digital infrastructure and equipment, including the development of the 5G network, especially in rural, sparsely populated, remote and peripheral areas in order to ensure that the EU takes a leading role in shaping the digital age;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on the Member States to ensure that all households and public institutions have access to electricity and high-speed internet as well as the necessary equipment and IT tools, which are key for improving the digital skills and for providing equal access for all to advanced technologies such as AI;

Amendment 86 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on Member States to assess the technological and non-technological barriers that hinder access to robots and wearable robotic devices such as occupational exoskeletons and active prosthetics by workers, especially ageing workers, workers with disabilities and those in physically demanding jobs;

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls the importance of cooperation between academics, industry, social partners and governments ~~on research and innovation in digital technologies~~regarding the digital transition, so that all social and human aspects are taken into account1 ; __________________ 1 European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, ‘Digitalisation and occupational safety and health – An EU-OSHA research programme’, p. 10.

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls the importance of cooperation between academics, industry, social partners and governments on research and innovation in digital technologies, so that all human aspects are taken into account1 ; stresses the need to ensure stable and adequate funding for European research programmes on artificial intelligence (AI); __________________ 1 European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, ‘Digitalisation and occupational safety and health – An EU-OSHA research programme’, p. 10.

Amendment 89 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Radka MAXOVÁ, Samira RAFAELA, Ilana CICUREL, Sylvie BRUNET, Stéphane BIJOUX, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Alin MITUȚA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls the importance of cooperation between academics, industry, social partners and governments on research and innovation in digital technologies, so that all human aspects are taken into account1 and that proper and rigorous testing and training frameworks exist in the implementation of AI; __________________ 1 European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, ‘Digitalisation and occupational safety and health – An EU-OSHA research programme’, p. 10.

Amendment 9 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Ádám KÓSA, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas digitalisation and artificial intelligence has the potential to substantially change the way people receive information, the way they communicate and the way they think;

Amendment 90 #

Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Manuel PIZARRO, Alicia HOMS GINEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls the importance of cooperation between academics, industry, social partners and governments on research, ensuring social sustainability and innovation in digital technologies, so that all human aspects are taken into account1; __________________ 1 European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, ‘Digitalisation and occupational safety and health – An EU-OSHA research programme’, p. 10.

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that it should be mandatory for users, including workers, and consumers to be informed when a system uses AI, particularly with regard to personalised products or services, and to receive meaningful information, in easily understandable and accessible form, on all ethical aspects of AI applications relevant to them, to take informed decisions; stresses the importance of understanding how algorithms process and value data and how this can be limited or stopped; highlights the need for competence development through training and education for workers and their representatives with regard to AI in the workplace to better understand the implications of AI solutions;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Reiterates the importance of such cooperation for better and timely monitoring and data gathering, with the aim of anticipating new types of jobs and necessary skills, and in general the short and long-term impact of AI on the labour market;

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines the need to involve all human sciences, such as anthropology, axiology, ethics, philosophy, sociology and others, to make sure that machines serve humanity without dehumanising individuals;

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that the use of AI applications, algorithms and process development affecting all aspects of work and workers’ rights, such as recruitment processes, ~~must not discriminate against~~cannot infringe the right to non-discrimination enshrined in Article 21 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights of workers and vulnerable groups nor reinforce inequalities on the pretext of gender, age, disability or nationality; Calls on the Commission to put in place adequate safeguards in the announced AI regulation to counter discrimination by AI by ensuring that the information or datasets used to run or train AI used on the workplace represent diversity and are not biased, including tools like consumer- sourced rating systems, which can reflect biased and discriminatory practices towards workers;

Amendment 95 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that the use of AI applications, algorithms and process development affecting all aspects of work and workers’ rights, such as recruitment processes, must not discriminate against workers and vulnerable groups or reinforce inequalities on the pretext of gender, age, disability or nationality; the principles of equality and non-discrimination must be respected in the design, development, deployment, application and evaluation of AI and systems integrating machine learning in particular, and it must be ensured that such systems are subject to adequate safeguards and oversight;

Amendment 96 #

Miriam LEXMANN, Gheorghe FALCĂ, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Radan KANEV, Eugen TOMAC, Krzysztof HETMAN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that the use of AI applications, algorithms and process development affecting all aspects of work and workers’ rights, such as recruitment processes, must not discriminate against workers and vulnerable groups or reinforce inequalities inter alia on the pretext of gender, age, disability ~~or nationality~~and health state or nationality; underlines the need to provide information in a simple and understandable manner regarding the use of the AI in recruitment processes or work-related administrative processes as explainability of the basic features of algorithms is a pre-condition for an ethical usage;

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that the use of AI applications, algorithms and process development affecting all aspects of work and workers’ rights, such as recruitment processes or people management through algorithmic management, must not discriminate against workers and vulnerable groups or reinforce inequalities on the pretext of gender, age, disability or nationality; encourages technology companies to involve disadvantaged persons in the development of their products and services to enhance inclusiveness in the digital sphere and bridge the digital divide;

Amendment 98 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 99 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

source: 663.153

2021/01/26 IMCO 201 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Virginie JORON

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

- having regard to the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) reports of 2020 and to the Special Eurobarometer results “Attitudes towards the impact of digitalisation on daily lives”1a, __________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publ icopinionmobile/index.cfm/survey/getsurv eydetail/instruments/special/surveyky/222 8;jsessionid=0A2965AA1C68AA476CBA2 02BE3EE7448.cfusion07001?CFID=949 8722&CFTOKEN=32cd2e310977224c- A882F889-08D5-0E55- 6CDA27376F14C4BE

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the EU’s technology lag in AI poses a threat to the independence and security of the European states;

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Strongly believes that AI can be a force for good for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environment; believes theat security, inclusiveness, accessibility and ~~fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of~~equitable conditions for the most vulnerable groups with regard to AI- driven products and services need to be ensured;

Amendment 101 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Believes that it is vital that the upcoming EU regulatory proposal establishes in law clear limitations as to what can be considered lawful uses of AI and must legally restrict uses and deployments of AI which unduly infringe upon access to social rights and benefits; believes Europe’s industries -from AI developers to car manufacturing companies - will benefit greatly from the regulatory certainty that comes from clear legal limits and an even playing field for fair competition;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Supports the expected Revision of the General Product Safety Directive announced in the Commission’s New Consumer Agenda, underlines that the revision of the Directive must go hand in hand with a revision of the Product Liability Directive in order to adapt both Directives to the digital economy;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Highlights that the main purpose of AI must be to provide more ecological and effective alternative to current technology. AI and humans should collaborate in fulfilling the long-term goals of humankind - to create equal society based on indisputability of human rights and especially right to human dignity, while achieving balances relationship with nature. Making the most advanced AI is not a goal for itself;

Amendment 104 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Recognises that in order to benefit from AI, the Commission, the Member States, the private sector, civil society and the scientific community all need to collaborate effectively~~, and~~ to create an ecosystem for s~~uccess~~afe human-centric AI that will benefit the whole society;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes that while AI offers g~~reat~~ood potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity;

Amendment 106 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes that while AI offers great potential, it can also present ~~certain~~high risks due to issues such as bias and opacity;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes that while AI offers great potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity, the manipulation of individual behaviour, violation of privacy, the identification/ forecasting of sensitive identity traits and emotion, enabling of mass surveillance, the restriction of access to vital public services, and reinforcing structural discrimination;

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes that while AI offers great potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity; calls for the traceability processes of AI-based systems to be transparent and capable of being reviewed in the event of any form of discrimination;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes that while AI offers great potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity; believes that these risks can manifest themselves depending on the specific context and use-cases of AI;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas AI is, to a certain extent, already subject to ~~many~~ existing legislative requirements;

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Highlights that beneficial innovation can only be achieved when we guarantee that uses are safe, legal, and do not discriminate; believes in need to ensure democratic oversight and clear regulation before technologies are deployed;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)

17b. Underlines that data sets used by AI systems (both for training and operation) may suffer from the inclusion of inadvertent historic bias, incompleteness and bad governance models. The continuation of such biases could lead to unintended (in)direct prejudice and discrimination against certain groups or people, potentially exacerbating prejudice and marginalisation. Harm can also result from the intentional exploitation of (consumer) biases or by engaging in unfair competition, such as the homogenisation of prices by means of collusion or a non-transparent market. Identifiable and discriminatory bias should be removed in the collection phase where possible. The way in which AI systems are developed (e.g. algorithms’ programming) may also suffer from unfair bias. This could be counteracted by putting in place oversight processes to analyse and address the system’s purpose, constraints, requirements and decisions in a clear and transparent manner;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)

17c. Urges the EU to take steps to prevent or mitigate associated risks by the negative effects of AI and to set concrete and applicable baseline standards and rules, specifically in the sensitive area of AI systems in law enforcement, such as facial recognition software;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)

17d. Notes that the EU should publicly and financially support only the AI directly linked with fulfilling of SDG´s and Paris Climate Agreement;

Amendment 114 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that aside from some of the barriers to the development, adoption and effective regulation of digital technologies in the EU, a lack of consumer trust and confidence can hold back the widespread adoption of AI;

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that a lack of consumer trust and confidence ~~can~~ holds back the widespread adoption of AI;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that a lack of consumer trust and confidence can hold back the widespread adoption of AI, draws attention to the unavoidable asymmetry in citizens’ understanding the processes by which advanced algorithmic and artificial intelligence systems make decisions;

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that a lack of consumer trust and confidence can hold back the widespread adoption of AI; therefore clear legislation with limitations must be introduced, since only ethical guidelines will hardly give consumers trust and confidence in AI;

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Demands therefore, that AI products and services are safe and that risks of discrimination, loss of privacy, loss of autonomy, and lack of transparency have to be avoided; calls thus, that consumers should have as a minimum the right to accountability, control, non-discrimination and the right to access to justice and fairness; calls further for mandatory information provisions to indicate whether consumers are interacting with AI decision making and demands rules for an effective auditing system that is able to check relevant AI processes to guarantee that anti-discrimination laws and rules on unfair commercial practices and data protection are upheld;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continuously improve the part of the public administration that will be responsible for regulating and implementing future legislation on AI; notes the risk of a significant asymmetry arising between the development dynamics of selected products and the ability of the public administration to assess them;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas we need to build public trust in AI ~~while~~by including by default the full respect of fundamental rights, consumer protection, data protection and security and fostering innovation in Europe;

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)

18b. Notes that consumers need a clear and predictable legal framework in case of product malfunction. Such a legislation must acknowledge the definition of malfunction as constantly changing, due to the use of AI in products. If consumers purchase products with embedded AI applications, in case of a malfunction, it may be hard to prove a causal relation between a problem in the AI application and the malfunction of the same products. The burden of proof should lay with the manufacture, as they have created the product and have an enormous knowledge advantage;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Welcomes the Commission’s white paper on AI, and calls on the Commission to develop a common EU regulatory framework for AI that is risk-based, proportionate ~~and clear~~, clear and common EU regulatory framework for AI; believes this is needed to oversee automated decision making systems and that this should complement existing legislation relevant to AI and ensure there is no duplication or new barriers created as a result;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Welcomes the Commission’s white paper on AI, and calls on the Commission to develop a common EU regulatory framework for AI that is risk-based~~, proportionate and clear~~ (whilst recognising that all AI technologies, dependent on use, pose a degree of risk), proportionate, clear, and allowing for contestability for risk determination;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Welcomes the Commission’s white paper on AI, and calls on the Commission to develop a common EU regulatory framework for AI that is risk-based, ~~proportionate~~more detailed than high and low risk, and clear;

Amendment 124 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Welcomes the Commission’s white paper on AI, and calls on the Commission to develop a common EU regulatory framework for AI that is human-centric, risk-based, proportionate and clear;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Calls to safeguard that there is always human control over algorithms and ensure that proper and effective redress mechanisms are in place; in that regard, calls to ensure that algorithms are openly auditable; calls for a ban on facial recognition algorithms for the wide damage they pose to fundamental rights of individuals;

Amendment 128 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Stresses the importance of empowering consumers with basic training and skills on AI that would allow them to benefit more from these technologies and, at the same time, protect themselves from any possible threats;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 13 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas wethere is a need to build public trust in AI while fostering innovation in Europe;

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 131 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes that, while to varying degrees, AI is already subject to current European legislation, ~~and~~AI raises new, so far unresolved, legal questions that affect consumers and thus calls on the Commission to issue clear guidance on the functioning and synergy between any current applicable legislation and any proposed new measures; ~~considers it important not to over-regulate AI;~~

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 134 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes that, to varying degrees, AI is already subject to current European legislation, and calls on the Commission to issue clear guidance on the functioning and synergy between any current applicable legislation and any proposed new measures; considers it important not to over-regulate AI or to define too widely possible categories of risk; asks the Commission, when drafting legislation on AI, to consider the investment approach, leaving the regulatory approach only to those areas where intervention is necessary to reduce negative social impacts, promote legal certainty and ensure harmonisation of rules within the EU;

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Points out that the use of self- learning algorithms enables businesses to gain a comprehensive insight about consumer’s personal circumstances and behaviour patterns, allowing them to tailor their advertising and contract terms to specific profiles thus exploiting consumer’s willingness to purchase goods and services as well as deploying scoring systems to decide whether a specific consumer can purchase a product or take up a service; thus calls on the Commission to comprehensively regulate AI technologies and to forbid an unfair or abusive use of such systems;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation, based on principles and proportionality rather than prescriptive rules; believes that to achieve this AI needs to be functionally and broadly defined in a manner that covers all automated decision- making, complex algorithmic-based systems and machine or deep learning processes so any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments and adequately reflect the degree to which the perceived risks of AI arise in practice in the varying ways AI is deployed;

Amendment 137 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation not only guidelines; believes that achieve this AI needs to be functionally and broadly defined in a manner that covers all automated decision- making, complex algorithmic-based systems and machine or deep learning processes so any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments;

Amendment 138 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Claudia GAMON, Karen MELCHIOR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation; believes that to achieve this ~~AI needs to be functionally and broadly defined in a manner that covers all automated decision-making, complex algorithmic-based systems and machine or deep learning processes so~~, a concrete definition of AI is not necessary so that any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments; reminds that there is no common definition on cybersecurity or even the internet;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation; believes that achieve this AI needs to be functionally ~~and broadly~~ defined in a manner that covers all automated decision- making, complex algorithmic-based systems and machine or deep learning processes so any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas EU Member States and EU institutions have an obligation under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights to ensure that each person’s rights to privacy, data protection, free expression and assembly, non-discrimination, dignity and other fundamental rights are not unduly restricted by the use of new and emerging technologies;

Amendment 140 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation; believes that to achieve this AI needs to be functionally and broadly defined in a manner that covers all automated decision-making, complex algorithmic-based systems and machine or deep learning processes so any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments; considers that this should be implemented without prejudice to the potential impact on consumers;

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Believes that the objective of a regulatory framework for AI should be to create an internal market for trustworthy and safe AI-enabled products, applications and services, and that this should be based on Article 114 of the TFEU;

Amendment 142 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Believes that consumers should be adequately informed, if requested in offline format, in a timely, impartial, easily-readable, standardised and accessible manner about the existence, process, rationale, reasoning and possible outcome of algorithmic systems, about how to reach a human with decision- making powers, and about how the system’s decisions can be checked, meaningfully contested and corrected;

Amendment 143 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)

22b. Believes that explicability is crucial for building and maintaining users’ trust in AI systems. This means that processes need to be transparent, the capabilities and purpose of AI systems openly communicated, and decisions explainable to those directly and indirectly affected;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Believes the regulatory framework needs to ~~build public trust in AI while allowing companies to develop automated systems without losing the confidence of their customer~~comprise safeguards and follow a precautionary approach to the development and use of AI and automated decision making systems as well as a more gradual establishment of risks and corresponding legal requirements including a right of information about the use of AI and automated decision making as well as preventive impact assessments in order to allow the banning of highly dangerous technologies; believes also that the regulatory framework should ensure transparency, accountability and provide for clear communication of the relevant requirements to both consumers and regulatory authorities;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Believes the regulatory framework needs to build public trust in AI while allowing companies to develop automated systems without losing the confidence of their customers; believes also that the regulatory framework should ensure transparency, ~~and~~ provide for clear communication of the relevant requirements to both consumers and regulatory authorities, and incentivise AI developers and deployers proactively to promote trustworthy AI;

Amendment 146 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Believes the regulatory framework needs to ~~build public trust in AI while allowing companies to develop automated systems without losing the confidence of their customer~~support the development of trustworthy AI systems and should ensure high consumer protection standards in order to strengthen consumer’s confidence in AI enabled products; believes also that the regulatory framework should ensure transparency, and provide for clear communication of the relevant requirements to both consumers and regulatory authorities;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Calls on the Commission to promote the exchange of information related to algorithmic systems between the Member States’ authorities and to support the development of a common understanding of algorithmic systems in the Single Market by issuing guidance, opinions and expertise;

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)

23b. Considers that an examination of the current market surveillance legislation might be necessary to avoid its obsolescence and ensure that it responds ethically to the emergence of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies and effectively protects European consumers in the Single Market; urges therefore the Commission to pursue a thorough analysis on this important matter in cooperation with Member States’ responsible authorities;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that such a framework should be based on a~~n ethical~~ fundamental rights compliant, human- centric and principle- based approach throughout the design, development and life cycle of AI products based on the preservation of fundamental rights and the principles of transparency, explainability (when relevant), a~~nd a~~ccountability and the rights, obligations of the GDPR – including data minimisation, purpose limitation and data protection by design and by default;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1

Part 1: ~~removing barriers to~~Strengthening the functioning of the digital single market

Amendment 150 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that such a framework should be based on an ethical, human- centric and ~~principle-based~~fundamental rights approach throughout the design, development and life cycle of AI products based on the preservation of fundamental rights and the principles of transparency, explainability (when relevant), and accountability;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Believes that such a framework should be based on an ethical, human- centric and principle-based approach throughout the design, development and life cycle of AI products based on the preservation of fundamental rights and the principles of transparency, explainability ~~(when relevant)~~, and accountability;

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Believes that the scope of new regulatory requirements should be scaled so that AI deemed to pose the highest risk is subject to the most regulatory requirements or should be outright banned in the case of lethal autonomous weapon systems; calls on the Commission to develop an objective methodology for calculating the risk of harm, in addition to what already by exists in current consumer legislation; believes that such a methodology should avoid a restrictive, binary approach that could quickly become obsolete, and instead focus on the context, application and specific use of AI;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Believes that the scope of new regulatory requirements should be scaled so that AI applications in their specific context which are deemed to pose the highest risk isare subject to the most regulatory requirements; calls on the Commission to develop an objective methodology for calculating the risk of harm, in addition to what already by exists in current consumer legislation; believes that such a methodology should avoid a restrictive, binary approach that could quickly become obsolete, and instead focus on the context, application and specific use of AI;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Believes that the scope of new regulatory requirements should be scaled so that AI deemed to pose the highest risk is subject to the most stringent regulatory requirements; calls on the Commission to develop an objective methodology for calculating the risk of harm, in addition to what already by exists in current consumer legislation; believes that such a methodology should avoid a restrictive, binary approach that could quickly become obsolete, and instead focus on the context, application and specific use of AI;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Stresses that EU-wide AI standardisation will foster innovation and interoperability, as well as guarantee a high level of consumer protection; acknowledges that, while a significant number of standards already exist, further promotion and development of common standards, such as those applicable to component parts and full applications, for AI is necessary;

Amendment 156 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Stresses that EU-wide AI standardisation ~~will~~should foster innovation and interoperability, as well as guarantee athe highest level of consumer protection; acknowledges that, while a significant number of standards already exist, further promotion and development of common standards for AI is necessary;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that the development of a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI~~, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust~~ involving all relevant stakeholders and based on transparent standards could help improve consumer trust; this labelling could notably include information on safety aspects, such as a safety score, and minimum age requirements;

Amendment 158 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Marc ANGEL, Brando BENIFEI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that ~~a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help imp~~once clear legal rules and enforcement mechanisms are in place, the role of a trustworthy label could be considered while at the same time it is important to bear in mind that the information asymmetry inherent to algorithmic learning systems, makes the rovle ~~consumer trust~~of labelling schemes very complex;

Amendment 159 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a ~~voluntary~~ labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could improve transparency of AI-based technology and help improve consumer trust;

Amendment 16 #

Marion WALSMANN, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is about removing national barriers and synergies and enhancing the benefits for the European citizens, therefore having a better organised and common European approach for market integration and harmonisation can contribute to that result; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this, including by eliminating unjustified geo-blocking;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy high-risk AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a ~~voluntary labelling~~European quality seal scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a ~~voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission~~high level of protection of data and open technology for trustworthy AI, could help improve consumer trust;

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust; considers that a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust; underlines that any such labelling scheme must be understandable for consumers and be shown to provide a measurable benefit in consumer awareness and satisfaction with compliant AI applications, otherwise it will not achieve a sufficient level of adoption in real-world use;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust, while acknowledging that any voluntary measures cannot prevent against deliberate misuse or serious threats to fundamental rights;

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Considers that a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commission, could help improve consumer trust and empowering them to make an ethical choice;

Amendment 166 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Strongly believes that new regulatory requirements and assessments ~~should~~must be both understandable and implementable, and should be incorporated into existing sector specific requirements where possible;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Strongly believes that new regulatory requirements and assessments should be both understandable and implementable, and incorporated into existing sector specific requirements where possible and keep administrative burdens to a minimum;

Amendment 168 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. calls on the Commission and the Member States to make use of innovative regulatory tools such as ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to help provide a clear path to scale-up for start-ups and small companies, regardless of the risk profile of their product; believes that these tools can help encourage innovation without any detriment to consumer protection;deleted

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to ~~mak~~evaluate the use of innovative regulatory tools such as ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to help provide a clear path to scale-up for start-ups and small companies, regardless of the risk profile of their product; believes that these tools can help encourage innovation if applied in a controlled environment and without any detriment to consumer protection and other applicable rights;

Amendment 17 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes the EU ~~needs to become a~~’s digital policy should create or support the key foundations needed for the European public and private sectors to be world leaders in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is one such foundation and is about removing national barriers, strengthen competition and having a better organised and common European approach for market integration ~~and harmonisation~~; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this;

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to ~~mak~~consider the use of innovative regulatory tools such as ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to help provide a clear path to scale-up for start-ups and small companies, re~~gardless of the risk profile of their product~~calls that such tools must be considered by making use of the precautionary principle; believes that these tools ~~can~~should help encourageing innovation without any detriment to consumer protection;

Amendment 171 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to make use of innovative regulatory tools such as ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to help provide a clear path to scale-up for start-ups and small companies, ~~regardless of~~taking the risk profile and the possible welfare gain of their product into account; believes that these tools can help encourage innovation without any detriment to consumer protection;

Amendment 172 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to make use of innovative regulatory tools such as ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to help provide a clear path to scale-up for start-ups and small companies, regardless of the risk profile of their product; believes that these tools can help encourage innovation without any detriment to consumer protection; points out that creating a coherent environment for innovative testing and validating products based on technologies such as AI will help European businesses to overcome the fragmentation of the Single Market and to take advantage of the growth potential throughout the EU;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Points out that the most efficient way of reducing bias in data based systems is by ensuring that the maximum of non-personal data is available to train them, for which it is necessary to limit any unnecessary barrier to text-and-data mining, and to facilitate cross-border uses; notes in addition that public domain or freely licensed data are often used by AI and machine learning developers when selecting training data, both for ease of access and to avoid potential infringement liability exposure; believes therefore that publishing data under free licenses should be encouraged in order to prevent selection bias in training data, as it could lead to harmful bias in results; emphasises the need to address remaining uncertainties related to the legal performance of text and data mining that developers may still face;

Amendment 174 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the use of high-risk AI should be limited to specific and clearly warranted purposes, in full respect of the applicable law and subject to transparency obligations; underlines that this will be decisive for ensuring public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission jointly with civil society organization, trade unions and consumer organizations to carefully consider whether there are certain use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards, including underlying algorithms, should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development; where the applications of AI are deemed to be incompatible with the protection of human rights, such as the use of remote biometric identification systems that enable mass surveillance, the Commission must consider outright bans and other highly restrictive measures;

Amendment 175 #

Clara PONSATÍ OBIOLS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the use of high-risk AI should be limited to specific and clearly warranted purposes, in full respect of the applicable law and fundamental rights, and subject to transparency obligations and necessity and proportionality assessments; underlines that this will be decisive for ensuring public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission to carefully consider whether there are certain use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards, including underlying algorithms, should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development; in particular, calls on the Commission to consider introducing a moratorium to the deployment or use by public authorities of recognition technologies, such as facial or biometric recognition, even for the purpose of responding to a national emergency;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the use of high-risk AI should follow a precautionary approach and be limited to specific and clearly warranted purposes, in full respect of the applicable law and subject to transparency obligations; underlines that this will be decisive for ensuring safety and security, data and consumer protection, public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission to carefully consider whether there are certain use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards, including underlying algorithms, should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development;

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the ~~use of~~ high- risk ~~AI should be limited to specific and clearly warranted purposes, in full respect of the applicable law and~~s may arise from the use of AI tools in a specific circumstance or with a particular objective; notes that these instances should be subject to specific transparency obligations and such use should remain in compliance with all other applicable law; underlines that this will be decisive for ensuring public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission to carefully consider whether there are certain use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards~~, including underlying algorithms,~~ should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development;

Amendment 178 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the use of AI in a high-risk AIcontext should be limited to specific ~~and clearly warranted~~ purposes, in full respect of the applicable law and subject to transparency obligations; underlines that ~~this~~only a clear and legally certain legislative framework will be decisive for ensuring public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission to carefully consider whether there are certain use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards, including underlying algorithms, should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the use of high-risk AI should be ~~limited to specific and clearly warranted purposes~~clearly defined, multi-level , in full respect of ~~the applicable~~ law and subject to transparency obligations; underlines that this will be decisive for ensuring public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission ~~to carefully consider whether there are certain~~consider use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards, including underlying algorithms, should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed by competent authorities and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is about ~~removing~~ensuring the full potential of new technologies, removing unjustified national barriers and having a better organised and common European approach for market integration and harmonisation; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this;

Amendment 180 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Member States to encourage and support the establishment of specialised review boards for AI products and services in the Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm stemming from high-risk, impactful AI-based projects;deleted

Amendment 181 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the ~~Member States to encourage and support the establishment of specialised review boards for AI products and services~~ Commission and the Member States to ensure close cooperation and mutual recognition of decisions when enforcing the ~~Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm stemming from high-risk, impactful AI-based projects~~regulatory framework in order to prevent a fragmented Single Market;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Member States to encourage and support the establishment of ~~specialis~~EU-certified review boards for AI products and services in the Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm stemming from high-risk, impactful AI- based projects;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Member States to encourage and support the establishment of specialised review ~~boards~~ for AI products and services in the Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm stemming from high-risk, impactful AI- based projects;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Member States to encourage and support the establishment of specialised review boards for AI products and services in the Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm, notably the potential social impact, stemming from high-risk, impactful AI- based projects;

Amendment 185 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EU centre of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, civil society organisations, consumer organizations, trade unions, companies and research institutions; believes that such a centre can help to provide specialised training and development for regulatory authorities and can contribute to combat climate change, growing social injustice and the growing monopolisation by few Big Tech Companies; supports the creation of public awareness activities around the societal, legal, and ethical impact of AI;

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; therefore calls on the Commission and the Member States to est~~ablish an EU~~rengthen and enhance existing centres of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institutions; believes that such a centre can help to provide specialised training and development for regulatory authoritie such as the European Artificial Intelligence Networks;

Amendment 187 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; ~~calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EU centre of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institu~~supports the establishment of the European Network of Artificial Intelligence Excellence Centres; believes that this network should help to strengthen the exchange of knowledge on AI, support AI related talent within the EU and attract new talent, foster the cooperations; be~~lieves that such a centre can help to~~tween science and AI developers as well as provide specialised training and development for regulatory authorities;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EU centre of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institutions; believes that such a centre can help to provide specialised training and development for regulatory authorities; furthermore stresses the importance of measures and information channels to help small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups to effectively digitise and advance into ‘industry 4.0’;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EU centre of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institutions; believes that such a centre can help to provide specialised training and development for regulatory authorities, with the aim of ensuring the proper use of these technologies and protecting European citizens from potential risks and damages to their fundamental rights;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in ~~digital~~trustworthy, human- centric innovation; considers that the digital single market is about removing national barriers and having a better organised and common European approach for market integration and harmonisation; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this;

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EU centre of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institutions; believes that such a centre can help to provide specialised training and development for regulatory authorities and citizens in order to close the digital and social divide and equip them with digital skills necessary for the development of AI;

Amendment 191 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Calls for impact assessments on the consequences of a digital future on people; recalls that those without digital skills are left behind and digital infrastructure cannot evolve and function without proper operators; calls for mitigation of negative impact through reskilling and upskilling; underlines that the gender dimension needs to be taken into account, given the insufficient representation of women in STEM and digital companies;

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Believes that particular attention in AI literacy programs should be paid to situations where AI systems can cause or exacerbate adverse impacts due to asymmetries of power or information, such as between employers and employees, businesses and consumers or governments and citizens;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)

32b. Notes that those who own or operate inputs to AI systems and profit from it should be asked to help fund the development of AI literacy programs for consumers as this is in the best interest of both the company and society as a whole;

Amendment 194 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Considers that the lack of clear European rules on the attribution of liability in the event of a malfunction or accident of the advanced AI-system could be one of the key obstacles to the implementation of AI-based technologies into everyday use; calls on the Commission to update the existing liability framework in order to address new challenges posed by emerging digital technologies such as artificial intelligence;

Amendment 195 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to update the existing ~~liabili~~product liability and product safety framework in order to address new challenges posed by emerging digital technologies such as artificial intelligence;

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to update the existing product safety and liability framework in order to address new challenges posed by emerging digital technologies such as artificial intelligence;

Amendment 197 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to update the existing liability framework in order to address new challenges posed by emerging digital technologies such as artificial intelligence and urges the Commission to update inter alia the Product Liability Directive, in particular by redefining the terms ‘product’, ‘damage’ and ‘defect’ and reversing the concept of ‘burden of proof’, and calls on the Commission to introduce a liability regime that is based on the proportion of control the party holds over the risk of the operation taking into account the development and the deployment phase and ensure compensation for non-material damages caused by AI;

Amendment 199 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33a. Notes that the development of AI technologies is expected to take diverse forms depending on the economic sector in question or the intended use; asks the Commission to consider the creation of a European Observatory of AI in order to monitor the different development of AI technologies at European and Member States’ level and better inform authorities and policy makers on emerging social, economic and legal issues to be addressed;

Amendment 2 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Citation 29 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 20 January 2021 on strengthening the single market: the future of free movement of services,

Amendment 20 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is about ~~removing national barriers and~~ having a better organised and common European approach for market ~~integration and~~ harmonisation; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this;

Amendment 200 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33a. Stresses that adequate connectivity should be developed for the implementation of AI, as well as any new technology, in favour of the most disadvantaged depopulated areas; calls for the unequal access to technology in rural areas to be taken into account;

Amendment 201 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)

33b. Considers that AI can, if developed and deployed adequately, be a formidable enabling technology but which can nonetheless pose serious challenges to the European environmental objectives set out in the Green Deal; highlights that studies have shown that training a single AI model can emit carbon dioxide in amounts comparable to that of five cars over their lifetimes; calls on the Commission to take into account the environmental footprint of AI technologies, including in their development phase, in order to ensure that the development of AI is in line with our European environmental objectives;

Amendment 21 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is about removing unjustified national barriers and having a better organised and common European approach for market integration and harmonisation; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this;

Amendment 22 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that existing gender, digital and social gaps should be addressed when designing legislation for Europe’s digital future; considers that AI, algorithms and data should be based on transparency and the possibility for oversight; calls for plans to be drawn up at European level for harmonised implementation in all Member States;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the importance of a fully functioning digital single market for the benefit of consumers and enterprises and asks for SMEs to be supported in their digital transformation and expects from the Commission to introduce a fitness check for SMEs before proposing legislation;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that the principles underlying the EU’s approach to digitalisation should be based on fundamental rights, consumer protection, technological neutrality and data protection;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that the ~~principles underlying the~~ EU’s approach to digitalisation ~~should be based on~~needs be fully compliant with fundamental rights, consumer protection and data protection;

Amendment 26 #

Clara PONSATÍ OBIOLS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that the principles underlying the EU’s approach to digitalisation should be based on fundamental rights, consumer protection and data protection; and that EU’s approach should also take into account the challenge that digitalisation represents for regional and minority languages;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that the principles underlying the EU’s approach to digitalisation should be based on fundamental rights, consumer protection and data protection as well as non- discrimination of the most vulnerable groups;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that digitalisation and technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the objectives of the Industrial Strategy, Vision Zero, Green Deal and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; further believes that the Industrial Strategy and Green Deal should themselves support the objective of digitalisation and realisation of technological leadership, as part of a mutually reinforcing policy approach; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;

Amendment 29 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that human and environmental centric digitalisation and technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the ~~objective~~targets of the Green Deal and ~~for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis~~to overcome some of the difficulties created by the COVID-19 crisis; points out the potential of digital solutions, such as teleworking and AI applications, to support the participation of people with disabilities in the Digital Single Market; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas substantial barriers ~~still exist for the realisation of the full potential of the digital single market~~in the digital single market still exist and they have to be removed in order to realise its full potential, and whereas a common EU approach is essential for its success;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that digitalisation and technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the objectives of the Green Deal, promoting energy efficiency of data processing and storage systems, and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;

Amendment 31 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that digitalisation and technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the objectives of the Green Deal and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; considers that the ~~COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation,~~se benefits can only be realised if the severe environmental, privacy and fundamental rights concerns, for example of worker surveillance, can be prevented and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that digitalisation and emerging technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the objectives of the Green Deal and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;

Amendment 33 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that digitalisation and technologies such as AI ~~will be important for~~could potentially achiev~~ing~~e the objectives of the Green Deal and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that digitalisation and technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the objectives of the Green Deal and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall; believes that the digital transformation must be targeted to meet the needs of urban, rural and isolated regions in the EU;

Amendment 35 #

Arba KOKALARI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes that new technologies, data and AI are key enablers of the transition to a circular economy, facilitating the introduction of circular business models, contributing to more sustainable value chains and optimising resource use; calls on the Commission to promote and support the uptake and development of sustainable technology in the realisation of the Green Deal;

Amendment 36 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Believes that practices that undermine consumer experience, data protection and labour rights such as technology-enabled surveillance, monitoring and control in the workplace, such as prediction and flagging tools, remote monitoring and time-tracking and algorithmic management should be eliminated;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that the Commission should ~~adopt a balanced approach to legislation in order to create a digital single market that~~create a digital single market that ensures the provision of public services, is competitive, fair, accessible, technologically neutral, innovation- friendly, consumer-friendly, human- centric and trustworthy, ~~and that~~ builds a secure data society and economy and ensures that equal conditions prevail as regards tax payment, meaning in particular that leading internet companies pay their taxes where their profits are generated;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that the Commission should adopt a ~~balanc~~n evidence based approach to legislation in order to create a digital single market that is competitive, accessible, technologically neutral, innovation- friendly, human-centric and trustworthy, and that builds a secure data society and economy;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights that the Commission should adopt a ~~balanced~~n approach to legislation in ~~order to~~that creates a digital single market that is competitive, accessible, technologically neutral, innovation-friendly, human-centric and trustworthy, and that builds a secure data society and economy;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas ~~substantial~~ barriers still exist for the realisation of the full potential of the digital single market, and whereas a common, human and environmental centric, EU approach is essential for its success;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points out that SMEs and other economic actors should use cooperation as much as possible, working in an ecosystem that benefits citizens and is able to support growth. The use of open source is a path towards open and sustainable digital transformation, both through open source software and open hardware - progressing towards European strategic autonomy in digital;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Calls on the Commission to assess the environmental impact of data sharing and the infrastructures required to ensure a sustainable digital deployment in line with the Green Deal; stresses that, despite the current high carbon footprint of development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence and machine learning, robotics and related technologies, those technologies can contribute to the reduction of the current environmental footprint; calls for the introduction of an EU digital sustainability index based on an analysis of product life cycles;

Amendment 42 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Marc ANGEL, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to ~~follow the ‘one in, one out’ principle in its future legislative proposals, and to~~ address the fragmentation of the digital single market, remove any existing unjustified barriers, and support innovation ~~by reducing red tape~~;

Amendment 44 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to follow the ‘one in, one out’ principle in its future legislative proposals, and to a~~ddress~~void the fragmentation of the digital single market, remove any existing unjustified barriers in particular administrative burdens, and support innovation ~~by reducing red tape~~especially for SMEs;

Amendment 45 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to follow the ‘one in, one out’ principle in its future legislative proposals, and to address the fragmentation of the digital single market, remove any existing unjustified barriers, and support innovation by reducing red tapesupport public trust in AI by providing clear, regulatory limits to uses of AI which inherently undermine fundamental rights and the protection of the environment;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to follow the ‘one in, one out’ principle in its future legislative proposals, and to address the fragmentation of the digital single market~~, remove any existing unjustified barriers,~~ and support innovation by reducing red tape;

Amendment 47 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to follow the ‘one in, one out’ principle in its future legislative proposals, and to address the fragmentation of the digital single market, remove any existing unjustified barriers, ~~and~~ support innovation by reducing red tape, and use the appropriate incentives that create a level playing field, such as stimulus-inducing fiscal policies and equal access to investment opportunities;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Asks the Commission to ensure ~~proper~~an ambitious enforcement of both current and any new legislative requirements; believes that enforcement needs to work effectively across borders and across sectors, with greater cooperation between authorities, and with due regard for the expertise and relevant competence of each authority; believes that the Commission should provide a guiding framework to ensure coordination for any new regulatory requirements on AI or related fields;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to increase support for key enableing sectors of the digital economy; stresses the need to avoid service provider or technological lock-in for public data collection processes and calls for all Union public procurement processes and funding programmes to include open data access, mandatory interoperability and portability requirements, as well as to promote the use of open-source software and hardware;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas digitalisation done with citizen and sustainable environment goals in mind has the potential to add significant value to the single market as a whole, and is important for both traditional and non- traditional sectors and can be a competitive advantage on the global market;

Amendment 50 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ~~increase support for key enablers of the digital economy~~aim at an innovation-friendly regulatory environment for enablers of the digital economy and to strengthen the financial and institutional support for the European digital economy in close coordination with Member States and stakeholders;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to increase ~~support for key enablers of~~investment in the digital economy;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to increase support for key enablers of the digital economy, such as: investing in research and development, supporting commercial innovations in Europe, providing increased and broader access to data, building digital infrastructure, increasing the general availability of digital skills within the population, promoting technological leadership for the business environment, and creating a proportionate and harmonised regulatory environment;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to increase support for key enablers of the digital economy; considers in this regard the important role that smart public procurement, such as European GovTech platform, can play in supporting digital developments across the EU;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that substantial investment in AI and other key new technologies is required; calls for NextGenerationEU, as well as public and private funding, to increase investment in rights-compliant technologies with a concerted review mechanism to ensure transparency and a full, publicly available prior fundamental rights impact assessment of all EU-funded technology investments so as to reflect the EU’s ambition of becoming a global technological leader and reaping the full benefits of digitalisation for all in society;

Amendment 55 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that substantial investment inand public-private cooperation are required in the field of AI and other key new technologies ~~is required~~; calls for NextGenerationEU, as well as public and private funding, to increase investment so as to reflect the EU’s ambition of becoming a global technological leader, developing its research and knowledge and reaping the full benefits of digitalisation;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers that substantial investment in AI and other key new technologies is required; calls for ~~NextGenerationEU, as well as~~ public and private funding, to increase investment so as to ~~reflect the EU’s ambition of becom~~strengthen and improve the EU’s standing at global ~~technological leader and reaping the full benefits of digitalisation~~level;

Amendment 57 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Considers that AI poses a special challenge for SMEs. The transition to AI solutions shall benefit these companies to flourish and new legislation on the use of AI shall not create such a complexity and bureaucracy jeopardising their competitiveness in the market;

Amendment 58 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 59 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas digitalisation has the potential to add significant value to the single market as a whole, and is important for both European consumers as well as traditional and non-traditional sectors;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to ensure wider coordination of investment in the NextGenerationEU recovery plan; calls on the Commission to propose concrete actions within this plan to support key digital enablers and high impact technologies in the EU such as artificial intelligence, high performance computing, quantum computing, cloud infrastructure, platforms, smart cities, 5G and fibre infrastructure;

Amendment 61 #

Jordi CAÑAS, Svenja HAHN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen their support to start-ups and Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMS), via the Single Market Programme, Digital Innovation Hubs and the Recovery and Resilience Facility, in the development and application of digital technologies, in order to further drive digital transformation and thus enable them to fully develop their digital potential and competitiveness for growth and jobs in Europe;

Amendment 62 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that there is a significant lack of European venture and seed capital, as well as of private equity funding, when compared to ~~its two biggest competitors; believes that this both prevents the EU from realis~~other markets; considers that this often leads European start-ups to scale-up ing th~~e full potential benefits of new technology, and also hinders the EU from influencing the globa~~ird country markets rather than expanding in the EU; believes that this prevents the wider European economy from gaining as many spill gover~~nance of new and emerging technologies~~ benefits from ventures originating in Europe; calls on the Commission and the Member States to propose a comprehensive European approach to ~~increas~~broaden the sources of capital for technological investments in the EU, including initiatives to support angel investing by European private sector leaders;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that there is a significant lack of European venture and seed capital, as well as of private equity funding, when compared to its two biggest competitors; believes that this both prevents the EU from realising the full potential benefits of new technology, and also hinders the EU from influencing the global governance of new and emerging technologies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to propose a comprehensive European approach to increase sources of capital for technological investments in the EU as well as to ensure the availability of venture and seed capital for European companies and start-ups;

Amendment 64 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Regrets, that the Digital Europe programme as well as the Horizon Europe and Connecting Europe programmes do not dispose over higher budgets; urges the Commission to ensure that these programmes are deployed as soon as possible;

Amendment 65 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to work to position the EU as leader in the adoption and standardisation process for new technologies; highlights the need to work with standardisation organisations, industry and also with international partners on setting global standards; considers the use of CEN Workshops Agreement in specific areas, such as AI and new emerging technologies, as a way to increase efficiency in creating harmonised standards;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to work to position the EU as leader in the adoption and standardisation process for new technologies ensuring that “AI made in Europe” is based on European values and norms in order to promote not only economic development but especially social welfare; highlights the need to work with industry and also with international partners on setting global standards;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to work to position the EU as leader in the fundamental rights compliant adoption and standardisation process for new technologies; highlights the need to work with ~~industry and also with~~ international partners on setting global standards;

Amendment 68 #

Svenja HAHN, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Andrus ANSIP, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Sandro GOZI, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jordi CAÑAS, Claudia GAMON, Ivars IJABS, Karen MELCHIOR, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to work to position the EU as leader in the adoption and standardisation process for new technologies; highlights the need to work with industry and also with international partners on setting global standards; in this regard, welcomes the Commission’s proposal from December 2020 for a new transatlantic agenda, which highlights the importance of cooperating with the US on technology and standards;

Amendment 69 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to work to position the EU as leader in the adoption and standardisation process for new technologies; highlights the need to work with industry and also with international partners on setting global standards, which should be the first preference when standard setting in the digital single market, given the global nature of technology leadership and development;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas a dismantling of online and offline rules in the European Single Market and the DSM, respectively, has to be prevented at all costs and whereas the principle “what is illegal offline is illegal online” has to be respected;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Stresses that enabling sharing and access to essential and well-defined data sets will be key to fully unlock the potential of the Green Deal; calls on the Commission to assess which datasets are essential for the ecological transition in the context of sustainable products and services, inter alia in product manufacturing, transportation, carbon, energy and biodiversity impact, as well as their end-of life handling; calls on the Commission to consider extending the scope of the high value datasets defined in Directive(EU) 2019/1024 on Open Data to private actors;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Believes that there is an urgent need to incentivise access to the data that is currently locked in the private sector, while ensuring that the use of public money always result in public data; in that regard, calls for the establishment of a “public money, public data” principle and call for incentives meant to give SMEs access to non personal data produced by other private stakeholders in a voluntary and mutually benefiting process;

Amendment 72 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of control over data, with clear and balanced rules on intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important; considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 74 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of control over data and maintain the highest standards of protection for personal data, with clear and balanced rules on intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of control over data, with clear and balanced rules on inter alia intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important;

Amendment 76 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of consumers’ control over data, with clear and balanced rules on intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of control over data, with clear and balanced rules on intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important; supports the Commission’s aim to address unjustified obstacles to international non-personal data flows as well as the restrictions European companies sometimes face in third countries;

Amendment 78 #

Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Virginie JORON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Underlines that private operators generate, collect and process a significant amount of data in connection with the provision of services of general interest or when carrying out tasks that are co- financed by public funds; stresses that, given their importance and high value for society, such data should be made available free of charge for re-use in the general interest, while guaranteeing a high level of personal data protection;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Stresses the need to require that Europeans’ data be processed and hosted on EU territory and in accordance with EU law;

Amendment 8 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Brando BENIFEI, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the digital transition requires increased investment in key enablers of the digital economy and coordination with Green transition policies;

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act proposed by the Commission; believes that this should contribute to supporting innovation, and removing unjustified and disproportionate barriers and restrictions to the provision of digital services while improving consumer protection;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. WBel~~comes~~ieves that the Digital Services Act ~~proposed by the Commission; believes that this~~ should contribute to supporting innovation, and removing unjustified and disproportionate barriers and restrictions to the provision of digital services while improving consumer protection;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the Digital Services Act proposed by the Commission; believes that this should contribute to supporting innovation, ~~and removing unjustified and disproportionate barriers and restri~~guaranteeing a high level of consumer protection~~s to~~ and the improv~~ision of digital services while improving consumer protection~~ement of users’ rights, trust and safety online;

Amendment 83 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls for further support for European trade competition regulation making sure that European market will be active, highly competitive and resistant to foreign take overs; considers that further support is needed on screening procedures for further investment, with special scrutiny to be given to take overs of technological companies including SMEs and start-ups;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Outlines that consumer protection should play an important role in the Digital Services Act and is convinced that transparency and due diligence for online marketplaces would enhance the safety of products and therefore strengthen the trust of consumers in online marketplaces;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes the New Consumer Agenda proposed by the Commission, and encourages the Commission to update consumer protection legislation, where appropriate, to take better account of new technologies and potential consumer harm; considers it important that we empower European consumers to play an active role in the digital transition and that when consumers are reassured that their rights will be protected in all circumstances there is an increase in trust and adoption of digital technologies;

Amendment 87 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Welcomes the New Consumer Agenda proposed by the Commission, and encourages the Commission to update consumer protection legislation, where appropriate, to take better account of new technologies and potential consumer harm, especially for the most vulnerable groups and considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Recalls that the geo-blocking of online services constitutes a significant barrier to the Single Market, a derogation from the European economic freedoms on which the EU integration is based and an unjustified discrimination between European consumers; notes the Commission’s first short-term review of the Geo-blocking Regulation and urges the Commission to continue its assessment with a pro-consumer approach and to consider proposing follow-up appropriate measures to approach the problems related to copyright-protected content such as audio-visual, music, e-books, and games;

Amendment 89 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Highlights that the sharing of data should be used to enhance competition; emphasises the need for adequate safeguards against market failures on data markets; suggests that the Commission takes advantage of the review of horizontal and vertical competition guidelines to introduce new tools to counter excessive market concentration, inherent to data markets, including, inter alia ongoing monitoring for at-risk- markets and, where necessary, ex-ante regulation;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas artificial intelligence (AI) can offers many benefits but also presents certain risks;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Reiterates European principles on the ownership of individuals of their own personal data and explicit, informed consent which is necessary before using personal data as enshrined in the GDPR; points out that consent implies that individuals understand for which purpose their data will be used and that entities using personal data in algorithms have a responsibility for ensuring this understanding;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Welcomes the New EU’s Cybersecurity Strategy for the Digital Decade, which is indispensable to secure citizens’ trust and fully benefit from innovation, connectivity and automation in the digital transformation, while safeguarding fundamental rights, and calls for the effective and speedy implementation of the measures outlined;

Amendment 92 #

Jordi CAÑAS, Svenja HAHN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Calls on the Member States to implement without delay the European Accessibility Act, in order to effectively remove barriers for citizens with disabilities and ensure the availability of accessible digital services, as well as the suitability of the conditions under which they are provided, with the objective of achieving a fully inclusive and accessible Digital Single Market that ensures the equal treatment and the inclusion of people with disabilities; recalls the possibility of Member States and encourages the extension of the application of the Directive on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies to areas that are open for public use, especially in the health, transport, postal or telecommunications sector1a; __________________ 1aDirective(EU) 2016/2102 of 26 October 2016 on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies, par. 34.

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Calls to avoid encouraging a business model based on restricting access to data and knowledge, which is especially harmful to SMEs; therefore cautions against pushing for new IPR limitations and the use of trade secrets as a barrier, while advocating for removing restrictions on databases and ensuring that public data maintains its open character and cannot be privatised; reminds that according to the first evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases, the introduction of a new “sui generis right” has led to a decrease in the production of European produced databases; therefore encourages the Commission to repeal Directive 96/9/EC;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Notes that the EU must pay attention in the way in which data are stored and processed. Integrity of data must also be protected and the reading of data must not lead to oppression or discrimination;

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Strongly believes that AI can be a force for good for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, ~~security,~~ education, healthcare, transport and the environment; believes the s~~ecuri~~afety, inclusiveness, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of AI- driven products and services need to be ensured insofar as it ensures that people will not be harmed by its development and use, and that its benefits are enjoyed equitably across society;

Amendment 96 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Andreas SCHIEDER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Tsvetelina PENKOVA, Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Maria GRAPINI, Marc ANGEL, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ, Christel SCHALDEMOSE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Strongly believes that AI ~~can be a force for good~~has the potential to improve certain areas for ~~all~~ European citizens, and offer ~~significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environment~~benefits for the economy; believes the security, ~~inclusiveness~~non- discrimination, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of AI-driven products and services need to be ensured;

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Strongly believes that AI can~~Is of the view that AI can, if developed adequately, be a force for good for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environment; believes the security, inclusiveness, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups ~~in vulnerable situations,~~of consumers considered as vulnerable of AI- driven products and services need to be ensured;

Amendment 98 #

Marion WALSMANN, Deirdre CLUNE, Edina TÓTH, Pablo ARIAS ECHEVERRÍA, Pascal ARIMONT, Maria da Graça CARVALHO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Strongly believes that AI can be a force for good for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environment; believes the safety, security, inclusiveness, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of AI- driven products and services need to be ensured;

Amendment 99 #

Alessandra BASSO, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Virginie JORON, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Markus BUCHHEIT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Strongly b~~Believes that AI can ~~be a force for good~~play a positive role for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environment; believes the security, inclusiveness, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of AI- driven products and services need to be ensured;

source: 663.012

2021/02/01 INTA 59 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the European Union needs to take urgent steps to close the gap with the US and China to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive data- driven global economy; notes that the Union should close a bilateral investment agreement with the Republic of China (Taiwan) and look for measures to help citizens from Hong Kong to settle in the Union as a way to ensure their social, civic and political rights; considers that the Commission should review export controls in case they apply to the Xinjiang province in order to ensure the Union is doing all it can to prevent the exports of goods that may contribute to human rights abuses in that province; stresses that this review should determine which additional specific products will be subject to export controls in the future;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and ~~calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be conclud~~for the sustainable opening of markets in order to deliver concrete benefits to companies, consumers and workers; calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be concluded and the WTO Information Technology Agreement, its expansion and the WTO Telecommunications Services Referenced Paper to be fully implemented and more widely adopted; regrets that, in the absence of global rules, EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; notes that these barriers are particularly challenging for SMEs; regrets that in the absence of global rules consumer protection is inadequate; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to ~~be concluded; regret~~achieve meaningful progress towards a balanced outcome, underlines that, in the absence of properly designed global rules, EU companies armay be faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified geo-blocking, data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; ~~supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent~~underlines that electronic data represents a key economic ‘raw material’ or the digital transitions and that it is thereby crucial to provide clarity regarding the definition of electronic transmissions and to ensure the respect of the principle of technological neutrality according to which rules of import and export should remain the same irrespective of the technology;

Amendment 12 #

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Svenja HAHN, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Jordi CAÑAS, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Urmas PAET, Nicola DANTI, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Samira RAFAELA, Jérémy DECERLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. SNotes the risks of incompatibility between approaches of different trading partners when it comes to the regulation of digital trade; strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be concluded as a matter of urgency; regrets that, in the absence of global rules, EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent; calls for the EU to further work with partners, for instance within the OECD and WTO, to set global standards for AI, in the interest of reducing trade barriers and promoting trustworthy AI in line with the EU's values;

Amendment 13 #

Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be concluded; the realization of the free flow of data with trust is also crucial; in doing so, bilateral/regional regulatory cooperation, such as promoting mutual recognition, could complement the future WTO scheme, taking into account the level of personal data protection under each domestic law; regrets that, in the absence of global rules, EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent;

Amendment 14 #

Svenja HAHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be concluded; regrets that, in the absence of global rules, EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent; calls on the Commission to carefully assess the impact of a source code clause currently discussed in the e- commerce negotiations on WTO level on future EU AI legislation and to involve the European Parliament in this assessment;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Strongly supports~~Emphasises that the European Union can accept no multilateral solutions for digital trade rules ~~and~~without firm guarantees such as those callsed for by the ~~plurilateral WTO negotia~~European Parliament after completing its work on the introductions o~~n e-commerce to be concluded; regrets that, in the absence of global rules,~~f an ethical framework for artificial intelligence, rules on civil responsibility, respect for intellectual property and regulatory measures for digital services which protect consumers; deplores the fact that EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade, such as ~~unjustified data localisation and~~ mandatory technology transfer ~~requirement~~s; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be concluded; regrets that, in the absence of global rules, EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent; considers that digitalization greatly benefits supply chains and trade;

Amendment 17 #

Bernd LANGE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. points out the importance of establishing disciplines prohibiting forced transfer of intellectual property rights in the form of source codes; underlines in this regard in the case of AI the need for a clear definition of source code and its distinction from algorithms; points out the importance of ensuring auditing and systemic risk assessment of algorithms

Amendment 18 #

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Svenja HAHN, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Jordi CAÑAS, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Urmas PAET, Nicola DANTI, Samira RAFAELA, Jérémy DECERLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. NStresses the centrality of data flows to digital trade, and that apart from being a means of production, data itself has become a tradable asset; notes that data access and processing are often indispensable to providing competitive digital services, notably in AI; calls on the Commission to adopt digital trade rules that increase the competitiveness of EU business and facilitate the free ~~transfer of data flows~~flow of non- personal data across borders while respecting EU data protection rules; highlights that in line with the GDPR, personal data can be transferred to third countries via adequacy decisions, standard contractual clauses and binding corporate rules; calls for data protection considerations to be raised in future trade agreements, with the aim to facilitate the adequacy decision process with trading partners;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that data access and processing are often indispensable to providing competitive digital services; calls on the Commission to adopt digital trade rules that increase the competitiveness of EU business and facilitate the free transfer of data flows across borders while ~~respecting EU data protection rule~~ensuring EU data protection and privacy rules are respected; supports the principle that data should be allowed to flow across borders provided that appropriate legal transfer tools for the protection and security of personal data can be put in place by parties; calls for unjustified data localisation practices to be robustly banned in the WTO e- commerce agreement and in EU FTAs;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the European Union needs to take urgent steps to promote its digital transformation in order to facilitate its recovery from the COVID pandemic, increase its resilience to overcome challenges in the future, and to close the gap with the US and China to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive data- driven global economy;

Amendment 20 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that ~~data access and processing are often~~respect for privacy and data protection are indispensable to providing competitive digital services and to winning back consumer trust; calls on the Commission to adopt digital trade rules that increase the competitiveness of EU business ~~and facilit~~while respecting EU data protection rules; points out thate the ~~free transfer of data flows across borders while respecting EU data protection rules~~Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that enterprises operating from third countries must offer the same level of protection as enterprises operating in the Union;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 22 #

Maximilian KRAH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that data access and processing are often indispensable to providing competitive digital services, highlighting the need to develop quickly in the EU the 5G infrastructure which offers extra high speeds; calls on the Commission to adopt digital trade rules that increase the competitiveness of EU business and facilitate the free transfer of data flows across borders while respecting EU data protection rules;

Amendment 23 #

Roman HAIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that data access and processing are often indispensable to providing competitive digital services; calls on the Commission to adopt digital trade rules that ~~increase~~support the competitiveness of EU business and facilitate the free transfer of data flows across borders while ~~respecting EU data protection~~guaranteeing the enforcement of EU data protection, consumer protection standards and privacy rules;

Amendment 25 #

Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls for AI on trade systems to be technically robust in order for them not tobe used for harmful purposes to European trading interests; stresses that fundamental principles for the development of AI trade services is the consent of the user and her anonymity, without any mandatory nature of using contact-tracing applications; urges therefore for AI services to be user-based; urges the Commission to set up means to certify these services in order to prevent the proliferation of harmful contact- tracing applications; stresses that regional and local competences as regards to AI services, where existent, should be guaranteed and that notice-and-action mechanisms should be based on the principle of subsidiarity and therefore recognise these type of competences in order to guarantee that regional administrations do not lose competences;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Stresses that the most important impact of the blockchain is the facilitation of trade, providing a secure structure for the exchange of information and process structuring; considers that the added value of this technology is the creation of a trust framework where there is no single platform with a single administrator, where all actors involved are on the same level, and where decentralized control is blockchain's main basis; recalls that blockchain technologies may be beneficial for customs procedures, with high information exchange, more transparency, greater trust between partners; considers that blockchain technologies may also be beneficial for trade and sustainable development (TSD); regrets that the Union still lacks of a harmonised legal framework on the use of blockchain technologies in trade;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reminds the Commission that any proposal on the digital single market should fully respect the EU’s international obligations, including WTO and bilateral trade agreements; urges the Commission to fully assess the geopolitical and strategic implications of its proposals; urges the Member States and the Commission to promote interoperability between devices, applications, data repositories, services and networks, necessary to fully benefit from the deployment of information and communication technologies (ICTs), also used in the trade sector by its users;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reminds the Commission that any proposal on the digital single market should fully respect the EU’s international obligations, including WTO and bilateral trade agreements; urges the Commission to fully assess the geopolitical and strategic implications of its proposals; considers that the EU should remain a role model in terms of an open rules based data economy, and promote the sharing of data between the EU and third countries;

Amendment 3 #

Roman HAIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the European Union needs to take urgent steps to close the gap with the US and China to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive data- driven global economy, but also to be able to really influence important areas like data security and data protection which is a crucial topic when dealing with artificial intelligence;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reminds the Commission that ~~any~~its proposals on the digital single market should fully respect the EU’s international obligations, including WTO and bilateral trade agreements; urges the Commission to fully assess the geopolitical and strategic implications of its proposalsand artificial intelligence, which are consistent with the stance adopted in a number of own-initiative reports adopted by Parliament by a large majority in 2020, cannot and must not fully respect WTO agreements and that our bilateral trade agreements will have to be modified if the new rules are to be complied with to the full;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reminds the Commission that any proposal on the digital single market should fully respect the EU’s international obligations, including WTO and bilateral trade agreements; urges the Commission to fully assess the geopolitical and strategic implications of its proposalsPoints out that EU’s international obligations, including WTO and bilateral trade agreements should be interpreted, in consistency with the respect of fundamental rights and EU public policy objectives such as the right to privacy, data and consumer protection;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Welcom~~Notes the conclusion of the rules- based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP; believes that the ~~conclusion of the RCEP~~increased global weight of digital rules that are not in line with democratic principles, human rights and sustainable development should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the work towards the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council ~~and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade~~to foster Transatlantic cooperation on digital issues, including on export restrictions and FDI screening; supports in this regard the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to build stronger and broader consensus on principles of ethical AI and the governance of data and, within the framework of these principles, to foster innovation and sharing of data to develop AI; to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade; supports international regulatory and other cooperation between OECD countries on the digital economy, including the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence; encourages the EU to intensify work with the UN and international standards bodies;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region, integrates its supply chains, includes two of the world's three largest economies, harmonises rules-of-origin provisions, establishes a single set of regional content rules effectively creating a single market for immediate goods that will promote the creation and development of supply chains; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP and that it will provide modest demand boost for trade because most goods tariff reductions have already been provided for under existing trade agreements, while planned liberalisation of services trade is limited; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade; welcomes the new US Administration's new open stances with its European counterparts;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; ~~supports in this regard the~~takes note of the Commission and High Representative proposal to establish~~ment of~~ an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade; reiterates that the European Parliament must be an integral part in the negotiations on the Trade and Technology Council and be granted oversight in order to scrutinize the process as the only directly elected European Institution; urges the Commission to ensure a high level of transparency not only when negotiating trade rules but also when cooperating with third countries;

Amendment 35 #

Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter including commitments on environmental preservation and social rights in the RCEP; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade, ensuring a central role for the EU in the setting of those standards;

Amendment 36 #

Roman HAIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade; such a Transatlantic AI Agreement should also have a chapter dedicated to data security and data protection of users and consumers;

Amendment 37 #

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Svenja HAHN, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Jordi CAÑAS, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Urmas PAET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; ~~regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP;~~ believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and common standards in digital trade; calls on both parties to use the momentum of the new Biden administration to begin working on these issues urgently, and to find an agreement at the OECD on fair taxation for the digital economy;

Amendment 38 #

Enikő GYŐRI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Welcomes t~~The conclusion of the ~~rules-based Asian~~ Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set has created the largest economic integration in the world; this emphasises the importance for the EU to take the lead in setting global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Welcom~~Notes the ~~conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which d~~Commission's proposal to set up an 'EU-USA Trade and Technologies Council' and to start work on a Transatlantic Agreepmens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatt on Artificial Intelligence; calls on the Commission to focus on the development of a sound European regulatory framework consistent with our values and fundamental rights; emphasises that trade rules should never prevent regulatory authorities from enforcing legislanti~~c AI Agreement~~on on AI to the~~lp facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and standards in digital trade~~ letter; calls on the Commission to guarantee a high degree of transparency in the negotiations on trade rules;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the European Union needs to take urgent steps to close the gap with the US and China ~~to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive data- driven glob~~while promoting its model of an ethical data economy, founded in particular on respect for fundamental rights, consumer protection and measures to curb the market power of the actors which currently have a dominant position in the digital economy;

Amendment 40 #

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Svenja HAHN, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Jordi CAÑAS, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Samira RAFAELA, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Urmas PAET, Nicola DANTI, Jérémy DECERLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines the role of digital trade and the use of blockchain for instance in facilitating access to global value chains for SMEs and ~~contributing to women’s economic empowerment.~~ making cross-border trade processes and commercial transactions more efficient and less costly; Highlights in particular the benefits these could bring to contributing to women’s economic empowerment and also using blockchain to facilitate due diligence for companies; Calls for Digital Trade to be a pillar of the EU's new Trade Strategy; Further calls for Digital Trade Chapters to be included in all future FTAs;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines the role of digital trade in facilitating access to global value chains for SMEs ~~and~~, emphasizes that it should also contribut~~ing~~e to women’s economic empowerment.; points out that the use of open source is a path towards open and sustainable digital transformation, both through open source software and open hardware, progressing towards European strategic autonomy in the digital economy;

Amendment 42 #

Enikő GYŐRI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines the role of digital trade in facilitating access to global value chains for SMEs; a~~nd contributing to women’s economic empowerment~~s digitisation is indispensable to be competitive in global markets, calls on the Commission to find the way of supporting them in their digital transformation.

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines the role of digital trade in facilitating access to global value chains for SMEs, including in least developed countries, and contributing to women’s economic empowerment and their further inclusion.

Amendment 44 #

Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Notes that AI is embedded into a wide variety of systems and therefore it will expand available entry possibilities for malicious actors to exploit; therefore, it is necessary to promote cybersecurity by supporting industry-driven standards, guidelines and best practices to help companies manage their cybersecurity risks, considering the increasing of large- scale cyberattacks from non-EU countries aimed at misappropriating sensitive business information such as trade secrets and intellectual property, to which EU companies often are victims; notes that as a way to apply pressure on non- cooperative states, diplomatic action or economic retaliation could be considered; is of the view that an agreement within the OECD to not engage in commercial espionage against one another would also discourage other countries from taking actions.

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Underlines the importance of EU FTAs in promoting the interests and values of EU companies, consumers and workers in the global digital economy and sees them as being complementary to a competitive digital single market; welcomes the Digital Trade and Telecommunications chapters of the EU- UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement and considers them a benchmark for negotiations with other developed EU trading partners; calls on digital trade and telecommunications chapters to be included in all future EU FTAs;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Considers that the proposal for a Regulation on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (COM/2018/238 final) is a step towards a just level playing field for SMEs competing with large corporations in markets for digital services also implementing AI, and asks for its completion after being updated and aligned with the new Digital Strategy set up by the Commission in its Communication on Shaping Europe’s Digital Future of 19 February2020 (COM(2020)67 final);

Amendment 47 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Believes that practices that undermine consumer and data protection as well as labour rights such as facial recognition algorithms, technology- enabled surveillance, monitoring and control in the workplace, such as prediction and flagging tools, remote monitoring, time-tracking and algorithmic management should be avoided and that any future or updated trade agreement should ban transfers of data flows underpinning such practices;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Notes that production and trade depend on digital information being transported, stored and used across borders;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Underlines the importance of correcting existing imbalances and distortions in the global market that are hampering the growth of EU technology companies; calls on the Commission to continue working with the US, Japan and other like-minded partners on reforming the WTO rules on, inter alia, subsidies, forced technology transfers and state owned enterprises; underlines the need to better enforce existing trade and investment agreements, move towards reciprocity in some areas of trade and investment policy, and develop new EU regulatory frameworks, including a new instrument on foreign subsidies; considers it necessary to develop supportive conditions for EU technology companies with appropriate financing measures and export credits; supports developing safeguards in EU legislation and in trade agreements against anti- competitive behaviour of all actors in the digital value chain, including telecommunications;

Amendment 5 #

Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Svenja HAHN, Liesje SCHREINEMACHER, Jordi CAÑAS, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Urmas PAET, Nicola DANTI, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Samira RAFAELA, Jérémy DECERLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the European Union needs to take urgent steps to close the gap with the US and China to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive data- driven global economy and to become a leader in setting digital standards;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Asks the Commission to clarify the impact of the source code clause proposed in the context of current negotiations on electronic commerce at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) on EU digital policies, in particular as regards consumer rights, and meanwhile to withdraw such trade law clause since software source code already enjoys copyright and trade secret protection;

Amendment 51 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Notes that artificial intelligence, as well as distributed ledger technologies (DLT),are game-changer technologies in the field of trade, giving the possibility to assemble large amounts of data; stresses that the Union’s new Digital Strategy should embrace trade as a key sector that could revolutionise itself thanks to artificial intelligence;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Highlights the EU data strategy’s role in building its own single market for data through legislation, including the Data Governance Act and the forthcoming Data Act;

Amendment 53 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Underlines the fact that competitive access to data is of crucial importance for the development of AI technology, which will be increasingly important in several sectors in society; stresses therefore that researchers and businesses need to be given greater freedom to access and use data for AI development;

Amendment 54 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Urges Commission to transparently assess and ensure consistency of its trade proposals with internal policies especially in the field of regulation and oversight of AI and to ensure that EU policy space is preserved so that present and future regulatory endeavours as regards AI is not restricted through trade rules;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6 d. Draws attention to the legal unpredictability faced by AI technology developers because of inadequate coordination of data protection and ethics issues relating to AI at EU level; asks the Commission therefore to submit guidance for pre-approved data usage procedures, as well as for pseudonymisation and anonymisation, in order to increase legal predictability for AI technology developers; considers that national authorities should follow that EU guidance, when exercising their public authority, as a way of ensuring consistent regulatory compliance and removing obstacles to the functioning of the digital single market;

Amendment 56 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6 e. Recognises the ambition to make the EU a world leader in the development and application of AI and underlines the fact that the EU should position itself as a global leader in the development of ethical and legal norms and standards for the use of AI, potentially setting standards for the rest of the world;

Amendment 57 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)

6 f. Notes that SMEs are hardest hit by opaque bureaucracy and excessive regulatory burdens and, accordingly, underlines the fact that legislation needs to be simplified and clarified in order to promote the development and use by them of digital technologies, in particular AI;

Amendment 58 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Iuliu WINKLER, Gabriel MATO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 g (new)

6 g. Highlights the fact that the size of the single market constitutes the main potential for increased digital competitiveness and innovation in Europe and that therefore any fragmentation and any unwarranted border barriers to data flows, collaborative research and exports of digital goods and services between EU countries must be immediately eliminated so as to ensure that society reaps the full benefits of the EU market;

Amendment 59 #

Jörgen WARBORN, Massimiliano SALINI, Enikő GYŐRI, Danuta Maria HÜBNER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)

6 h. Encourages the Commission to evaluate the possibilities to facilitate data flows with strategically important third countries and strengthen the links to like- minded democracies and market economies in the area of data; especially crucial is the cooperation with the United Kingdom which has an important role in the global digital economy; encourages therefore the Commission to include the UK in the aspirations to create a seamless European single market for data; takes note in this regard of the grace period of 4+ 2 months for data transfers provided for in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and the UK, and encourages the Commission to urgently ensure continued data flows between the two partners, with respect for data protection rules as a precondition;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the European Union needs to take ~~urg~~long-term oriented steps to close the gap with the US and China to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive and sustainable data- driven global economy;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Underlines the need to develop infrastructures and technical solutions allowing the deployment of a digital transition consistent with the Paris Agreement and EU climate and environmental objectives and in particular with the 2030 targets and the zero net GHG emissions by 2050; calls thereby for the introduction of an EU digital sustainability index based on an analysis of product life cycles; points out that such index would contribute to the development of the EU toolkit to assess and further deploy Trade and Sustainability Chapters and related commitments and enforcement mechanisms;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Stresses that enabling sharing and access to essential and well-defined data sets will be key to fully unlock the potential of the Green Deal; calls on the Commission to assess which datasets are essential for the ecological transition in the context of sustainable products and services, inter alia in product manufacturing, transportation, carbon, energy and biodiversity impact, as well as their end-of life handling; underlines that future or updated trade deals should provide for specific mechanisms related to transfers and protection of such data sets;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Emphasizes the need to ensure that the digital transition reinforces open technologies, portability and interoperability; points out that updated and new trade deal should cover such objectives;

source: 680.842

2021/02/02 CULT 69 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that AI should be used in a fair and ethical manner and with due respect for Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity; notes that while AI offers great potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity, the manipulation of individual behaviour, violation of privacy, the identification/forecasting of sensitive identity traits and emotion, enabling of mass surveillance, the restriction of access to vital public services, and reinforcing structural discrimination; stresses that in view of commercial activities on online market places, self- regulation provided to be insufficient and therefore, asks the Commission to introduce strong safeguards and obligations for product safety and consumer protection for commercial activities on online market places, accompanied by a tailored liability regime with proper enforcement mechanisms;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Invites the Commission to launch an AI and robotics initiative in education; reiterates the need to update the Digital Education Action Plan in order to integrate AI and robotics innovation in education;

Amendment 11 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Morten LØKKEGAARD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Calls upon the creation of pan- European university’ and research’ networks focused on AI; reiterates the importance of easy accessible information about AI and underlines the importance of reinforcing the level of AI literacy; calls for enhanced studying and research on the impact of AI;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the crucial importance of a coherent vision at Union level in order to achieve a genuine digital single market within an AI-powered society that would fully benefit users; emphasises the need to offer learning and training opportunities in order to enable the Union population across all parts and ages of the society to gain basic digital skills and understanding of AI use and its potential and risks in order to use those technologies in their advantage and fully participate in digital market and society;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the crucial importance of a coherent ~~vision~~strategy at Union level in order to address the challenges of achieveing a genuine digital single market ~~within an AI-powered society that would fully benefit users~~; believes that AI must be human-centred and trustworthy in order to truly empower citizens and society as a whole;

Amendment 14 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the crucial importance of a coherent ~~vis~~regulation at Union level in order to achieve a genuine digital single market within an AI-~~power~~assisted society that would fully benefit uscitizens as users and consumers;

Amendment 16 #

Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the crucial importance of a coherent vision at Union level in order to achieve a genuine digital single market within an AI-powered society that would be secure and fully benefit users;

Amendment 17 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses th~~e crucial importance of~~at a coherent vision at Union level may be important in order to achieve a ~~genuine~~ digital single market within an AI-powered society that ~~would~~ must fully benefit users;

Amendment 18 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Loucas FOURLAS, Iuliu WINKLER, Peter POLLÁK, Milan ZVER, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Andrea BOCSKOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Underlines that the digital transformation affects the field of education, which is about to undergo the most substantial change since the introduction of compulsory education; stresses that, according to some estimates, 65% of children entering primary school today will ultimately end up working in new job types that do not yet exist; highlights that digital literacy is an essential skill and there is a need to ensure equal access to these skills as well as to digital equipment as highlighted by the COVID-19 related challenge of remote teaching and learning;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Emphasises the potential of AI- technologies for cultural and creative sectors and industries, from better audience management, outreach and engagement to assisted content curation revalorising cultural archives, as well as assisted fact-checking and data journalism; stresses further the potential of AI-based tools such as text-to-speech and speech-to-text, automated subtitling and translation to enhance access to culture, information and education for vulnerable groups such as visually and hearing impaired people;

Amendment 2 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that AI should be developed, deployed and used in a fair and ethical manner with a human centric approach and with due respect for Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression and information, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media freedom and pluralism and cultural diversity; underlines that the legal framework on AI requires the strict consideration of fundamental rights, ethical aspects and legal safeguards in order to protect our democratic societies and citizens as users and consumers of AI systems; emphasises that transparency and independent oversight are crucial in order to avoid all forms of abuse and to ensure the rule of law;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework that prioritises culture, education and sports, without discrimination, in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society; underlines the role of AI to preserve and boost the European culture and language diversity; underlines that data sets used by AI systems (both for training and operation) may suffer from the inclusion of inadvertent historic bias, incompleteness and bad governance models; stresses that the continuation of such biases could lead to unintended (in)direct prejudice and discrimination against certain groups or people, potentially exacerbating prejudice and marginalisation;

Amendment 21 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Morten LØKKEGAARD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework that prioritises culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society; calls upon the implementation of AI adapted initiatives for the cultural and creative sectors, in particular regarding cultural heritage and cultural tourism; calls upon the revision of the recommendations in order to integrate the cultural and creative sector and education as policy priorities on AI at Union level;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework that prioritises culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society; highlights that cooperation with creative and cultural sectors and industries can be invaluable in bringing AI innovation closer to the public and in finding creative solutions and possibilities for AI use;

Amendment 23 #

François-Xavier BELLAMY, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Deplores the omission of~~Attaches importance to factoring culture ~~from~~into AI strategies and policy recommendations at ~~both~~ national ~~and Union~~ level; stresses the need to ~~set up~~propose a clear legal framework within Member States that prioritises culture ~~in order to bring the Union~~, albeit with ratification and implementation of that framework to be under the sole discretion and responsibility of Member States, so that EU Member States can be brought to the forefront of AI-driven innovations and value creation worldwide and t~~o maximise its benefits, while assessing~~he benefits of AI are maximised, while at the same time assessing and factoring in its potential risks for society;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up, in association with all the relevant stakeholders including small and medium actors, a clear legal framework that prioritises culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society;

Amendment 25 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework ~~that prioritises~~for an ethical, sustainable and socially responsible AI that prioritises creativity and access to culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation ~~and~~, value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework that prioritises culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of technological development, AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Deplores~~Warns against the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework ~~that prioritises~~considering culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society;

Amendment 28 #

Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Hannes HEIDE, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Marcos ROS SEMPERE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls for the development, with Union and national funding, of training programs in AI for teachers across Europe in all field; recalls the special needs of VET education with regards to AI and calls upon a collaborative approach at European level designed to enhance the potential offered by AI in VET education across Europe;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Reminds that to be ethical, AI must be developed, deployed and used in a sustainable and socially responsible manner, including a gender equality strategy, cultural diversity, promoting digital literacy, closing the digital gap and safeguarding intellectual property rights;

Amendment 3 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Morten LØKKEGAARD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that ~~AI should be used in a fair and ethical manner and with due~~technologies using AI should by design be fair and ethical and respect ~~for~~ Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity; stresses that the Union must strive to become leader in ethical use of AI and must use it to the full potential in order to stay competitive and relevant on the world digital market; highlights that, to achieve this end, it is essential to encourage more people to pursue career in ICT-related sectors, such as data professionals in the AI field, but also professionals in connected new domains like AI-investing, AI safety and others, encouraging a wider activity of the EIT;

Amendment 30 #

François-Xavier BELLAMY, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Underlines the need for AI to be made widely available to the CCS across Europe in order to maintain a level- playing field and a fair competition for all stakeholders and actors in Europe;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that the transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) as well as Directive (EU) 2019/790, the Copyright Directive, into national law is crucial to achieving a genuine digital single market, which contributes to respect and promote cultural diversity; urges the Member States that have not yet done so to complete the transposition as soon as possible; stresses that the future Digital Services Act (DSA), Union data policies and any future regulation on AI, with particular regard to the cultural and creative sectors, should be in line with the principles and obligations of the AVMSD and the Copyright Directive; expresses major concerns in this regard on the European Commission’s recent consultation paper on the guidance for the application of Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, which contains certain aspects and elements of interpretation that may, if adopted as it is, have a detrimental impact on rightholders and creators and might consequently hamper a smooth functioning of Union copyright rules in the digital single market;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Emphasises that the~~Recommends that Member States review transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), into national law is crucial to achieving a genuine digital single market; urges the Member States that have not yet done so to complete the transposition as soon as possible; stresses that the future Digital Services Act (DSA) and any future regulation on AI, with particular regard to the cultural and creative sectors, should be in line with the principles and obligations of the AVMSD particular with regard to compatibility with the right to freedom of expression;

Amendment 33 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that the transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) into national law is crucial to achieving a genuine digital single market; urges the Member States that have not yet done so to complete the transposition as soon as possible; stresses that the future Digital Services Act (DSA) and any future regulation on AI, with particular regard to the cultural and creative sectors, should be in line with the principles and obligations of the AVMSD and should respect the broad framework of fundamental European rights of users and consumers, such as the protection of privacy, data, non-discrimination, dignity, fairness and free speech;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that the transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) into national law is crucial to achieving a genuine digital single market; urges the Member States that have not yet done so to complete the transposition as soon as possible; stresses that the ~~future~~ Digital Services Act (DSA) ~~and~~, the Digital Markets Act (DMA) as well as any future regulation on AI, with particular regard to the cultural and creative sectors, should be in line with the principles and obligations of the AVMSD;

Amendment 35 #

Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that the transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) into national law isand its proper implementation are crucial to achieving a genuine digital single market; urges the Member States that have not yet done so to complete the transposition as soon as possible; stresses that the future Digital Services Act (DSA) and any future regulation on AI, with particular regard to the cultural and creative sectors, should be in line with the principles and obligations of the AVMSD;

Amendment 36 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points out that algorithmic filters which, before or during the uploading of content, carry out an automated check on files to be uploaded and, on the basis of hash values, prevent publication of impermissible content in the first place - upload filters - are virtually unmanageable in practice, must therefore be rejected on principle and in any case are not mandated by law, since freedoms are ultimately undermined by attempts to use technology to rule out infringements of the law or make them impossible;

Amendment 37 #

François-Xavier BELLAMY, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Reminds that AI relies on the mass collection of data to operate; emphasises the importance of designing any future AI policy framework that ensures high levels of protection of personal data which must be processed fairly, in a non- discriminatory manner and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned; recalls that any automated algorithmic decision-making necessitates transparency and accountability with due respect of the rights and responsibilities of all relevant actors;

Amendment 38 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Morten LØKKEGAARD

4 a. Urges the Union to take steps to prevent or mitigate associated risks by the negative effects of AI and to set concrete and applicable baseline standards and rules, specifically in the sensitive area of AI systems in law enforcement, such as facial recognition software;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Highlights that the digital services sector is rapidly developing and therefore stresses the need to ensure that new regulations will not impede the openness of its market; stresses that the principle of net neutrality has to remain the cornerstone of the online sphere;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that AI should be used in a fair and ethical manner ~~and~~; stresses the need to ensure an appropriate ethical and legal framework with due respect for Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism ~~and~~, cultural ~~diversity~~and national diversity; emphasises that what is illegal offline must also be illegal online;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Believes that such a framework should be based on transparency, explainability, when relevant, accountability and the rights and obligations of the GDPR – including data minimisation, purpose limitation and data protection by design and by default;

Amendment 41 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Ilana CICUREL, Morten LØKKEGAARD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4 c. Stresses that the DSA should introduce a tailored liability regime with proper enforcement mechanisms for commercial activities on online market places in order to guarantee consumer protection and product safety;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be an effective tool ~~for~~in helping to enforc~~ing~~e the rules on online content, such as illegal content or fake news, ~~through automated content filtering,~~ and can also be used to help to implement the ‘notice, take down and stay down’ mechanisms; stresses, however, that AIuse of AI, if not properly regulated, may pose challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism; warns that automated mechanisms to enforce rules online can lead to false positives and inhibit legitimate and fair use, such as critique, caricature, and others; stresses that any use of AI must strictly follow principles of transparency and have clear rules for accountability with an effective appeal mechanism against such a decision guaranteed;

Amendment 43 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be an effective tool for enforcing the rules on online content, such as identifying illegal content ~~or fake news, through automated content filtering,~~, disinformation or fake news and can also be used to implement the ‘notice, take down and stay down’ mechanisms; stresses, however, that AI may pose challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism and recalls in this regard, the need for AI to respect fundamental rights and Union law when developed, deployed and used in the Union; emphasises that human intervention is necessary to filter out disinformation in order to avoid inappropriate removals e.g. when humour or irony are expressed, since AI-systems cannot evaluate the context;

Amendment 44 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be an effective tool for enforcing the rules on online content, such as illegal or harmful content or fake news, through automated content ~~filtering~~identification, and can also be used to implement the ‘notice, take down and stay down’ mechanisms; stresses, however, that ~~AI may pose challenges to~~a decision to remove or block content is always an encroachment on communication freedoms that has fundamental rights, i~~n particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism~~mplications, meaning that the decision itself must always be taken by a person, in particular since AI is still unable to reliably place content in discursive contexts;

Amendment 45 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Loucas FOURLAS, Iuliu WINKLER, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Peter POLLÁK, Milan ZVER, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Ioan-Rareş BOGDAN, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Christian EHLER, Andrea BOCSKOR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be an effective tool for enforcing the rules on online content, such as illegal content or fake news, through automated content filtering, and can also be used to implement the ‘notice, take down and stay down’ mechanisms; stresses, however, that AI may pose challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism; points out that the digital single market should be driven by the principle that "what is illegal offline is also illegal online";

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be a~~n effective~~ dangerous tool for cenfsorcing ~~the rules on~~ online content, ~~such as illegal content or fake news, through automated content filtering~~for example where a political decision has been taken to automatically filter content that is declared illegal or declared to be 'fake news', and can also be used to implement the ‘'notice, take down and stay down’' mechanisms; stresses, however, that AI ~~may~~ought to pose challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media and opinion pluralism;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be an effective tool for enforcing the rules on online content, such as illegal content or fake news, through automated content filtering, and can also be used to implement the ‘notice, take down and stay down’ mechanisms; stexpresses, however, concerns that AI may pose challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism;

Amendment 48 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that AI can be a~~n effective tool for~~ tool to help enforcing the rules on online content, such as illegal content ~~or fake news~~, through automated content f~~iltering, and~~lagging, which can also be used to implement the ‘notice~~, take down and stay down’~~ and action' mechanisms; stresses, however, that AI ~~may~~ poses significant challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism;

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Highlights, that for the European digital market to flourish and to enable effective and ethical AI, vast amounts of quality, compatible data is needed while upholding all privacy rules; emphasises that lack of data specialists and professionals may lead to flawed interpretation of data, which can create biases and skewed results;

Amendment 5 #

Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that AI should be appropriately and clearly regulated, as well as used in a fair and ethical manner and with due respect for Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Considers it necessary to end the “attention- seeking” profiling business model of digital markets, where algorithms prioritise controversial content and thus contribute to its spread online; stresses thus, that users should have more control on how rankings are presented, e.g. by giving them the choice to arrange them alternatively;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Reminds that Article 13 of Charter of fundamental rights in the EU on Freedom of the arts and sciences states that the arts and scientific research must be free of constraint and that academic freedom must be respected; recalls the violation of artistic freedoms in Europe summarised in "the state of artistic freedom 2020" report;

Amendment 52 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Insists that comprehensive information that is understandable to the user be provided as to when AI is used, how it works and how decisions based on it can be challenged; points out furthermore that, per se, AI-delivered results serve only as a pointer, but never as hard evidence;

Amendment 53 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Morten LØKKEGAARD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Notes that large platforms acquired a huge amount of data and replaced services of a diverse and decentralised system with open standards by “walled gardens” with locked- in users; stresses that as a consequence some markets are characterised by large platforms with significant network effects which are able to act as de facto “online gatekeepers” of the digital economy; considers it therefore necessary to introduce additional obligations regarding data protection, transparency, user choice and interoperability in order to guarantee a level playing field and consumer welfare;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. CStresses that the Union needs to strive for unified, unambiguous and up to date rules that do not humper the innovation in the internal market; calls, therefore, for a balanced approach between the deployment of automated enforcement and fundamental rights, in line with the applicable regulatory framework, such as the AVMSD, the Copyright Directive and the future DSA.

Amendment 55 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for a ~~balanced approach between the deployment of automated enforcement and fundamental rights,~~human- centric and careful approach towards automated decision-making, by all means respectful and protective of fundamental rights and ethical aspects, and which is in line with the applicable regulatory framework, such as the AVMSD, the Copyright Directive and the ~~future DSA.~~DSA package;

Amendment 56 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for a ~~balanced~~n approach ~~between the deployment of automated enforcement and~~respecting fundamental rights, and in line with the applicable regulatory framework, such as the AVMSD, the Copyright Directive and the future DSA.

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Recalls the urgent need for fairer competition for CCSIs online services in Europe in order to counter the networking and concentration effects of the data market that tend to unfairly benefit large digital companies; welcomes, in that respect, the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA) Commission proposals of 15 December 2020 that should help to further shape the digital future of Europe.

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Recalls that the Member States and the EU institutions have an obligation, under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights, to ensure that each person’s rights to privacy, data protection, free expression and assembly, non- discrimination, dignity and other fundamental rights are not unduly restricted by the use of new and emerging technologies;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Calls on the Commission to support public trust in AI by providing clear, regulatory limits to uses of AI which inherently undermine fundamental rights and the protection of the environment;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that AI ~~should~~must be used in a fair and ethical manner and ~~with due respect for~~on the basis of mandatory compliance with Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States for the surveillance of all workers, artists, athletes and students to be prevented;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6 d. Highlights that it is important for the Union to guarantee a high degree of control over data and maintain the highest standards of protection for personal data;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)

6 f. Reiterates European principles on the ownership of individuals of their own personal data and explicit, informed consent, which is necessary before using personal data as enshrined in the GDPR; points out that consent implies that individuals understand for which purposes their data will be used and that entities using personal data in algorithms have a responsibility for ensuring this understanding;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)

6 h. Notes that the Union must pay attention in the way in which data are stored and processed; stresses that the integrity of data must also be protected and the reading of data must not lead to oppression or discrimination;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 i (new)

6 i. Believes that it is vital that the upcoming EU regulatory proposal establishes in law clear limitations as to what can be considered lawful uses of AI and must legally restrict uses and deployments of AI which unduly infringe upon access to social, cultural, linguistic rights and benefits;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)

6 j. Highlights that the main purpose of AI must be to provide more ecological and effective alternative to current technology; stresses that AI and humans should collaborate in fulfilling the long- term goals of humankind - to create equal society based on indisputability of human rights and especially right to human dignity, while achieving balances relationship with nature; stresses that making the most advanced AI is not a goal for itself;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)

6 k. Highlights that beneficial innovation can only be achieved when we guarantee that uses are safe, legal, and do not discriminate; believes in the need to ensure democratic oversight and clear regulation before technologies are deployed;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 l (new)

6 l. Believes that consumers should be adequately informed, if requested in offline format, in a timely, impartial, easily-readable, standardised and accessible manner about the existence, process, rationale, reasoning and possible outcome of algorithmic systems, about how to reach a human with decision- making powers, and about how the system’s decisions can be checked, meaningfully contested and corrected;

Amendment 68 #

6 m. Believes that particular attention in AI literacy programs should be paid in all education levels;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 n (new)

6 n. Notes that those who own or operate inputs to AI systems and profit from it should be asked to help fund the development of AI literacy programmes for schools and universities.

Amendment 7 #

Radka MAXOVÁ, Irena JOVEVA, Vlad-Marius BOTOŞ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that AI should be used in a fair and ethical manner fully compliandt with ~~due respect for~~ Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses that according to the Centre for Data Innovation, the Union, while being very good in academic sphere, falls behind in the global AI race, especially in commercial AI adoption and funding; highlights that a general distrust and a lack of deep understanding of the risks and the benefits of the AI technologies further reduces the societal demand and therefore the development of those technologies; calls on the Member States in this regard, to invest into the awareness activities related to the AI technologies;

Amendment 9 #

Hannes HEIDE, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Łukasz KOHUT, Victor NEGRESCU, Pina PICIERNO, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls that the digital future of Europe must be socially inclusive and must leave no one behind; expresses, in this respect, concerns about the discrepancies in access to information, education and jobs created by the digital gap; reiterates its call on the Commission and the Member States to diligently address this gap including through adequate investments in infrastructure, equipment and resources, as well as the implementation and assessment of the Digital Education Action Plan;

source: 680.859

2021/02/09 FEMM 65 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that women account for 30 % of the technology workforce and 17 % of ICT specialists in Europe, and that the EU economy would be boosted by EUR 16 billion a year if women technology graduates followed through to digital jobs at the same rate as men; stresses, however, it is only natural that men and women should have differing preferences and that striving for strict parity in professions is counterproductive;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Highlights that one of AI’s biggest weaknesses relates to conveying certain types of biases, such as the ones related to gender, as a result of humans’ inherent biases being reproduced and magnified through the design, input and use of AI systems; considers that AI has great potential to promote gender equality provided that the transformation of human biases and prejudices into digital ones through algorithms is fought and this requires high data quality standards for the training and validation of AI systems;

Amendment 11 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Takes note that 30% of entrepreneurs, in the EU, are women, but they only receive 2% of the non-bank financing available1a, making it harder for them to participate in the digital economy; _________________ 1aFunding women entrepreneurs. How to empower growth. European Commission, 2018

Amendment 12 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1 e. Recalls that the ICT sector is the sector with the highest percentage of all- male company boards; and welcomes the Commission’s intention to encourage the adoption of the 2012 proposal for a Directive on gender balance among non- executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges (the Women on Boards Directive);

Amendment 13 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)

1 f. Stresses that the Fundamental Rights Agency’s survey on violence against women shows that high incidences of sexual harassment have been reported in STEM education sites, including in schools, universities and workplaces, which further excludes women from the sector;

Amendment 14 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that gender equality is a core principle of the European Union and should be reflected in all EU policies; recalls that women’s participation in the digital economy is crucial to shaping a flourishing digital society and to boosting the EU’s digital internal market; stresses that women's participation must be voluntary and be encouraged by raising awareness of training and jobs in the digital economy and of the opportunities that they represent, rather than by pursuing ideological objectives;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that gender equality is a core principle of the European Union and should be reflected in all EU policies; thus within the European digital transition, to acknowledge the fundamental role of women to achieve the European digital strategy goals in line with the gender equality objectives recalls that women’s participation in the digital economy is crucial to shaping a flourishing digital society and to boosting the EU’s digital internal market;

Amendment 16 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that gender equality is a core principle of the European Union and should be reflected in all EU policies; underlines the importance of ensuring gender mainstreaming in digital education at all levels; recalls that women’s participation in the digital economy is crucial to shaping a flourishing digital society and to boosting the EU’s digital internal market;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that ~~gender~~ equality is a core principle of the European Union and should be reflected in all EU policies; recalls that women’s participation in the digital economy is ~~crucial~~important to shaping a flourishing digital society and to boosting the EU’s digital internal market;

Amendment 18 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission to continue addressing the gender gap within the ICT sector and to establish policies to increase the participation of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and AI, and to advocate measures in education and employment in the digital sector in order to achieve this; points out, however, that policies involving quotas or positive discrimination run counter to the principle of meritocracy and undermine the legitimacy of the categories of people to whom they apply; takes the view that measures of this kind should not be introduced;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission to continue addressing the gender gap within the ICT sector and to establish policies to fully assess the causes and factors behind and to establish policies mechanisms and programmes to increase the participation of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and AI, and to advocate measures in education and employment in the digital sector in order to achieve this; to take into account AI from a gender perspective when developing policy and legislation, and, if necessary, adapt current legislation, including EU programmes;

Amendment 2 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that across all digital technology domains exists a gender gap putting women at a disadvantage, women account for 30 % of the technology workforce ~~and~~, 17 % of ICT specialists in Europe and only 12 % in the domain of AI , and that the EU economy would be boosted by EUR 16 billion a year if women technology graduates were not hindered from followeding through to digital jobs at the same rate as men;

Amendment 20 #

Monika VANA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Reiteratesthat harmful gender stereotypes, structural discrimination and negative workingand learning environments contribute to the exclusion of women and girls fromthe digital sector; Calls on the Commission to continue addressing the gender gap within the ICT sector and to establish policies to increase the participation of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and AI, and to advocate measures in education and employment in the digital sector in order to achieve this;

Amendment 21 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission to continue addressing ~~the gender gap~~women's participation within the ICT sector and to establish policies to increase the participation of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and AI, and to advocate measures in education and employment in the digital sector in order to achieve this;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Asks for, in what concerns measures in education, the Commission and the Member States to set up mentoring schemes with female role models in ICT within all levels of education starting from an early age; also calls on the Commission and the Member States to support lifelong learning, as well as training and schemes to boost the e- skills, upskilling and reskilling of girls and women;

Amendment 23 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on Commission and member states to apply multi-level approach to address the gender gap in all levels of digital education and employment, as well the access to the increasing online services and facilities; Stresses that closing the digital gender gap will increase gender equality not only for the labour market, but also through access to technologies and services;

Amendment 24 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Welcomes the Commission’s commitments to boosting the participation of women in the information society included in the Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, and calls on the Commission to ensure the full implementation of the ministerial Declaration of Commitment on ‘Women in Digital;

Amendment 25 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Asks for, in what concerns measures in employment, the Council to unblock and adopt the Woman on Boards directive; urges Member States to fully transpose and implement the work life balance directive; calls on the Commission and Member States to reduce the gender gap in the digital economy through targeted measures, including European funds to finance female-led projects in the digital sector, the promotion of a minimum number of women researchers participating in ICT projects, training courses for HR departments on ‘unconscious gender- discriminatory bias’ to promote gender- balanced recruitment, adoption of public procurement policies and/or guidelines on the purchase of ICT services from providers that apply a gender balance in the composition of their companies and boards, and facilitating the distribution of European funds to companies that take into account gender balance criteria;

Amendment 26 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Strongly supports the European Commission’s initiatives in raising awareness on digital opportunities such as the “ no women, no panel” approach, the EU Code week, , the “Digital skills and Jobs coalitions”, the “EU prize for women’s innovators”, #SaferInternet4EUinitiatives across Europe , the skills Agenda for Europe”- lifelong learning perspectives;

Amendment 27 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Recalls that the Covid pandemic has underlined the lack of access to internet, digital technologies and infrastructures in some rural areas making teleworking difficult if not impossible;

Amendment 28 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to increase financing opportunities for female entrepreneurs so that they have equal opportunities to compete in the digital single market, and for policies to unleash and support female’s entrepreneurial potential, as an untapped source of economic growth, innovation and jobs creation; Calls to further expand the European Business Angels Network and European Network of Mentors for Women Entrepreneurs, including through gatherings of female innovators, tech professionals and investors to encourage and boost innovations and funding for women-led firms;

Amendment 29 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Recalls that teleworking can be an opportunity for women by allowing them to work from home and has the potential to lead to a better work-life balance;

Amendment 3 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that women account for 30 % of the technology workforce and 17 % of ICT specialists in Europe, and that the EU economy would be boosted by EUR 16 billion a year if women technology graduates followed through to digital jobs at the same rate as men, and that promoting gender equality within the digital single market will contribute bridging the digital gender divide;

Amendment 30 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3 d. Calls on the Commission to assist member states to take the necessary steps to ensure that women can benefit from the opportunities telework can provide for an effective balance between paid professional and caregiving responsibilities by ensuring efficient implementation of the work-life balance directive in order to ensure a more equal distribution of caregiving responsibilities in families, as well as ensuring that women have access to the necessary social protection system and childcare;

Amendment 31 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3 d. Considers it to be of the utmost relevance, as additional measures, to have more women role models and to increase the number of women in leadership positions in the digital sector;

Amendment 32 #

Monika VANA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to promoting gender equality, provided that an appropriate legal framework is developed, conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated and the principles of gender equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, emphasises the need of having diverse teams of developers and engineers working alongside key societal actors to prevent gender and cultural biases being inadvertently included in AI algorithms, systems and applications; and the importance of using ~~sex-~~ gender-disaggregated data when developing products, AI standards, algorithms and applications;

Amendment 33 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to promoting gender equality, provided that an appropriate legal and ethical framework is developed, conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated and the principles of gender equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, and the importance of using sex- disaggregated data when developing products, AI standards, algorithms and applications; encourages the relevant actors to take action and promote a greater participation of women in the design, development and implementation of machine learning, natural language processing and AI;

Amendment 34 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to ~~promoting~~overcoming gender discrimination and address the challenges faced by women in order to promote gender equality, provided that an appropriate legal framework is developed, allowing for the elimination of conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated and the respect of the principles of gender equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, and the importance of using sex- disaggregated data when developing products, AI standards, algorithms and applications;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to promoting ~~gender equality~~women, provided that an appropriate legal framework is developed, conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated and the principles of ~~gender~~ equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, ~~and the importance of using sex-disaggregated data when developing products,~~ AI standards, algorithms and applications;

Amendment 36 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to promoting gender equality~~, provided that an appropriate legal framework is developed, conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated~~ and the principles of gender equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, and the importance of using sex- disaggregated data when developing products, AI standards, algorithms and applications;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to promoting gender equality, provided that an appropriate legal framework is developed, conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated and the principles of gender equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, and the importance of using sex- disaggregated data when developing products, AI standards, algorithms and applications; to ensure that it is developed in a way that respects and promotes equality;

Amendment 38 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Recalls the importance of eliminating unintentional gender discriminatory bias from algorithms and AI applications that perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes, favours the development of ‘gender-biased algorithms’, and lead to the reduced participation of women in the digital, AI and ICT fields; Stresses the need to address the gender innovation bias within the digital sector, whereby the designers and developers of services, software and user applications are mostly men and the users for a large amount are women;

Amendment 39 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Calls on the Commission to put forward a regulatory framework to address bias, unjustified discrimination and inequalities inherent in high-risk AI systems, including biometric systems; calls for more diversity through an intersectional approach and gender- balance among AI designers, and to ensure sufficient and qualified training to AI designers on the transparency, discrimination, gender stereotypes, racial, and ethnic origin and culture bias;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that women account for 30 % of the technology workforce and 17 % of ICT specialists in Europe, and that the EU economy would, according to expectations, be boosted by EUR 16 billion a year if women technology graduates followed through to digital jobs at the same rate as men;

Amendment 40 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Expresses concern that ~~the gender gap in digital skills puts~~ women are at a disadvantage in the emerging digital markets; stresses the importance of ~~empowering consum~~considering users, particularly women, through teaching basic ICT skills and launching awareness-raising campaigns in order to enable them to take full advantage of the benefits of the digital single market;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Highlights that structural gender- bias present in academia, research and business in the digital sectors slows down the career progression for women and reduces their career opportunities, results in an underrepresentation of women in the digital economy; calls on the Commission to ensure that such bias to the largest extent possible are countered during the funding, application and decision-making processes through the design of these as well as calls on the Commission to allocate more funding supporting females academics, researchers and entrepreneurs;

Amendment 42 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Highlights that a high level of STEM skills are critical to the process of innovation in cutting-edge ICT areas such as AI or cybersecurity, and will therefore be increasingly important to future the competitiveness of the European Union in global markets;

Amendment 43 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for special attention to be paid to ~~women as vulnerable~~the needs of women consumers and to the rise in cyber violence against women in the digital world, and ~~welcomes~~asks for the Commission’s proposal on the digital services act (COM(2020)0825)~~, which is addressing these issu~~ to address these issues; calls for campaigns to raise awareness and educate women in how to protect themselves online, and to combat gender-based violence and gender stereotypes; urges the Commission and the Member States to work closely with and involve women’s civil society organisations in order to better respond to and alleviate the concerns that exist in the everyday life of women and girls when designing and implementing consumer and public tech policies.

Amendment 44 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for special attention to be paid to women as vulnerable consumers and to the rise in cyber criminality and cyber violence against women in the digital world, that as a consequence is also deterring women and girls from an inclusive digital participation and welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the digital services act (COM(2020)0825), which is addressing these issues.

Amendment 45 #

Monika VANA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for special attention to be paid to women as ~~vulnerable consumers~~targets of harassment and to the rise in cyber violence against women in the digital world, impeding their ability to fully participate in digital markets and welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the digital services act (COM(2020)0825), which is addressing these issues.

Amendment 46 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for special attention to be paid to women and girls as vulnerable consumers and to the rise in cyber violence against women in the digital world, and welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the digital services act (COM(2020)0825), which is addressing these issues.

Amendment 47 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for special attention to be paid to ~~women as~~ vulnerable consumers and to the rise in cyber violence ~~against women~~ in the digital world, and welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the digital services act (COM(2020)0825), which is addressing these issues.

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Commission to exploit and better target the Digital Agenda and the Digital Single Market Strategy with a view to addressing the serious gender gap within the ICT sector and fostering the full integration of women into the sector, particularly in relation to technical and telecommunication professions, and to foster the education and training of women and girls in ICT and other science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects;

Amendment 49 #

Karen MELCHIOR, Samira RAFAELA, Radka MAXOVÁ, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ, Hilde VAUTMANS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Highlights that AI, especially AI- applications, can significantly reshape our images of gender and AI-designers modify AI-systems based on their own human perception and world of experience; highlights that the lack of diversity in the digital and AI sector can cause the lack of gender diversity also in the development and marketing of the digital services and AI-applications;

Amendment 5 #

Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. whereas women are significantly underrepresented in the information and communication technologies (ICT) sector (17%), among science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) graduates (36%), with the share of men working in a digital sector 3.1 times greater than the one of women, despite the fact that girls outperform boys in digital literacy1a; _________________ 1aA Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, COM/2020/152 final

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce and ensure the implementation of gender mainstreaming in the Digital Single Market Strategy with a view to effectively addressing the under- representation of women ingrowing sectors for the future EU economy.

Amendment 51 #

Maria da Graça CARVALHO, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Frances FITZGERALD, Cindy FRANSSEN, Christine SCHNEIDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support lifelong learning as well as training and schemes which help participants to adapt better or to prepare for a potential change of career path in accordance with the growing demand for digital skills in many different sectors, paying particular attention to elderly woman.

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Expresses concern that AI- applications, gaming industry and digital sound assistants are still mostly targeted to male consumers promoting heteronormative images of gender and the marketing often repeats and promotes conscious and unconscious gender biases and sexist images of women and girls and stereotypical images of minorities;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Expresses concern that digital voice assistants are mainly programmed as young women and that digital voice assistants have been shown to respond to messages comparable to sexual harassment often positively and that the programmed responses of voice assistants to sexual harassment repeats a sexist image of women;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6 d. Highlights that it is essential in the functioning of the digital single market and improving the use of AI that using digital services and AI-applications are safe also for women, girls and minorities; highlights that cyber violence and harassment remains a huge concern for consumers of online digital services and AI-applications, especially for women, girls and minorities;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6 e. Calls for the responsibility of the Commission, the Member States and the online digital service and AI industry to further develop safe spaces and to add possibilities to report online harassment for consumers when using their services and applications; Calls for binding legislative measures to combat cyber violence and to support Member States in the development of training tools for Digital services and AI developing industry;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)

6 f. Stresses the need for training for employers, workers and teachers in digital and AI-sectors to identify and correct gender-discriminatory practices in the workplace and in education, and training for employers, workers and teachers to identify and eliminate gender biases and sexism in the products and services they develop;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 g (new)

6 g. Highlights that achieving gender equality in the digital single market and in the use of AI for European consumers needs to be understand as a structural challenge in the society, that challenge can be tackled only by strong public policies and by binding legislation to compact discrimination based on gender and based on belonging to a minority group;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)

6 h. Calls on the Commission and Member States to support research aimed to identify and eliminate the causes of responses of digital voice assistants that underestimate the sexual harassment towards them and to end the practice of making digital voice assistants women by default and to encourage the development of gender-neutral voice assistants;

Amendment 59 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 i (new)

6 i. Highlights that during the Covid- 19 period people coming from the most vulnerable groups had been submitted to a double pressure due to the lack of access to digital services and been put in an even more precarious situation; stresses that the impact of teleworking on women and workers in general needs to be evaluated notably regarding working hours, lack of collective bargaining, isolation, separation between work and private life and psychological pressure;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses that gender stereotypes greatly influence study choices and hence, career choices: less than 3% of teenage girls in EU Member States express an interest in working as an ICT professional at the age of 301a; _________________ 1a2018 International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS)

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)

6 j. Highlights that new digital services and AI technology based consumer products have abled new possibilities to work from home and that working from home has put pressure on workers to work more flexible, have expanded working time beyond working hours and made difficult to separate work and private live; therefore stresses the workers’ rights to be disconnected to be respected;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)

6 k. Considers essential for the achievement of gender equality in the development, production, marketing and in the use of digital services and AI consumer products, applications and online-platforms to build a comprehensive education in schools and workplaces to recognize and eliminate gender biases in own behaviour and work;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 l (new)

6 l. Calls on Commission and the Member states to implement gender mainstreaming and develop indicators to measure the development of gender equality in all stages of work in the Digital services and AI industry to improve the use of digital services and AI for European consumers;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 m (new)

6 m. Calls on the Commission and the Member states to recognize the online harassment towards sole entrepreneur that are women and to take action to tackle this issue;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 n (new)

6 n. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that digital single market supply chains are based on fair trade and ensure gender equality; Calls on the Commission and the Member state to ensure enough resources to achieve this goal;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 o (new)

6 o. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to push forward binding legislation to make digital services and AI applications accessible and affordable to all, to improve operational life of digital and AI products and to make repairing of the digital and AI products accessible and affordable to all despite of their social background;

Amendment 7 #

Maria-Manuel LEITÃO-MARQUES, Evelyn REGNER, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Maria NOICHL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that women bring a different and constructive approach to the design, development and implementation of technologies;

Amendment 8 #

Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. whereas the use of full potential of women’s digital skills can contribute significantly to boosting the European economy, especially that there are around 1 million vacancies in Europe for digital experts, 70% of companies delaying investments because they do not find the people with the right digital skills1a and in some job categories, more than 90% of jobs require specific types of digital skills1b; _________________ 1a Commission report on the impact of demographic change, SWD(2020)109 final 1bEuropean Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience, COM(2020) 274final

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Recalls that globally only 22 % of AI professionals are female; whereas the lack of women in AI development not only increases the risk of bias, but also the risk that the products developed are not specially catered to the needs of female consumers;

source: 680.974

2021/02/11 AGRI 140 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas climate change is already having a significant impact on agriculture and is having an immediate impact on production, which could be mitigated through the use of artificial intelligence technologies and innovative tools;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

A b. whereas new technologies can boost the transition to a more sustainable agri-food sector in the EU, in line with the objectives of the European Green Deal;

Amendment 100 #

Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that the potential of AI technologies ~~can and~~ should be ~~used to improve~~assessed with a view to facilitating the traceability of products, including issues such as origin or production methods, in keeping with the interests of the European farming industry;

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products including issues such as origin or production methods, for both agricultural and forestry products;

Amendment 102 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products, such as an EU blockchain of food, including issues such as origin or production methods;

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used urgently to improve the traceability of products including issues such as origin or production methods;

Amendment 104 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies c~~an and sh~~ould be used to improve the traceability of products including issues such as origin or production methods;

Amendment 105 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that AI technologies must be promoted in order to maintain and actually improve agricultural productivity and sustainability, with an eye to the impact of climate change on agricultural practices; the introduction and application of these technologies will mean farmers having to acquire new skills and know-how, and there is hence a need to raise awareness and hold training courses at regional/local level, especially for small and medium-sized farms, where the use of digital technologies is not always viewed as profitable;

Amendment 106 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Calls on the respective authorities in the Member States to present and promote only AI technologies and studies, which are fully functional and completed, so that the agri-food community can benefit more from them without prejudice or assumptions vis-à-vis AI on a larger scale;

Amendment 107 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that digital innovation in agriculture can be a factor that contributes to generational renewal in the primary sector, attracting young people to the industry. In turn, it could help address rural depopulation;

Amendment 108 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries; however the Commission must take into full account the different level of preparedness of Member States by evaluating the CAP Strategic Plans;

Amendment 109 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries; calls on the Member States to reduce administrative burdens and any obstacles to the implementation of IA investments by developing fair and effective standards;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the ~~Farm to Fork strategy sets out to reduce the use of pesticides by 2030~~European Union has a responsibility to aid farmers reduce inputs, such as pesticides, AI could play a part in achieving this aim, which cwould ~~be assisted through the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologie~~not only improve soils, water quality but also reduce costs for farmers;

Amendment 110 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries and to offer independent advice on its use in order to improve resource efficiency and contribute to the targets of the Biodiversity and the Farm to Fork Strategies;

Amendment 111 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools ~~at affordable rates for beneficiarie~~, providing interested parties with all the information on the aid available (at European, national and regional levels) to develop digitisation projects;

Amendment 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States not to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries as long as ethical, responsibility and insurance questions have not been solved;

Amendment 113 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries; especially for young and small farmers and those in disadvantaged rural areas;

Amendment 114 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries, with training for farmers as an essential element of these measures;

Amendment 115 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Riho TERRAS, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the agriculture research and development as well as the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries;

Amendment 116 #

Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on all Member States to include in their common agricultural policy strategic plans and rural development plans measures to support the possibilities offered by the introduction and wider use of safe and reliable AI and innovative tools at affordable rates for beneficiaries;

Amendment 117 #

(1) Calls on Member States to develop education and training programmes that provide farmers with the skills to use digital tools;

Amendment 118 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls on the Member States to foresee resources for technological and material upgrade and renewal in the scientific bases, which work on or with AI, such as agricultural institutes, universities or other specialised bodies, with the aim of collecting more up-to-date and accurate data about the effect of AI on the plants, animals, soils, water among others;

Amendment 119 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Stresses that the benefits of AI technologies in the agri-food sector can only materialise and be fully harnessed if accompanied by appropriate capacity building measures and continuous training and provision of advices to farmers, agriculture workers and other operators throughout the food supply chain;

Amendment 12 #

Clara AGUILERA, Paolo DE CASTRO, Pina PICIERNO, Tonino PICULA, Ivo HRISTOV, Carmen AVRAM

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the Farm to Fork strategy sets out to reduce the use of pesticides by 2030, which could be assisted through the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, which can enable the creation of new tools to replace those pesticides that could pose a risk to human health, as well as favour a more limited use of them with precision agriculture;

Amendment 120 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls on the Commission to integrate precision farming as a key component in the Farm to Fork Strategy to enable full use of its potential for a sustainable management of resources and efficient food production;

Amendment 121 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Invites the Member States to develop specific data analysis tools, with a special focus on costs/benefits, to provide farmers with the information they need on digital technologies;

Amendment 122 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Believes that the European Union should enable more investments in order to become a competitive player in the field of digital and AI technology, specifically agriculture related technology;

Amendment 123 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls on the Commission to conduct extensive consultations with Member States, industry and academia on concrete proposals for an approach to the development and deployment of AI.

Amendment 124 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Calls on all Member States to mobilize structural funds in order to ensure the sustainability and growth of the pan-European ecosystem of agriculture-related Digital Innovation Hubs (DIHs), as mechanisms to promote and accelerate the adoption of IoT and AI technologies in agriculture;

Amendment 125 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to include at least two representatives with an agricultural background and one representative with forestry background to the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (HLEG AI);

Amendment 126 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to include at least two representatives with an agricultural and land management background to the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (HLEG AI);

Amendment 127 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Member States to consider inclusion of more AI trainings and courses both as part of their general but also specialised agri-food focused higher education, but also any other appropriate level of education, as part of both formal and informal education in their respective constituencies;

Amendment 128 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to furnish the resources needed to establish and maintain a database, in all the official EU languages, of good practices relating to artificial intelligence in agriculture, so as to enable a quicker and more comprehensive exchange of experiences and improve processes in this area;

Amendment 129 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Calls the Member States with ANC to provide sufficient resources for research on use of AI in these areas in order to facilitate farmers there to make better use of the available resources;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the Farm to Fork strategy and the Biodiversity Strategy sets out to reduce the use of pesticides ~~by 2030, which could be assisted through~~, the losses of nutrients from fertilisers and the antimicrobials by 50% until 2030, which could be assisted through the digitalisation of agri-food sector and the use of artificial intelligence (AI)and internet of things (IoT) technologies;;

Amendment 130 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Calls on the European Commission to design and put in place a digital platform or a website dedicated to the AI developments in the EU agri-food sector;

Amendment 131 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on all Member States to include at least ~~one~~two experts, on agriculture and forestry respectively in the innovation hubs with a high degree of specialisation in AI, as proposed by the Commission in its White Paper of 19 February 2020 entitled ‘On Artificial Intelligence – A European Approach to excellence and trust’ (COM(2020)0065).

Amendment 132 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on all Member States to include at least one expert on agriculture and fisheries in the innovation hubs with a high degree of specialisation in AI, as proposed by the Commission in its White Paper of 19 February 2020 entitled ‘On Artificial Intelligence – A European Approach to excellence and trust’ (COM(2020)0065).

Amendment 133 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes the limited competition in the agriculture market for advanced digital services using AI technology; stresses that agri-food SMEs need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources, reducing digital imbalances in terms of capabilities and infrastructure, especially in smaller cities and rural and remote areas;

Amendment 134 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls on the EC to conduct thorough analyses on the use of data collecting and measuring and magnetic- and wave-based devices on the most commonly bred agricultural animals such as cattle, sheep, goat, pigs, poultry and bees, which will be crucial for the design and use of AI on EU level.

Amendment 135 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the competent national, regional and local authorities in the Member States to help initiate national and, where appropriate, regional and local digital agriculture hubs;

Amendment 136 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Believes that agriculture technology and knowledge must be shared within the Member States in order to tackle challenges ahead together.

Amendment 137 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Stresses the need to ensure stable and adequate funding for the process of building digital infrastructure for agricultural sector, including the development of the 5G network; notes that a 5G network will provide the speed, less delays in responding to upcoming challenges and connectivity to enable a new generation of services and business opportunities for agriculture;

Amendment 138 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Draws attention of the exorbitant cost of different digital solutions available in the market for farming; notes that open source platform make the solutions more affordable, resulting in rapid adoption and higher penetration among the farmers; calls for all Union public procurement processes and funding programmes to include open data access requirements, as well as to promote the use of open-source software and hardware;

Amendment 139 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7 d. Highlights the need to support farmers ensuring smooth transition to digitalisation by safeguarding that they have access to the right skills and funding; highlights the need for fair and proportionate support covering all regions of EU, including remote, rural and island areas; stresses the urgent need to strengthen digital capabilities and infrastructure in smaller places at the periphery of Europe;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Recital Β

B. whereas the Farm to Fork strategy sets out to reduce the use of pesticides by 2030, which could be assisted through the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in order to cultivate quality, organic produce;

Amendment 140 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)

7 e. Stress that achieving digital leadership will depend on education and knowledge; urges Member States to invest more in digital education and provide students from an early age with the basic skills necessary to direct them towards digital transformation; demands urgent measures to end brain drain, especially at rural areas, and by ensuring a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, attract the best minds to work at agriculture sector.

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the Farm to Fork strategy sets out to reduce nutrient losses and the use of pesticides by 2030, which could be assisted through the use of digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the Farm to Fork strategy sets out to reduce the use of pesticides and fertilisers by 2030, which could be assisted through the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the Farm to Fork strategy sets out to reduce the use of pesticides by 2030, in which ~~could be assisted through~~precision agriculture and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are crucial;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas technological sectors have grown exponentially in recent years, especially platforms specialising in data use and storage;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas the White Paper on Artificial Intelligence has recognised agriculture as one of the sectors in which AI can increase efficiency,

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas climate change is already having a significant impact on agriculture and is having an immediate impact on production, a factor that has repercussions on the entire food chain and hence on consumers;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas one of the general objectives of the future CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) is to promote smart farming;

Amendment 21 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas the proposal for the next multiannual financial framework provides for EUR 10 billion of the Horizon Europe budget to be allocated to research and development (R&D) in agriculture, which should help to develop technological AI infrastructure for the sector, while distributing digital technologies in agriculture, forestry and food industry can lead to growing sufficient raw materials, producing sustainable and affordable food, improving plant protection, protecting animal health and contributing to the rural development;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas there is a huge difference in the take-up and coverage of NGA broadband in rural areas1a; __________________ 1a European Commission. Digital Economy and Society Index. DESI individual indicators – 1b1 Fast BB (NGA) coverage

Amendment 25 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas plant diseases and pests still cause the loss of around 30% of annual harvests worldwide, digital solutions can detect plant pests and nutrient deficiencies and suggest appropriate measures for specific diseases;

Amendment 26 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the process of setting up Digital hubs for agriculture, which are expected to have an important role in the introductions and implementation of AI and digital solutions, has started in several Member States;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the European Parliament voted in October 2020 on the initiative report "Framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies";

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas the digital transition in agriculture requires increased investment in key enablers of the digital economy such next-generation access (NGA) broadband and training for farmers to unlock the full potential of digitalisation and AI use in the agricultural sector;

Amendment 29 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas some sectors of agriculture already apply AI technologies with potential for growth to a larger scale for the sector; notes that in numerous others the use of such technologies remains absent limited;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas climate change isand biodiversity loss are already having a significant impact on agriculture and ~~is having an immediate impact on~~ are negatively affecting crop and livestock production as well as the quality of agricultural product~~ion~~s;

Amendment 30 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)

C c. whereas education and training is crucial for the smooth and successful introduction of AI technologies in the agricultural sector, both among the newer generation, but also among the current members of the agricultural community;

Amendment 31 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)

C d. whereas information about good AI practices should be available to broader range of experts and stakeholders in order to increase awareness and create opportunities for the sector across the whole EU, but also on regional and local level, where applicable;

Amendment 32 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C e (new)

C e. whereas the agricultural sector, its digitalisation and the application of AI in the sector depend on reliable data and stable infrastructure from other sectors such as aero-spatial and meteorological tools as well as tools for soil testing and measuring animal indicators, among others; whereas this might imply the need for a technological upgrade and improvement in some regions and Member States;

Amendment 33 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C f (new)

C f. whereas AI technologies and digitalisation have the potential of improving the agricultural performance in areas with natural constraints (ANC), which often suffer from access to limited resources and considerable seasonal variations; whereas because of their constraints they often remain out of the scope of the main research;

Amendment 34 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C g (new)

C g. whereas AI research and work in the field of agriculture and animal husbandry has the potential of increasing the attractiveness of the sector for younger people and thus contribute to solving the issue of generational renewal;

Amendment 35 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C h (new)

C h. whereas the demonstration or use of not fully functional AI technologies in the agri-food sector, or of studies, which are not fully completed, risks jeopardizing the trust of the agri-food community in the AI;

Amendment 36 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C i (new)

C i. whereas agri-food start-ups play an important role for the sector in terms of introduction of new technologies and techniques, which can benefit and facilitate the introduction of AI technologies in it;

Amendment 37 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Recital C j (new)

C j. whereas AI has the potential of contributing to collecting more accurate and up-to-date data with regards to animal welfare, which on the other hand can improve the quality of sectoral research and respectively the decision making processes;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that issues related to the wellbeing ~~of agricultural workers and/or operators~~and protection of livelihood of farmers, agricultural workers and/or operators, societal demands on food and health, including safe, nutritious and sustainable food, animal welfare, and other ethical and social aspects should be a priority when it comes to assessing the applicability of AI ~~in the sector~~and IoT technologies in the sector and rural areas;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that issues related to the well-being of agricultural workers and/or operators, food security, producers' adaptability to new AI technologies, animal welfare, and other ethical aspects should be a priority when it comes to assessing the applicability of AI in the sector;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas climate change is already having a significant impact on agriculture ~~and is having an immediate impact on production~~, on production and on availability of natural resources on which it depends;

Amendment 40 #

Clara AGUILERA, Paolo DE CASTRO, Pina PICIERNO, Tonino PICULA, Ivo HRISTOV, Carmen AVRAM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that issues related to the ~~wellbeing of agricultural workers and/or operato~~improvement of working conditions of agricultural workers and the reduction of high production costs for European farmers, animal welfare, andmong other ~~ethical aspects~~issues, should be a priority when it comes to assessing the applicability of AI in the sector;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that issues related to the wellbeing of agricultural and forestry workers and/or operators, animal welfare, and other ethical aspects should be a priority when it comes to assessing the applicability of AI in the sector;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that issues related to the wellbeing of agricultural workers and/or operators, animal welfare, and other ethical aspects ~~should b~~are a priority when it comes to assessing the ~~applicability~~impacts of AI in the sector;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Believes that workers have valid fears the adoption of AI will lead to job losses, therefore adoption must follow the principles of the just transition, in particular the goal of creating new employment, rather than creating unemployment through technological advancement;

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that agriculture is an economic sector in which artificial intelligence will play a key role in solving food production and supply issues and challenges in the medium and long term, and therefore that priority should be awarded, when allocating resources at national and EU level, to investment in research, analysis, science and socio- economic investigation centring on and affecting artificial intelligence in the agricultural sector;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Affirms that the principle of “public money, public data” should guide the research, development and implementation of artificial intelligence, where public funds are involved; stresses that any public financing of artificial intelligence in agriculture should focus on holistic solutions to common environmental, climate and food security challenges, whilst also integrating its socio-economic impact, in order to put innovation at the service of the common good;

Amendment 46 #

1 a. Calls on all relevant stakeholders to work towards a European ethical standard/code of conduct on the use of AI and IoT in agri-food sector, ensuring the participation of the entire value chain, including farmers, agronomists, food producers, retailers, IT developers and consumers, in the deliberation process;

Amendment 47 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Strongly believes that the AI achievements and digitalisations should be accessible to all agricultural producers and breeders irrespective of the size or location of their farm or facilities;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses that the use of AI must be sustainable and ethical;

Amendment 49 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Calls on the responsible authorities in the Member States to prepare and implement smooth transition to any new AI-based model of agriculture by including socially responsible and just policies and solutions for the workers in the sector;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas climate change is already having a significant impact on agriculture and forestry and is having an immediate impact on production;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Stresses that IoT technologies and AI in particular present a significant opportunity for the modernisation, automation and improved efficiency and sustainability of the agri-food sector and for the local development in rural areas;

Amendment 51 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Calls on the EC to facilitate and guarantee within its remits the fair and equal funding, access and distribution of AI achievements among the various sectors such as agriculture with the aim of avoiding new divisions and a two-speed EU on issues such as AI;

Amendment 52 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Believes that the competent national authorities should prepare and publish analyses on the impact of introduction of AI technologies on work places and workers in short-, mid- and long-term with the aim of helping the labour market adjust accordingly and avoid social and economic exclusion;

Amendment 53 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)

1 e. Underlines the role which the social partnership and dialogue with employers, employees and their unions or representatives has to play in the area of designing socially responsible and just transition to AI in the agricultural sector;

Amendment 54 #

Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA, Carmen AVRAM, Pina PICIERNO, Juozas OLEKAS, Miroslav ČÍŽ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)

1 f. Urges the Member States to include all sectoral partners, including workers' representatives and syndicates of agricultural workers, should such exist, in the discussions and the development of sectoral AI plans and strategies;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that targeted investments should be made in AI and innovative tools intended to improve the quality and use of natural resources, such as soil and water for agriculture production in the EU; Underlines that development of Galileo in combination with AI and digital technologies used in agriculture should take due account of and should be adapted also to models of agriculture with natural features and to be able to determine position in space with a precision of a few centimeters in order to allow for use of mechanisation and to ensure that a diverse landscape is not in disadvantage in digital transition;

Amendment 56 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that targeted investments should be made in AI and innovative and efficient tools intended to improve the quality and use of natural resources, such as soil and water for agriculture production in the EU, taking into account the increasing importance of digital solutions in the time of COVID-19 pandemic and the significance of guaranteeing a functioning agriculture and food sector in the EU;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that targeted investments should be made in ~~AI and~~the research, development and deployment of IoT and AI technologies and other innovative tools intended to improve the quality and sustainable use of natural resources, such as soil and water for agriculture production in the EU; thus contributing to the biodiversity protection and to climate change adaptation and mitigation;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses th~~at targeted investments should be made in AI and innovative tools intended~~e need to assess social and environnemental consequences on rural economy before making investments in AI and innovative tools, and that it is also necessary to evaluate if they are able to improve the quality and use of natural resources, such as soil and water for agriculture production in the EU;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas presence of landscape features in the agricultural area is favourable for biodiversity, can contribute to mitigation of extreme weather events, and protects soil from erosion and desertification; whether high-resolution remote sensing data ensures their proper registration, as well can improve auditing and prevent unfair exclusion of parts of eligible area covered by landscape features or unfair assessment of wooded pastures and other agroforestry systems as non-agricultural area;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 61 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Benoît LUTGEN, Anne SANDER, Juan Ignacio ZOIDO ÁLVAREZ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Asim ADEMOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that targeted investments should be made in AI and innovative tools intended to improve the quality and use of natural resources, such as soil and water, both for agriculture production in the EU and for the forestry sector;

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that targeted investments should be made in digitalization, AI and innovative tools intended to improve the quality and use of natural resources, such as soil and water for agriculture production in the EU;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Considers that the digital divide is an obstacle to sharing the advantages of the artificial intelligence sector; stresses that farmers need to be trained and made aware of their rights and obligations in the use of artificial intelligence, to enable them to harvest potential benefits while ensuring their autonomy; considers that the implementation of artificial intelligence tools is not an end in itself, but should only be driven by the needs asserted by farmers themselves, in a bottom-up participatory process;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Highlights that data of AI technologies collected from farmers should remain the property of the farmers, stresses that there is currently no EU legal framework to control the use of data collected and assessed by agribusiness companies and that misuse of farm data may lead to anti- competitive practices, including price discrimination and speculations in commodity markets which can negatively affect farmer's income;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Highlights that further research into how to harness signals from the Galileo satellites to produce high- resolution maps of soil moisture or carbon content could help farmers make decisions about water and input management, as well could be deployed to monitor compliance with GAECs on protection of peatlands and grasslands;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes that the application of existing IoT technologies in the agricultural sector can result in increased crop production and improved crop quality; Considers the use of digital technologies and AI in the agri-food sector necessary for improving sustainability, efficiency, accuracy and productivity;

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses the importance of developing technological applications which respond to real needs so that the agricultural sector can benefit to the full from them and farmers can choose the technology that best suits their activities;

Amendment 69 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses that digitalisation, tailored AI applications and systematic knowledge can lead to more targeted and sustainable agriculture and animal husbandry, while increasing production efficiency and sustainability;

Amendment 7 #

Clara AGUILERA, Paolo DE CASTRO, Pina PICIERNO, Tonino PICULA, Ivo HRISTOV, Carmen AVRAM

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas our action to combat climate change requires important decisions to be taken in the field of agricultural and livestock production in the European Union, raising the requirements for these sectors to contribute to greater environmental sustainability, also with the support of artificial intelligence: considering that we should impose identical requirements on products from third countries with which we conclude free trade agreements;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses the need for further investments in data infrastructure for the agriculture sector and connectivity in rural areas;

Amendment 71 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses the potential of IoT in precision agriculture, in particular in detecting weather conditions, soil nutrients and water needs, as well as in identifying pest infestations and plant diseases; underlines that monitoring through automated and digital tools can lead to a substantial decrease of pesticide use thus further minimising the environmental and climate footprint of agriculture;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses that investment in artificial intelligence is a major financial risk and can lead to an exacerbation of the farmers' over-indebtedness, thus increasing their dependence on other actors in the agricultural sector and contributing to a shift of the value produced by farms to agro-equipment suppliers;

Amendment 73 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses that appropriate training and expertise must be given to farmers in order to help them acquire, implement and use the right applications;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses that the interoperability of AI systems is critical for the farmer's free choice when using applications and digital devices;

Amendment 75 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Stresses that in particular small and medium-sized farms need to be supported in the transition to and the implementation of digital and AI technology;

Amendment 76 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2 d. Stresses the need to reinforce the synergies between the different structural and investment funds with the objective to help agri-food sectors improve their economic resilience and environmental sustainability;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that robots, automated tractors and drones that rely on artificial intelligence will be an additional factor in the ongoing and large-scale job loss in the agricultural sector and that appropriate measures should be implemented to preserve the family-model of European agriculture ~~should be preserved~~ and that the introduction of AI technologies cshould be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be preserved and that the introduction of IoT and AI technologies could be harnessed to support the family model ~~and~~, sustain traditional practices, protect small farmers and attract young generations in farming; notes that these technologies will give added value to local products, making small farming businesses profitable, competitive and sustainable;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be preserved and that the introduction of AI technologies could be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices, develop local markets and short supply circuits and safeguard local cultural and biological heritage;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. Recognises the potential of artificial intelligence and other innovative tools in perfecting production practices that, with a view to an increasingly more efficient use of resources, are essential for achieving the Union's sustainability goals.

Amendment 80 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Asim ADEMOV, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be preserved and that the introduction of AI technologies could be harnessed to support the family model ~~and~~, to sustain traditional practices; and to improve automated work processes, while finding sustainable solutions to data protection and data security issues and protecting from hacker attacks;

Amendment 81 #

Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Benoît LUTGEN, Anne SANDER, Juan Ignacio ZOIDO ÁLVAREZ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Asim ADEMOV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be preserved and that the introduction of AI technologies could be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices; highlights the need for knowledge transfer and training to enable all farmers to benefit from smart farming tools;

Amendment 82 #

Clara AGUILERA, Paolo DE CASTRO, Pina PICIERNO, Tonino PICULA, Ivo HRISTOV, Carmen AVRAM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be preserved and that the introduction of AI technologies could ~~be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices~~help to steer this production model in particular and help to strengthen the maintenance of traditional practices that now generate low profitability for their future survival;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be ~~preserv~~supported and that the introduction of new digital and AI technologies could be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture should be preserved and that the introduction of accessible AI technologies could be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices;

Amendment 85 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the family-model of European agriculture ~~should~~must be preserved and that the introduction of AI technologies cshould be harnessed to support the family model and sustain traditional practices;

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)

(1) Stresses that the development of digital skills is essential in order to achieve a real digital transformation in the field of agriculture; however in order to exploit the full potential of this opportunity the gap between service providers and end-users must be dealt. In this process the role of digital farming advisors is key;

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses that AI is built and trained on datasets, both public and private, and enabling sharing and access to essential and well-defined data sets will be key to fully unlock the potential of the Green Deal; calls on the Commission to assess which datasets are essential for the ecological transition in the context of sustainable agriculture, inter alia in production, transportation, carbon, energy and biodiversity impact, as well as end-of life handling; calls on the Commission to consider extending the scope of the high value datasets defined in Directive (EU) 2019/1024 on Open Data to private actors and ensure that public money always result in public results and data;

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses that the digital transition and approach, as well as the provision and implementation of AI technologies, should not discriminate among agricultural workers, including hired hands and self-employed workers, and should provide proper targeted support for reskilling and upskilling in quality jobs and professions;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underlines the importance of bridging the digital and generational divide that exists in many agricultural regions in the EU. The European Commission and the Member States should present a training plan to strengthen digital competences in the primary sector;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas the world population is expected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050 and the food demand will be substantially higher;

Amendment 90 #

Marlene MORTLER, Norbert LINS, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Franc BOGOVIČ, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Daniel BUDA, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Dan-Ştefan MOTREANU, Riho TERRAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Points out that innovations are the driving force behind structural change on farms and that many farms across Europe are not sufficiently prepared to apply innovations or artificial intelligence, which vary considerably between Member States;

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Points out that in order for agriculture to benefit from new digital and AI technologies, universal broadband as well as the new 5G standard coverage need to be completed in rural areas as soon as possible;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Underlines that the quality of data collection and data sets used to train the AI has a major impact on achieving the efficiency and values we strive for; Call the Commission to ensure standardisation of datasets and a high quality review in order to eliminate biases and incorporate Green deal values in the AI products;

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products including issues such as origin or production methods, thereby providing a tool for farmers to be in close contact with consumers about the quality and high standard of their products; stresses that added value in the chain generated by these data must return to farmers; highlights that AI technologies through optimisation of the whole chain can contribute as well to a reduction in food losses;

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that IoT and AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products including issues such as origin or production methods, as well as aspects like product sustainability, integrity, authenticity and prevention of food- related frauds; stresses that this will increase transparency, afford higher protection to producers and result in better information of consumers to choose healthy and sustainable diets;

Amendment 95 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products including issues such as origin or production methods; in this regard, the solutions offered by blockchain systems should be explored at every stage of the food production process: production, processing and distribution;

Amendment 96 #

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products, including issues such as origin or production methods, and in measures to ensure fair competition between the various actors concerned and on market outlets;

Amendment 97 #

Clara AGUILERA, Paolo DE CASTRO, Pina PICIERNO, Tonino PICULA, Ivo HRISTOV, Carmen AVRAM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability ofand labelling of agri-food products, including issues such as origin or production methods, thus providing greater transparency and useful information to European consumers;

Amendment 98 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that AI technologies can and should be used to improve the traceability of products, including issues such as origin or production methods; , and that they can make a contribution to a range of activities along the entire agri- food chain;

Amendment 99 #