7 Amendments of Josef WEIDENHOLZER related to 2014/2228(INI)
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced, however, that TTIP should not only cut down barriers but also aim at promoting Europeanand guaranteeing the high levels of consumer protection in Europe; observes that in mostany sectors EU and US standards and regulatory environments ensure this high level; considers, therefore, that approximating our regulations in these fields represents a unique chance to establishprotect and further develop high-quality standards and laws for consumers which will be the de facto international standards;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that there are fields in which no uniform European standards yet exist and in which therefore there is no basis for negotiating on approximation in TTIP; notes that this is particularly true in the fields of copyright, protection of personal data and data encryption; calls for these fields not to be discussed in TTIP until standards relating to them exist for the European internal market;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Stresses the right of all contracting parties to take regulatory action on the internal market to protect consumers; emphasises that TTIP must not undermine this right; calls, therefore, for the protection of investors’ interests to be performed by the ordinary courts;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Stresses the need to involve consumer protection organisations in the negotiations in order to ensure maximum protection of consumers’ interests;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Insists, while respecting the freedom of governments to protect public servicesStates to provide special protection for public services and services of general interest, that EU service providers must have full market access to liberalised services in the US, under transparent rules at both federal and sub-federal levels;
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for mutual recognition of professional qualifications between the Parties and for the abolition of work permit requirements for high-skillqualified workers in sectors covered by TTIP, so as to create maximum mobility of these professionals between the EU and the US;
Amendment 762 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv
(xiv) to ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion and have a fair opportunity to seek and achieve redress of grievances, which can be achieved withoutle benefiting from no greater rights than domestic investors; to oppose the inclusion of an ISDS mechanism; such a mechanism is not necessary in TTIP given the EU’s and the US’ developed legal systems; a state-to- state dispute settlement system and the use of national courts are the most appropriate tools to address investment disputin TTIP, as other options to enforce investment protection are available, such as domestic remedies;