11 Amendments of Tom VANDENKENDELAERE related to 2018/2008(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas consumers make an associative link between brand, agricultural or food product and quality and expect agricultural or food products of the same brand to be identical in quality whether they are sold in their own country or in another Member State;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas no European citizen should be treated as a second-class citizen in the single market and the allegations of double quality of products which would consist in selling products of lower quality under the same brand name in some Member States rather than others, if proven, must be taken seriously; whereas no proven case of double quality of products appears has been the subject of a court judgment in Europe at the moment;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the analyses show that certain products contain less meat, or less of other ingredients, in certain countries, in most cases those countries which joined the EU in 2004, 2007 and 2013; whereas the analyses found instances of the same products being sold at considerably higher prices in those countries than in the so- called ‘old Member States’; whereas, however, the methodologies used for those analyses are contested;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas a robust European methodology accepted by all actors in the food supply chain is necessary to determine whether the problem is systemic or anecdotal; whereas the involvement of Member States, the agrifood industry and consumer associations is essential to ensure that test results are accepted by all;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas, if they exist, differences in ingredients or compositions of food products marketed within the single market do not automatically induce a lower quality but may be linked to product reformulation and market segmentation strategies related to consumer taste, the existence of specific national legislation and different supply in agricultural raw materials;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
C c. whereas existing European legislation covers the practices mentioned, since it already protects consumers against deceptive practices which have or are likely to substantially alter the economic behaviour, in relation to the product, of the consumer whom it affects or to whom it is addressed;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
C d. whereas the European Union has already developed distinctive labels in order to meet the particular expectations of consumers and to take account of production specificities through the optional quality terms;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph –1 (new)
Paragraph –1 (new)
-1. supports the gradual approach of the European Commission, namely: a. the preparation and publication in September 2017 of guidelines to facilitate and improve the application of the EU legislation in force by the national authorities with a view to protecting European citizens; b. the development by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) of a robust European methodology accepted by all actors to test and compare agricultural and food products;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Firmly believeConsiders that, in response to European citizens’ concerns about different products being sold under the same brand in different Member States, the practice of ‘one brand, one product, different content and proportional composition’ needs to be stopped by means of an amendment to Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practicet would be premature today to consider a modification of the Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices since no European methodology exists to date, there is no evidence to confirm that it is a systemic practice and no impact assessment has been conducted by the European Commission ; adds that Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May 2005, being a horizontal legislation, therefore applies to all products in the supply chain, and not only to agricultural and food products;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that, until that practice is stopped, and in order to raise the profile of manufacturers’ initiatives on the use of locSupports producer and manufacturer initiatives on specific product labelling and on the use of local recipes ; recalls that European legislation already allows the introduction of optional quality terms, such as 'protected designation of origin' (PDO) and 'protected geographical indication' (PGI) for products which have a specific link with a specific region, the 'traditional rspecipes, a system should be introduced for indicating, in a way thatality guaranteed' (TSG) for products characterized by a traditional production process or mountain products or products from the outermost regions of the EU; stresses that such systems respects both the consumer’'s right ofto an informed choice and consumer preferences, the local recipes used in the preparathe proper functioning of specific products; the single market;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4