Activities of Leszek MILLER
Plenary speeches (93)
Presentation of the programme of activities of the Finnish Presidency of the Council (debate)
Threats to the status of volunteer firefighters in the European Union (debate)
Situation in Northern Syria (debate)
Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 and own resources: time to meet citizens' expectations (B9-0110/2019, B9-0112/2019, B9-0113/2019)
Taking forward the Horizontal anti-discrimination Directive (debate)
The 30th Anniversary of the Velvet revolution: importance of the fight for freedom and democracy in Central and Eastern Europe for the historical unification of Europe (debate)
EU response to extreme meteorological events and their impacts: how to protect European urban areas and their cultural heritage (debate)
Presentation by the Commission President-elect of the College of Commissioners and their programme (debate)
Eastern neighbourhood developments (debate)
The European Green Deal (debate)
EU disability strategy post 2020 (debate)
Animal welfare conditions during transport to third countries (debate)
Fair taxation in a digitalised and globalised economy - BEPS 2.0 (B9-0238/2019)
Common charger for mobile radio equipment (debate)
Distortion of European history and remembrance of the Second World War (topical debate)
Ongoing hearings under article 7(1) of the TEU regarding Poland (debate)
Commission Work Programme 2020 (debate)
Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (A9-0004/2020 - Guy Verhofstadt)
Gender pay gap (B9-0069/2020, B9-0073/2020, B9-0083/2020, B9-0084/2020)
The current security situation in Syria (debate)
Preparation of the Extraordinary European Council Meeting of 20 February 2020 on the Multiannual Financial Framework (debate)
Coronavirus outbreak, state of play and ensuring a coordinated European response to the health, economic and social impact (debate)
70th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration (debate)
EU Recovery package (debate)
Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)
Presentation of the programme of activities of the German Presidency (debate)
Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020 (continuation of debate)
Draft Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union (continuation of debate)
State of the Union (topical debate) (debate)
Rule of Law conditionality in the framework of the MFF 2021-2027 and Next Generation EU (continuation of debate)
Conclusions of the Special European Council meeting of 1 and 2 October 2020 - Preparation of the European Council meeting of 15 and 16 October 2020 (continuation of debate)
Multiannual Financial Framework (including Own Resources), Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism and the Recovery Fund for Europe (continuation of debate)
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2021 – all sections (debate)
Representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers (debate)
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 (debate)
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 – MFF, Rule of Law Conditionality and Own Resources – Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 – Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources – Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (debate)
The de facto abortion ban in Poland (debate)
EU Association Agreement with Ukraine (continuation of debate)
Government attempts to silence free media in Poland, Hungary and Slovenia (debate)
Application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092, the rule of law conditionality mechanism (continuation of debate)
Programme for the internal market, competitiveness of enterprises, the area of plants, animals, food and feed and European statistics (Single Market Programme) 2021-2027 (debate)
Meeting the Global COVID-19 challenge: effects of waiver of the WTO TRIPS agreement on COVID-19 vaccines, treatment, equipment and increasing production and manufacturing capacity in developing countries (debate)
State of the SMEs Union – Implementation of better regulation agenda / Reduction target for administrative burden (continuation of debate)
Parliament's right of inquiry (debate)
European Citizens' Initiative "End the cage age" (continuation of debate)
The Commission’s 2020 rule of law report (debate)
Old continent growing older - possibilities and challenges related to ageing policy post 2020 (debate)
Media freedom and further deterioration of the Rule of law in Poland (debate)
The state of play on the submitted RRF recovery plans awaiting approval (debate)
Protecting workers from asbestos (debate)
The Rule of law crisis in Poland and the primacy of EU law (debate)
Insurance of motor vehicles (debate)
Common agricultural policy - support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States and financed by the EAGF and by the EAFRD - Common agricultural policy: financing, management and monitoring - Common agricultural policy – amendment of the CMO and other regulations (debate)
Situation at the Ukrainian border and in Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine (debate)
European framework for employees' participation rights and the revision of the European Works Council Directive (debate)
Plans to undermine further fundamental rights in Poland, in particular regarding the standards of the European Convention of Human Rights and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (debate)
An EU ban on the use of wild animals in circuses (debate)
Digital Services Act (continuation of debate)
EU-Russia relations, European security and Russia’s military threat against Ukraine (debate)
The Rule of Law and the consequences of the ECJ ruling (continuation of debate)
A new EU strategic framework on health and safety at work post 2020 (continuation of debate)
The impact of the war against Ukraine on women (debate)
The call for a Convention for the revision of the Treaties (debate)
Radio Equipment Directive: common charger for electronic devices (debate)
AccessibleEU Centre in support of accessibility policies in the EU internal market (debate)
The accession of Romania and Bulgaria to the Schengen area (debate)
Humanitarian situation after the devastating floods in Pakistan and the climate crisis (debate)
Defending democracy from foreign interference (debate)
Availability of fertilisers in the EU (debate)
This is Europe - Debate with the President of Lithuania, Gitanas Nausėda (debate)
2022 Rule of Law Report - The rule of law situation in the European Union - Rule of law in Greece - Rule of law in Spain - Rule of law in Malta (debate)
The need for a coherent strategy for EU-China Relations (debate)
Establishing the Act in support of ammunition production (debate)
The electoral law, the investigative committee and the rule of law in Poland (debate)
Make Europe the place to invest (debate)
Financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2022 - Control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2022 (joint debate - European Investment Bank)
Public access to documents – annual report for the years 2019-2021 (debate)
Corrupt large-scale sale of Schengen visas (debate)
Situation of Ukrainian women refugees, including access to SRHR support (debate)
A true geopolitical Europe now (topical debate)
Fighting disinformation and dissemination of illegal content in the context of the Digital Services Act and in times of conflict (debate)
European Citizens' Initiative 'Fur Free Europe' (debate)
Continuing threat to the rule of law, the independence of justice and the non-fulfilment of conditionality for EU funding in Hungary (debate)
The European Elections 2024 (debate)
Environmental consequences of the Russian aggression against Ukraine and the need for accountability (debate)
EU-US relations (debate)
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 14-15 December 2023 (debate)
The fight against hate speech and disinformation: responsibility of social platforms within the Digital Services Act (topical debate)
Need to fight the increase of antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred (debate)
New wave of mass arrests in Belarus of opposition activists and their family members
War in the Gaza Strip and the need to reach a ceasefire, including recent developments in the region (debate)
Formal sitting - 20th Anniversary of the 2004 EU Enlargement
Formal sitting - 20th Anniversary of the 2004 EU Enlargement
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on eGovernment accelerating digital public services that support the functioning of the single market
Opinions (2)
Opinion on Guidelines for the 2021 Budget - Section III
OPINION on the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2021 - all sections
Shadow opinions (6)
OPINION on artificial intelligence: questions of interpretation and application of international law in so far as the EU is affected in the areas of civil and military uses and of state authority outside the scope of criminal justice
Opinion on Guidelines for the 2022 Budget - Section III
OPINION European Union regulatory fitness and subsidiarity and proportionality -----– report on Better Law Making covering the years 2017, 2018 and 2019
OPINION on an intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience
OPINION on Protecting workers from asbestos
OPINION General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023 - all sections
Institutional motions (4)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the criminalisation of sexual education in Poland
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on media freedom and further deterioration of the rule of law in Poland
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the rule of law crisis in Poland and the primacy of EU law
Oral questions (4)
Animal welfare and the new Green Deal
Dual quality of products in the single market
An EU ban on the use of wild animals in circuses
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
Written explanations (23)
Launch of automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Ireland (A9-0003/2019 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
Opowiadam się za przyjęciem rezolucji ustawodawczej w sprawie uruchomienia w Irlandii zautomatyzowanej wymiany informacji dotyczących danych rejestracyjnych pojazdów. Dzięki tej decyzji Parlamentu możliwe będzie wreszcie pełne wdrożenie w Irlandii postanowień decyzji Rady z 2008 r. w sprawie intensyfikacji współpracy transgranicznej w zwalczaniu terroryzmu i przestępczości transgranicznej. Dotychczas wymiana tych danych nie była możliwa, ponieważ prawodawstwo irlandzkie nie w pełni uwzględniało wymogi stawiane ochronie danych wrażliwych, określonych przez prawo UE. Uważam, że każda inicjatywa podejmowana w celu zwalczania terroryzmu i innych form najpoważniejszej przestępczości w UE powinna być przyjmowana bez zbędnej zwłoki i sprawnie implementowana przez państwa członkowskie.
The UK’s withdrawal from the EU (B9-0038/2019, B9-0039/2019)
Podzielam pogląd, że planowane wyjście Wielkiej Brytanii z Unii Europejskiej powinno nastąpić w oparciu o wynegocjowane porozumienie – tak, by umożliwić obu stronom kontynuowanie współpracy z obopólnymi korzyściami. Uważam jednak, że ważny w tym kontekście jest nie tylko wymiar polityczny przyszłych relacji pomiędzy Wielką Brytanią a Unią, gdyż kluczowe znaczenie ma również sytuacja obywateli – zarówno UE, jak i Wielkiej Brytanii, którzy planując swe życie rodzinne i zawodowe podjęli już często nieodwracalne decyzje.Unia Europejska powinna również konsekwentnie bronić wynegocjowanego stanowiska w odniesieniu do tzw. rozwiązania awaryjnego dotyczącego granicy pomiędzy Irlandią a Irlandią Północną. Z całą pewnością wyjście Wielkiej Brytanii z UE nie powinno doprowadzić do ponownego powstania sztucznych podziałów na wyspie Irlandii, które w minionych latach były zarzewiem krwawego konfliktu.Brak zgody parlamentu Wielkiej Brytanii na ratyfikację wynegocjowanego porozumienia i ostatecznie wyjście z UE z dniem 1 listopada br. może prowadzić do nieprzewidywalnych skutków i chaosu prawnego. Mając to na uwadze popieram propozycję warunkowej zgody PE na przedłużenie terminu wyjścia Wielkiej Brytanii z UE, lecz z uzasadnionego jedynie powodu, który pozwoliłby uniknąć wyjścia bez porozumienia, doprowadziłby do przeprowadzenia wcześniejszych wyborów parlamentarnych, ponownego referendum lub zatwierdzenia przez parlament brytyjski umowy o wystąpieniu.
Employment and social policies of the euro area (A9-0016/2019 - Yana Toom)
Polityka zatrudnienia, zwalczanie bezrobocia i kwestie społeczne w Unii Europejskiej to przede wszystkim domena państw członkowskich. Niemniej jednak Unia również posiada w tym zakresie pewne kompetencje polegające głównie na uzupełnianiu i koordynacji działań państw członkowskich. Jak wynika z najnowszych danych Eurostatu, w sierpniu 2019 r. stopa bezrobocia w całej UE osiągnęła stosunkowo niski poziom – 6,3 %, zaś w strefie euro – 7,4 %. Pomimo to bezrobocie wśród młodzieży pozostaje nadal niedopuszczalnie wysokie, kształtując się na poziomie 15,2 % w UE i 16,9 % w strefie euro. Te same dane wskazują też, że ponad jedna piąta obywateli UE jest zagrożona ubóstwem i wykluczeniem społecznym, szczególnie zaś najsłabsze grupy społeczne, jak np. dzieci, osoby niepełnosprawne, długotrwale bezrobotni czy osoby bezdomne.W tym kontekście podzielam stanowisko Parlamentu Europejskiego, że w celu ograniczenia skali tych negatywnych zjawisk społecznych konieczne jest podjęcie działania na poziomie Unii. W tym celu Komisja Europejska powinna niezwłocznie przedstawić projekty legislacyjne przewidujące m.in. ustanowienie minimalnego wynagrodzenia w całej Unii Europejskiej, ustanowienie funduszu na rzecz walki z ubóstwem wśród dzieci, zwalczanie bezrobocia wśród młodzieży oraz wzmocnienie praw socjalnych pracowników tzw. platform cyfrowych, którzy poza wynagrodzeniem za pracę nie korzystają z żadnych innych praw pracowniczych gwarantujących m.in. pewność zatrudnienia czy też możliwość płatnego wypoczynku.
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) (A9-0015/2019 - Vilija Blinkevičiūtė)
Opowiadam się za przyjęciem nowelizacji rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie Europejskiego Funduszu Dostosowania do Globalizacji (EFG). Jest ona niezbędna, ponieważ stanowi część unijnego planu awaryjnego mającego na celu złagodzenie najpoważniejszych zakłóceń spowodowanych wystąpieniem Wielkiej Brytanii z UE bez porozumienia. Nowelizacja przewiduje, że osoby, które utracą pracę wskutek nieprzewidywalnych konsekwencji brexitu, będą mogły liczyć na pomoc z EFG. Oficjalne dane angielskiego urzędu statystycznego pokazują, że Polacy mieszkający w Wielkiej Brytanii stanowią najliczniejszą mniejszość narodową. Można zatem przyjąć, że to także nasi obywatele będą beneficjentami funduszu, co pozwoli im przetrwać ten trudny okres.Popieram wniosek Komisji również dlatego, że stanowi on wyraźny polityczny sygnał, że Unia Europejska – za pośrednictwem EFG – jest w stanie skutecznie reagować w sytuacjach nieprzewidywalnych, obejmując pomocą docelową wszystkich obywateli UE, którzy bez własnej winy znaleźli się nagle w trudnej sytuacji życiowej.
Implementation and financing of the EU general budget in 2020 in relation to the UK's withdrawal from the EU (A9-0018/2019 - Johan Van Overtveldt)
Głosowałem za przyjęciem zalecenia w sprawie projektu rozporządzenia Rady dotyczącego wykonania i finansowania budżetu ogólnego Unii w 2020 r. w związku z brexitem. Wystąpienie Zjednoczonego Królestwa z Unii na podstawie porozumienia byłoby z pewnością najlepszym rozwiązaniem. Jednak przedłużający się proces ratyfikacji umowy przez parlament Wielkiej Brytanii oraz deklaracje premiera Borisa Johnsona przekonują, że Unia powinna przygotować się na wszystkie możliwe scenariusze.Twardy brexit, czyli wyjście Wielkiej Brytanii z UE bez umowy, będzie oznaczał brak porozumień prawnych dotyczących stosunków budżetowych między Unią a Zjednoczonym Królestwem. Zrodzi ponadto niepewność i znaczne trudności w wykonaniu budżetu Unii na lata 2019–2020 w odniesieniu do wszystkich beneficjentów – nie tylko ze Zjednoczonego Królestwa, lecz również z pozostałych państw członkowskich, w tym Polski. W tym kontekście niezbędne jest przyjęcie proponowanych zmian, by zapobiec negatywnym konsekwencjom – głównie poprzez przedłużenie do 2020 r. obowiązywania ram awaryjnych, które pozwolą na zminimalizowanie najbardziej dotkliwych zakłóceń mających wpływ na beneficjentów programów finansowych.
Distance sales of goods and certain domestic supplies of goods (A9-0019/2019 - Ondřej Kovařík)
Przedstawiona przez Komisję Europejską nowelizacja dyrektywy Rady w sprawie przepisów dotyczących sprzedaży towarów na odległość oraz niektórych krajowych dostaw towarów ma na celu dostosowanie obowiązujących przepisów do przyjętej w ostatnim czasie tzw. dyrektywy o VAT w handlu elektronicznym. Popieram zaproponowane rozwiązania, ponieważ pozwolą one uszczelnić system podatkowy, rozszerzając system procedur względem podatników nieposiadających stałej siedziby, którzy świadczą usługi telekomunikacyjne, nadawcze lub elektroniczne. To samo dotyczy podatników, którzy jedynie ułatwiają – za pośrednictwem platform handlowych lub portali – dostawy towarów przez innych podatników.Uważam, że Komisja powinna uwzględnić we wniosku wszystkie zmiany zaproponowane przez Parlament, szczególnie te, które pozwolą określić właściwe państwo członkowskie identyfikacji podatkowej w przypadku podatników nieposiadających siedziby działalności gospodarczej ani stałego miejsca prowadzenia działalności gospodarczej na terytorium Unii Europejskiej. Ponadto efektywna współpraca państw członkowskich w Radzie nad procedowanymi zmianami podatkowymi powinna skłonić Komisję Europejską do przedłożenia w niedługim czasie dalej idących wniosków legislacyjnych, dotyczących w szczególności ustanowienia skutecznego podatku cyfrowego w Unii Europejskiej względem podmiotów czerpiących z jednolitego rynku gigantyczne zyski, lecz nieodprowadzających z tego tytułu należnego podatku jedynie dlatego, że ich siedziba znajduje się poza UE.
Criminalisation of sexual education in Poland (B9-0166/2019, B9-0167/2019, B9-0168/2019)
Decyzja rządzącej w Polsce większości parlamentarnej, aby kontynuować prace nad zmianami w kodeksie karnym, które prowadziłyby do karania pedagogów za wychowanie młodzieży w ramach edukacji seksualnej, wzbudziła moim zdaniem uzasadniony sprzeciw europejskiej opinii publicznej. Należy jednak podkreślić, że rezolucja Parlamentu Europejskiego w żaden sposób nie zmierza do ograniczenia praw rodziców czy też ich wpływu na wychowanie własnych dzieci. Stanowi jedynie sprzeciw wobec próby penalizacji upowszechniania wśród nieletnich (tj. osób poniżej 18. roku życia) nauczania o ludzkiej seksualności, zdrowiu i stosunkach intymnych.Dziś w dobie powszechnego dostępu do internetu, w którym aż roi się od niewłaściwych treści, byłoby rzeczą skrajnie nieodpowiedzialną pozostawienie możliwości wychowania seksualnego wyłącznie w gestii rodziców, którzy niekiedy ze względu na zwykłą niechęć do poruszania tej tematyki z własnymi dziećmi unikaliby po prostu przekazywania im niezbędnej wiedzy czy też wyjaśniania interesujących je kwestii, uznając je za wstydliwe.W dzisiejszych czasach życie nabrało takiego tempa, że seksualność człowieka nie stanowi już żadnego tabu. Dlatego powinniśmy dbać o to, żeby osoby nieletnie właściwie rozumiały treści oglądane w mediach społecznościowych oraz nabyły niezbędną i opartą na faktach wiedzę o tym, jak w sytuacjach intymnych należy zachowywać się odpowiednio i odpowiedzialnie.
Children rights in occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (B9-0178/2019, B9-0179/2019, B9-0180/2019)
Cieszy fakt, że Parlament Europejski obchodzi dziś uroczyście 30. rocznicę uchwalenia Konwencji o prawach dziecka ONZ. Jest to chwila tym bardziej podniosła, że do powstania tekstu Konwencji, jako jej pomysłodawca, w znaczniej mierze przyczyniła się Polska. Podstawę merytoryczną projektu stanowiły zaś dokonania polskiej myśli pedagogicznej, przede wszystkim koncepcja filozoficzno-wychowawcza doktora Janusza Korczaka, heroicznego dyrektora Domu Sierot w okupowanej Warszawie.Prawa dziecka są rozwinięciem katalogu praw człowieka i, jako takie, powinny podlegać szczególnej ochronie. Zgadzam się ze stanowiskiem Parlamentu, że Unia Europejska powinna rozważyć przystąpienie do Konwencji w charakterze strony, co mogłoby wzmocnić wymiar ochrony praw dziecka w Unii. Uważam jednak, że byłby to gest w głównej mierze symboliczny, gdyż do Konwencji należą już wszystkie państwa członkowskie.Rzeczywiste działania UE na rzecz ochrony praw dziecka powinny skupiać się – moim zdaniem – na zwalczaniu ubóstwa i marginalizacji społecznej najmłodszych. Niestety bieda jest najczęściej zjawiskiem dziedzicznym. Z tego powodu, mając na uwadze dobro dzieci, Unia powinna skupiać się na wdrażaniu programów pomocowych, takich jak Child Guarantee , które pozwolą zapewnić każdemu dziecku w Europie zagrożonemu ubóstwem lub wykluczeniem społecznym dostęp do darmowej opieki zdrowotnej, darmowej edukacji, bezpłatnej opieki i wychowania przedszkolnego, godnych warunków mieszkaniowych i odpowiedniego odżywiania. Dopiero osiągnięcie tych celów sprawi, że poszanowanie praw dziecka będzie zupełne.
European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0036/2020, B9-0037/2020, B9-0038/2020)
Zgadzam się ze stanowiskiem, że konferencja w sprawie przyszłości Europy powinna skupić się na kwestiach związanych z poprawą funkcjonowania Unii w oparciu o potencjał traktatu lizbońskiego. Powinniśmy też zadbać o możliwie szeroki udział w tej debacie wszystkich obywateli.W dyskusjach na temat przyszłości Unii należy jednak pamiętać, że nadrzędnym celem traktatów jest zbudowanie coraz bliższego związku pomiędzy społeczeństwami Europy. Natomiast jego realizacja, szczególnie w okresie aktualnych zmagań z poszanowaniem rządów prawa i wystąpieniem Zjednoczonego Królestwa z UE, powinna skłonić do podjęcia kwestii przeniesienia na grunt prawa pierwotnego zasady pierwszeństwa prawa Unii. Jak dotychczas wynika ona bowiem jedynie z orzecznictwa Trybunału Sprawiedliwości bazującego na systematyce i wykładni ducha traktatu rzymskiego.Inną kwestią, na którą w świetle bieżących wydarzeń konferencja powinna zwrócić uwagę podczas przeglądu traktatów jest konieczność dostosowania – niezmienianego od czasów traktatu EWWiS – protokołu dotyczącego immunitetu formalnego przysługującego posłom do PE. Z biegiem lat Parlament Europejski przekształcił się ze zgromadzenia doradczo-kontrolnego w podstawowy organ legislacyjny UE, którego posłowie są wybierani w powszechnych wyborach bezpośrednich, a nie jak w czasach EWWiS delegowani przez parlamenty krajowe. W konsekwencji to PE powinien każdorazowo decydować o uchyleniu immunitetu własnego posła, a nie sąd krajowy deliberować, czy z takim wnioskiem ewentualnie wystąpić.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Lead and its compounds (B9-0089/2020)
Głosowałem za sprzeciwem Parlamentu Europejskiego wobec wniosku Komisji dotyczącego zmiany rozporządzenia regulującego ograniczenia w zakresie stosowania ołowiu i jego związków (tzw. rozporządzenie REACH). W sprawie tej zwracali się do nas liczni obywatele, którzy zasadnie sygnalizowali sprzeczność proponowanej nowelizacji z ratio legis zmienianego rozporządzenia REACH, którego celem jest ochrona zdrowia ludzkiego i środowiska naturalnego.Komisja Europejska chciała zaproponować zmianę zasad dotyczących stężenia ołowiu w PCW. Zasadniczo tolerowane byłoby stężenie na poziomie 0,1% ołowiu w PCW, ale Komisja chciała jednocześnie zaproponować wyższe progi w przypadku PCW pochodzącego z recyklingu, tj. 2% w przypadku PCW sztywnego i 1% w przypadku PCW elastycznego.Ołów jest substancją toksyczną, która nawet w małych dawkach może mieć poważny wpływ na ludzkie zdrowie i powodować nieodwracalne szkody neurologiczne. Dlatego uznałem, że poziomy odstępstw zaproponowane przez Komisję nie odpowiadają standardom bezpieczeństwa i – zgodnie z licznymi postulatami obywateli – należało zagłosować za wetem Parlamentu wobec tej inicjatywy.
EU-Belarus Agreement on facilitation of issuance of visas (A9-0090/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík)
Głosowałem za zgodą Parlamentu na zawarcie umowy pomiędzy UE a Białorusią o ułatwieniach w wydawaniu wiz. Jestem przekonany, że zacieśnianie relacji pomiędzy obywatelami naszych państw leży w interesie zarówno Unii, jak i Białorusi, bowiem bezpośrednie kontakty między ludźmi to niezbędny warunek rozwoju więzi gospodarczych, humanitarnych, kulturalnych i naukowych.Na pełną aprobatę zasługują rozwiązania przewidujące zmniejszenie opłaty wizowej i poszerzenie katalogu osób uprawnionych do zwolnienia z niej, jak również uproszczenie procedur wizowych i skrócenie czasu oczekiwania.Umowa ma także istotny wymiar polityczny, bo podkreślono w niej znaczenie i konieczność poszanowania praw człowieka i zasad demokracji. Białoruś od czasu podjęcia negocjacji z Unią zaangażowała się wprawdzie w poprawę poszanowania swobód, praworządności oraz praw człowieka, w tym wolności słowa i mediów, a także praw pracowniczych. Jednak w umowie przewidziano możliwość jej zawieszenia z powodu naruszenia któregokolwiek z postanowień odnoszących się np. do praw człowieka czy praworządności.Głosowałem za zawarciem umowy także z tego względu, że jej wejściem w życie jest szczególnie zainteresowana Polska, która od wielu lat jest liderem wśród państw strefy Schengen, jeśli chodzi o liczbę rozpatrywanych wniosków wizowych. Towarzysząca zatem umowie deklaracja w sprawie personelu konsularnego stwarza realną szansę na rozwiązanie problemu niewystarczającej obsady kadrowej polskich placówek na Białorusi.
New MFF, own resources and Recovery plan
. – Z pełnym przekonaniem poparłem rezolucję w sprawie nowego budżetu UE na lata 2021–27, zasobów własnych i planu naprawy gospodarczej. Parlament bardzo pryncypialnie domaga się w niej od Komisji i państw członkowskich podjęcia odważnych decyzji budżetowych i fiskalnych w związku z potrzebą przeciwdziałania skutkom ekonomicznym pandemii. Kluczowe w tym względzie jest ustanowienie solidnych wieloletnich ram finansowych Unii i funduszu odbudowy, który będzie głównym narzędziem w walce z recesją.Podzielam pogląd, że w obecnej sytuacji podnoszenie składek członkowskich opartych na DNB nie wydaje się celowe. Dlatego niezbędne jest utworzenie nowego koszyka zasobów własnych poszerzonego m.in. o podatek od usług cyfrowych i od transakcji finansowych, jak również zniesienie wszelkich rabatów i korekt budżetowych.Popieram także postulat emisji długoterminowych obligacji naprawczych zabezpieczonych budżetem UE. Wbrew niektórym opiniom na temat niezgodności tego rozwiązania z traktatem uważam, że jest ono w pełni możliwe do realizacji, o ile zostaną stworzone warunki skłaniające beneficjentów pomocy do ciągłego prowadzenia zrównoważonej polityki budżetowej (zgodnie z wykładnią art. 125 TFUE dokonaną przez TSUE w sprawie C 370/12).Głosowałem za rezolucją także dlatego, że Parlament domaga się w niej wzmocnienia swojej pozycji we wszystkich działaniach dotyczących strategii naprawczej oraz ostrzega Komisję przed stosowaniem nierzetelnych danych liczbowych i sztuczek księgowych, które mogły utrudnić Parlamentowi pełnienie funkcji kontrolnych.
European citizens’ initiative: temporary measures concerning the time limits for the collection, verification and examination stages in view of the COVID-19 outbreak (C9-0142/2020 - Loránt Vincze)
Popieram wniosek Komisji dotyczący ustanowienia – w związku z pandemią – przepisów szczególnych dotyczących wydłużenia terminów obowiązujących przy realizacji europejskiej inicjatywy obywatelskiej. Stanowi ona kluczowy instrument demokracji uczestniczącej, który pozwala obywatelom Unii – poza aktywnym uczestnictwem w wyborach do PE – wywierać wpływ na system prawny UE.Procedura wystąpienia z inicjatywą obywatelską stanowi proces złożony i wieloetapowy, wymagający pewnej struktury organizacyjnej. Utworzenie komitetu obywatelskiego otwiera drogę do rejestracji inicjatywy i zbierania pod nią deklaracji poparcia. Deklaracje te podlegają następnie weryfikacji i certyfikacji przez właściwe organy krajowe, po czym możliwe jest przedłożenie wniosku i jego rozpatrzenie przez Komisję Europejską. Co istotne, wszystkie te etapy muszą być dokonane w określonych terminach, a ich niedotrzymanie skutkuje upadkiem inicjatywy.W tym kontekście wybuch pandemii i krajowe środki izolacji w zasadzie wykluczyły możliwość skutecznego kontynuowania działań promocyjnych i procesu zbierania deklaracji poparcia – zarówno pod bieżącymi, jak i przyszłymi inicjatywami obywatelskimi. Komisja Europejska słusznie zatem zaproponowała przyjęcie epizodycznego rozporządzenia PE i Rady przewidującego stosowne wydłużenie wszystkich okresów potrzebnych na poszczególne czynności związane z wykonywaniem prawa inicjatywy obywatelskiej.
European protection of cross-border and seasonal workers in the context of the COVID-19 crisis (B9-0172/2020)
. – Kryzys pandemii koronawirusa wpłynął szczególnie negatywnie na sytuację pracowników transgranicznych i sezonowych. W Unii Europejskiej stanowią oni grupę ponad 1,5 miliona osób, z czego wiele pochodzi z Polski. Duża część pracowników transgranicznych i sezonowych w UE pochodzi z regionów zubożałych i podatnych na zagrożenia. Ich praca ma jednak zasadnicze znaczenie dla dostarczania niezbędnych towarów i usług w kluczowych sektorach gospodarki, jak rolnictwo i produkcja żywności, transport czy budownictwo.Specyficzne warunki wykonywania pracy i zatrudnienie najczęściej na podstawie umowy krótkoterminowej powodują dla pracowników transgranicznych i sezonowych szereg komplikacji skutkujących niewystarczającym ubezpieczeniem zdrowotnym i społecznym czy niewielkim bezpieczeństwem pracy. Są oni ponadto narażeni na naruszenia ich praw przez nieuczciwe agencje pośrednictwa pracy czy pracodawców. Wszystkie te utrudnienia znacząco pogłębił wybuch pandemii COVID-19, gdyż pracownicy transgraniczni i sezonowi niekoniecznie kwalifikują się do objęcia tymczasowymi środkami wsparcia.Mając to na uwadze, uważam, że państwa członkowskie – w ścisłej współpracy z Komisją Europejską i Europejskim Urzędem ds. Pracy – powinny zapewnić właściwe egzekwowanie ochrony prawa pracowników transgranicznych i sezonowych do otrzymywania równego wynagrodzenia za taką samą pracę w tym samym miejscu, gwarantować im swobodę przemieszczania się pomiędzy miejscem pracy a miejscem zamieszkania lub państwem pochodzenia, odpowiednie warunki bezpieczeństwa pracy oraz utworzenie systemu wymiany danych, który ułatwi walkę z nadużyciami i łamaniem praw pracowników transgranicznych i sezonowych.
Determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law
Głosowałem za przyjęciem rezolucji, ponieważ od czasu przejęcia władzy w Polsce przez partię J. Kaczyńskiego w 2015 r. rządząca większość parlamentarna usunęła praktycznie wszystkie „bezpieczniki” praworządności. Doszło do tego w wyniku stopniowego przejmowania kontroli nad Trybunałem Konstytucyjnym, Sądem Najwyższym i Krajową Radą Sądownictwa mającą wpływ na nominacje sędziowskie. W efekcie pozbawiona kontroli władza ustawodawcza zaczęła z naruszeniem zasad demokratycznych w coraz szerszym stopniu przekraczać ustrojowy zakres własnych uprawnień i zawłaszczać kompetencje pozostałych władz. Zachwianie równowagi instytucjonalnej i konsolidacja władzy państwowej skutkują tym, że rządy prawa przeistaczają się w rządy prawem. Otwarta zostaje tym samym droga do ucisku w imieniu prawa i dochodzi do coraz częstszych naruszeń praw człowieka. Wyrazem tego jest m.in. coraz częstsze stygmatyzowanie określonych grup społecznych i mniejszości, jak również fakt, że mowa nienawiści i zachowania nietolerancyjne stają się, niestety, coraz bardziej obecne i widoczne w sferze publicznej. Jestem temu zdecydowanie przeciwny.
Digital Services Act and fundamental rights issues posed (A9-0172/2020 - Kris Peeters)
Głosowałem za przyjęciem rezolucji ustawodawczej w sprawie unijnego prawa usług cyfrowych, ponieważ jest to pierwsza aktualizacja ram prawnych dotyczących usług online od 20 lat. Zgodnie z oczekiwaniami Parlamentu nowe regulacje UE mają po raz pierwszy nałożyć na platformy internetowe odpowiedzialność zarówno za zamieszczane na ich stronach produkty, jak i za szkodliwe treści (dezinformacja, mowa nienawiści).Celem nowego prawa ma być też zapewnienie unijnym konsumentom takiej samej ochrony w internecie, jaką cieszą się w świecie realnym. Przepisy powinny ograniczyć nieuczciwe praktyki handlowe, m.in. poprzez zobowiązanie e-platform handlowych, by weryfikowały tożsamość swojego klienta, co pomoże ograniczyć sprzedaż online nielegalnych lub niebezpiecznych produktów. Nowe przepisy mają też uregulować sposób gromadzenia i przetwarzania danych użytkowników przez serwisy internetowe w celach reklamowych. Chodzi tu przede wszystkim o wykorzystywanie algorytmów i technologii opartych na sztucznej inteligencji, które narzucają konsumentom sposób podejmowania decyzji, decydując o tym, jakie informacje zobaczymy na ekranie komputera i co nam może być pokazywane, a co nie.Przyjęcie przepisów regulujących usługi cyfrowe zapewni wreszcie lepszą ochronę danych osobowych Europejczyków w sieci. Konsumenci muszą być odpowiednio informowani, kiedy i z jakiego powodu jest śledzona ich aktywność w sieci. Muszą mieć ponadto prawo do bycia zapomnianym przez platformy internetowe.Z tych właśnie względów głosowałem za.
The right of information of the Parliament regarding the ongoing assessment of the national recovery and resilience plans (B9-0276/2021)
Głosowałem za rezolucją wzywającą do zwiększenia udziału Parlamentu Europejskiego w bieżącej ocenie krajowych planów odbudowy, bo uważam, że wydatkowanie unijnych środków publicznych powinno być poddane kontroli parlamentarnej. Obywatele Unii Europejskiej muszą mieć pewność, że środki pochodzące z Funduszu Odbudowy będą wydatkowane zgodnie z ich przeznaczeniem i że posłużą realizacji właściwych reform, a nie zostaną potraktowane przez rządy państw członkowskich, jako ich fundusz wyborczy.Komisja Europejska powinna regularnie informować Parlament o stanie oceny krajowych planów odbudowy, a także przekazywać nam wszelkie dokumenty przedkładane przez państwa członkowskie. Także te, zawierające podsumowanie procesu konsultacji przeprowadzonych z władzami lokalnymi i regionalnymi, partnerami społecznymi i organizacjami społeczeństwa obywatelskiego. Komisja powinna też skutecznie zachęcić i zmotywować państwa członkowskie, żeby w regulacjach krajowych zawarły przepisy umożlwiające władzom lokalnym i regionalnym monitorowanie wdrażania środków pochodzących z Funduszu Odbudowy.Państwa członkowskie powinny także pamiętać, że Komisja Europejska będzie kontrolowała nie tylko poprawność wydatkowania środków pod względem gospodarczym, zgodnie z celami nakreślonymi w rozporządzeniu RRF, ale też, czy wydatkowanie środków odbywa się przy poszanowaniu przez państwa członkowskie zasad praworządności, o czym przesądza rozporządzenie PE i Rady w sprawie ogólnego systemu warunkowości służącego ochronie budżetu Unii. W tym kontekście, Parlament będzie stanowczo wymagał od Komisji, żeby wypełniała swą rolę strażnika Traktatów.
EU Digital COVID Certificate - Union citizens (C9-0104/2021 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
Przyjęcie unijnego rozporządzenia w sprawie cyfrowego zaświadczenia COVID jest obecnie działaniem koniecznym, bo pozwoli przezwyciężyć ograniczenia, jakich doświadczają obywatele UE w związku z pandemią. Żeby zwalczać koronawirusa, państwa członkowskie przyjęły różne ograniczenia dla osób podróżujących i przekraczających granicę (m.in. obowiązkowe testy, kwarantanna, czy samoizolacja). Unijne cyfrowe zaświadczenie COVID będzie elektronicznym dowodem na to, że dana osoba została zaszczepiona przeciwko koronawirusowi, uzyskała negatywny wynik testu albo jest ozdrowieńcem. Dzięki niemu posiadacz zaświadczenia nie będzie poddawany dodatkowym ograniczeniom w swobodnym przemieszczaniu się. Wbrew licznym obawom posiadanie certyfikatu nie będzie warunkiem swobodnego przemieszczania się. Obywatele, którzy nie są jeszcze zaszczepieni, będą zatem mogli podróżować nadal do innych krajów UE. Z tym, że będą jednak musieli stosować się do przepisów sanitarnych obowiązujących w państwie docelowym. Liczne obawy związane z uruchomieniem ogólnounijnego systemu certyfikatów cyfrowych COVID wzbudza też kwestia ochrony danych osobowych. Obawy te są jednak niepotrzebne, gdyż unijne zaświadczenie cyfrowe będzie zawierało wyłącznie podstawowe informacje, jak imię i nazwisko posiadacza, jego datę urodzenia, informacje nt. szczepionki, testu lub przejścia choroby oraz datę wydania certyfikatu i niepowtarzalny identyfikator. Dane te będą widniały wyłącznie na zaświadczeniu i nie będą przechowywane ani zatrzymywane podczas weryfikacji zaświadczenia w innym państwie członkowskim. Odwiedzane kraje nie będą mogły ich przechowywać.
EU Digital COVID Certificate - third-country nationals (C9-0100/2021 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
. – Przyjęcie unijnego rozporządzenia w sprawie cyfrowego zaświadczenia COVID jest obecnie działaniem koniecznym, bo pozwoli przezwyciężyć ograniczenia, jakich doświadczają obywatele UE w związku z pandemią. Żeby zwalczać koronawirusa, państwa członkowskie przyjęły różne ograniczenia dla osób podróżujących i przekraczających granicę (m.in. obowiązkowe testy, kwarantanna, czy samoizolacja). Unijne cyfrowe zaświadczenie COVID będzie elektronicznym dowodem na to, że dana osoba została zaszczepiona przeciwko koronawirusowi, uzyskała negatywny wynik testu albo jest ozdrowieńcem. Dzięki niemu posiadacz zaświadczenia nie będzie poddawany dodatkowym ograniczeniom w swobodnym przemieszczaniu się. Wbrew licznym obawom posiadanie certyfikatu nie będzie warunkiem swobodnego przemieszczania się. Obywatele, którzy nie są jeszcze zaszczepieni, będą zatem mogli podróżować nadal do innych krajów UE. Z tym, że będą jednak musieli stosować się do przepisów sanitarnych obowiązujących w państwie docelowym. Liczne obawy związane z uruchomieniem ogólnounijnego systemu certyfikatów cyfrowych COVID wzbudza też kwestia ochrony danych osobowych. Obawy te są jednak niepotrzebne, gdyż unijne zaświadczenie cyfrowe będzie zawierało wyłącznie podstawowe informacje, jak imię i nazwisko posiadacza, jego datę urodzenia, informacje nt. szczepionki, testu lub przejścia choroby oraz datę wydania certyfikatu i niepowtarzalny identyfikator. Dane te będą widniały wyłącznie na zaświadczeniu i nie będą przechowywane, ani zatrzymywane podczas weryfikacji zaświadczenia w innym państwie członkowskim. Odwiedzane kraje nie będą mogły ich przechowywać.
Sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health (A9-0169/2021 - Predrag Fred Matić)
Z pełnym przekonaniem głosowałem za przyjęciem rezolucji, w której Parlament Europejski zajął zdecydowane stanowisko w sprawie sytuacji kobiet w Unii Europejskiej i przysługujących im praw w zakresie zdrowia seksualnego i reprodukcyjnego.Kwestia dopuszczalności przerywania ciąży jest w Unii regulowana przez państwa członkowskie i Parlament to szanuje. W rezolucji wzywamy rządy zajęcia się wyzwaniami dotyczącymi praw reprodukcyjnych kobiet, a także zapewnienia m.in. kompleksowej edukacji seksualnej, nowoczesnej antykoncepcji, bezpiecznej i legalnej opieki aborcyjnej, dostępu do leczenia niepłodności i do bezpiecznych produktów menstruacyjnych.Kobieta musi mieć możliwość legalnego przerwania ciąży. Powinna to być zawsze dobrowolna decyzja oparta na życzeniu kobiety, podjęta z jej własnej woli. Niestety w Polsce – po zeszłorocznym drakońskim wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego – obowiązuje obecnie najbardziej rygorystyczne prawo aborcyjne w całej Unii. Kobiety zmuszane są wbrew własnej woli do rodzenia płodów uszkodzonych albo bez szans na przeżycie. To pogwałcenie praw człowieka i forma przemocy wobec kobiet. Faktyczny zakaz aborcji (poza przypadkami ciąż pochodzących z gwałtu) zmusza kobiety do szukania możliwości dokonania nielegalnej aborcji albo podróżowania do innych krajów Unii Europejskiej, gdzie zabiegi te są dostępne i odpłatne. Rezolucja, którą przyjęliśmy, wzywa do rozwiązania tej trudnej i krzywdzącej kobiety sytuacji.
Citizens’ dialogues and citizens’ participation in EU decision-making (A9-0213/2021 - Helmut Scholz)
Dzisiejsza debata powinna stanowić przyczynek do głębszej dyskusji – w jaki sposób ulepszyć dialog obywatelski i uczestnictwo obywateli w procesie decyzyjnym w Unii Europejskiej.Choć wyniki ostatnich wyborów europejskich świadczą o wzroście zainteresowania obywateli wydarzeniami na szczeblu UE, to dane wskazują wyraźnie, że obywatele rzadko korzystają z większości form uczestnictwa, jakie stwarzają m.in.: europejska inicjatywa obywatelska, konsultacje publiczne czy dialogi obywatelskie. Zmiana tego stanu rzeczy z pewnością pozwoliłaby wzmocnić legitymizację demokratyczną Unii. Powstaje jednak pytanie, jak to uczynić. Uważam, że poza udoskonalaniem istniejących mechanizmów partycypacji i wzmocnieniem przejrzystości działań instytucji UE powinniśmy dążyć też do zwiększenia zaangażowania w sprawy europejskie ludzi młodych. Doskonałą okazją do tego jest prowadzona właśnie debata polityczna na temat przyszłości Europy.Krzewienie aktywnego obywatelstwa europejskiego powinno stać się także częścią programu nauczania w państwach członkowskich UE. Jest to o tyle ważne, że gdzieniegdzie u młodych ludzi próbuje się wykształcić postawy antyeuropejskie – myląc, albo celowo zacierając granice pomiędzy patriotyzmem a nacjonalizmem i ksenofobią. Jest to szczególnie widoczne w państwach, gdzie coraz większe znaczenie zyskuje skrajna prawica. Tak jest też niestety w Polsce, gdzie minister edukacji narodowej twierdzi wprost, że Unia Europejska jest tworem niepraworządnym i że tego właśnie mają uczyć się uczniowie. Takie podejście nie służy dialogowi europejskiemu.
Artificial Intelligence Act (A9-0188/2023 - Brando Benifei, Dragoş Tudorache)
Proponowane rozwiązania zawarte w projekcie rozporządzenia nie tworzą dostatecznego zabezpieczenia przed niewłaściwym wykorzystywaniem systemów AI do inwigilacji, gromadzenia i przetwarzania informacji w czasie rzeczywistym. Dotyczy to w szczególności tych krajów UE, w których Komisja godzi się od lat na łamanie praworządności.Bez odpowiednich zabezpieczeń i precyzyjnego katalogu spraw, w których AI może być wykorzystywana do celów inwigilacji ludności, oraz bez ujednoliconej i precyzyjnej procedury udzielania zgody na stosowanie takich środków AI daje rządom możliwość łamania podstawowych praw i wolności obywatelskich przy pomocy nowego narzędzia. Projekt rozporządzenia nie zabezpiecza dostatecznie prawa do prywatności, ochrony wizerunku czy danych osobowych. Wskazuje się tylko na konieczność „poinformowania” o fakcie bycia poddawanym profilowaniu czy innym czynnościom kwalifikującym przez AI, ale nie wskazuje się na prawo i procedurę odmowy czy też braku zgody na przetwarzanie w ten sposób np. naszych danych biometrycznych. Szczególnie jeśli dane te będą zbierane w czasie rzeczywistym. Obywatel nie ma też możliwości weryfikacji czy odwołania się od decyzji, która wynika z profilowania przez AI, ponieważ do skutecznej oceny praw przed sądem należałoby ujawnić wszystkie parametry i algorytm, które stanowiły dane wyjściowe dla systemów. Rozporządzenie również w tej kwestii nie tworzy dostatecznego zabezpieczenia praw jednostki. Wprowadza się „systemy monitorowania”, ale nie mechanizmy i instrumenty ochrony.
Investigation of the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (Recommendation) (B9-0664/2022, B9-0260/2023)
Wnioski komisji śledczej są jednoznaczne. Pegasus okazał się dżinem wypuszczonym z butelki. Nic nie wskazuje na to, że ponownie pozwoli się w niej zamknąć. Oczarował bowiem swoimi możliwościami nie tylko tajne służby, ale także rządy - wszystkie, bez wyjątku, zwłaszcza jednak autorytarne. Dobrze służy każdej władzy i jej interesom politycznym.Wbrew oficjalnym zapewnieniom, że używany jest wyłącznie w celach propaństwowych, Komisja wykazała, że używa się go do inwigilowania przeciwników politycznych i paraliżowania ich działań. Nie sądzę, że Pegasusa da się okiełznać – jest zbyt atrakcyjnym narzędziem walki politycznej. Nikt z niego nie zrezygnuje, o czym świadczy niechęć różnych rządów, instytucji, urzędników i funkcjonariuszy demonstrowana wobec komisji Parlamentu Europejskiego do spraw Pegasusa i odmawianie współpracy z nią. Żeby więc wzmocnić gwarancje obywatelskie i fundamenty państwa prawa, należy pozamykać szczeliny, które wykorzystywane są, żeby usankcjonować korzystanie z Pegasusa, i zdecydowanie zaostrzyć kary za dowiedzione, niedozwolone praktyki z wykorzystaniem tego oprogramowania. Dla Pegasusa niemożliwe nie istnieje, dla człowieka, który ma skłonność do łamania przepisów zwłaszcza pod płaszczem patriotycznych potrzeb – także. Połączenie zatem interesów państwowych z prawami obywatela jest niczym próba pogodzenia ognia z wodą. Mimo wszystko nie mamy innego wyjścia – bez praw obywatelskich nasza wspólnota przestanie być wspólnotą wartości, a będzie jedynie wspólnotą interesów.
Written questions (38)
Establishing a fair digital tax at EU level
EU promotion and support for cooperatives and other forms of social entrepreneurship
Reinforcing the EU standard for protection of consumer rights in the retail credit market by combating usurious practices in the EU
Strengthening the protection of wild animals in the EU by banning their use in circus activities and introducing stricter conditions on transport
European Court of Justice’s authority to dismiss members of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
Recognising burn-out as an occupational disease
Revision of EU rules on services of general economic interest
Disability focal points
Disability focal points
The need for effective digital public administrations
Role of the European Council under the proposed mechanism for the protection of the EU’s financial interests and respect for the rule of law (conditionality regime)
Role of the European Council under the proposed mechanism for the protection of the EU’s financial interests and respect for the rule of law (conditionality regime)
Refusal to grant EU funds to cities in Poland which have established so-called LGBT-free zones
Easing travel restrictions for foreigners in informal relationships with EU citizens (Love Is Not Tourism)
Against the brutal treatment and mass killing of greyhounds used for hunting in Spain
The need to immediately address medical equipment shortages and the lack of doctors and support staff in the Member States
The situation of women in Poland and reimbursement of the costs of terminating a pregnancy in strictly-defined cases anywhere in the EU
Implementation issues related to the Platform to Business Regulation
Food safety risks of imported meat from stolen and unidentified horses from Argentina
Self-employed tourist guides and tour guides excluded from entitlement to state aid notified to the Commission in Poland
Proposal for an advertising tax in Poland
European Citizens’ Initiative as a tool for citizens’ participation in the EU decision-making process
Commission actions to complement national policies on the treatment of endometriosis and improve access to treatment for all women in the EU
Commission support for the creation of student cooperatives in the Member States
Establishment of a temporary unconditional basic income in the EU in order to stem the pandemic and improve the livelihoods of millions of EU citizens and their families
Resumption of logging activities on the Puszcza Białowiska site
Ensuring the availability of EU funding for final recipients – Regulation No 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget
Meeting between the Commission President and the Polish Prime Minister in the context of the ongoing rule of law procedure (Article 7 TEU)
The appropriateness of introducing a state of emergency at the Polish-Belarusian border in the context of a possible joint operation or rapid intervention as part of Frontex
The appropriateness of introducing a state of emergency at the Polish-Belarusian border in the context of a possible joint operation or rapid intervention as part of Frontex
Setting up and correctly targeting assistance from the Just Transition Fund for workers at power plants and mines in the Konin-Turek area of Poland
Revision of target group of social housing
Disinformation campaign by state-owned energy companies to blame the EU for energy price increases in Poland
Natural Gas Directive
The accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area
Revision of the Supreme Court Act and the unblocking of RRP funds
Grain from Ukraine
Polish hauliers protesting at the border with Ukraine
Amendments (417)
Amendment 6 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the importance of the proper implementation of the Directive that aims to address discrepancies between the different audiovisual media services; regrets that not all Member States have done this and encourages them to do so urgently; is concerned that due to the transposition delay, a full-scale ex-post evaluation is not entirely possible at the current stage;
Amendment 11 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the importance of the strengthened country of origin principle that helps providers to abide by the rules and to facilitate the cross-border provision of services; underlines that the country of origin principle is essential to achieve a single market in audiovisual media services, and remains relevant to incentivise investments in innovative and creative productions;
Amendment 16 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that media service providers must ensure, in line with Article 7 of the Directive, that audiovisual services are continuously and progressively made more accessible to people with disabilities; reminds that media service providers should report on a regular basis to the national regulatory authorities or bodies on the implementation of the measures; is concerned that, due to delays in transposition, Member States will not address the needs of people with disabilities;
Amendment 19 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines the importance of providing information and receiving complaints regarding any accessibility issues and therefore, highlights that it is fundamental to designate an easily accessible and publicly available online point of contact in every Member State without undue delay;
Amendment 20 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. In order to fulfil legal obligations in the field of accessibility as effectively as possible, calls on the Commission to promote the exchange of best practices between Member States, as well as between media service providers;
Amendment 21 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Stresses the need for synergies between the implementation of this Directive and the implementation of the Accessibility Act;
Amendment 24 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the Directive’s key provisions to protect minors, including those on commercial communications, especially on unhealthy food or beverages; urges the Commission to secure the strict implementation and proper enforcement of these rules; notes that self- regulatory codes can also be used as an additional tool to reduce the exposure of minors;
Amendment 30 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Notes that the different levels of consumer protection with regards to commercial communications create an unfair-level playing field between audiovisual media services and video sharing platforms, which is detrimental to consumer protection and this issue should be addressed;
Amendment 32 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Stresses that the free movement of services does not interfere with measures taken in accordance with Union law, in relation to the protection or promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity; welcomes the implementation of the required 30% quota obligation for European works in VOD catalogues which has had a positive impact on cultural diversity through greater exposure of the EU audience to European works and by offering more opportunities for European creation to reach viewers across the Digital Single Market; underlines at the same time that European works quotas diverging from the directive or national sub-quotas, additional investment requirements and complex financial contribution obligations create significant compliance costs for market operators and may undermine the integrity of the single market;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4 d. Reminds that streaming is a decisive form of accessing media in the internal market, in particular considering the converging online media environment, where boundaries between audiovisual, music or audio based services are blurring; calls on the Commission and the Member States to further elaborate on the possible application of the AVMSD rules on European works at least regarding promotion, prominence, and discoverability to music streaming services;
Amendment 36 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4 e. Notes the provision protecting the integrity of the broadcasting signal and the provision recognising the ability of Member States to promote the prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest; highlights the need to ensure proper implementation of these provisions; regrets that only very few Member States have taken measures to promote the prominence of general interest audiovisual media services; encourages Member States to adopt comprehensive and effective rules to protect the integrity of the broadcasting signal on all relevant online platforms and user interfaces used to access audiovisual media services;
Amendment 37 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4 f. Notes the opportunities offered by the major non-EU based VOD services to European audiovisual creators and producers; calls on the Commission to look into the impact on the entire value chain in European cultural and creative sector and on how these platforms comply with the internal market rules of the Union;
Amendment 38 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 g (new)
Paragraph 4 g (new)
4 g. Calls on the Commission to monitor and propose ways to remove unjustified and ineffective geo-blocking and to strive to build a harmonised digital single market; regrets that certain obstacles still persist, particularly in the provision of audiovisual services and content;
Amendment 16 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas over the past years, during the COVID-19 pandemic, European governments have set up digital modules to organize testing, vaccination and travel registration in a secure yet easy-to-use digital environment;
Amendment 19 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas digital registration of businesses can encourage a proliferation of letterbox companies resulting in regulatory regime shopping, races to the bottom and social dumping, as well as veiling criminal behaviour such as corruption, fraud, money laundering and tax evasion;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the provision of digital public services implies the use of personal data, and therefore calls on the Commission and Member States to pay special attention to the protection of citizens’ personal data, particularly sensitive data such as medical data and electoral records, stresses that the highest levels of data protection are necessary to encourage trust in institutions and digital public services and promote participation;
Amendment 39 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 47 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that without improvements to digital skills and digital literacy, especially for women, seniors, people with disabilities and economically disadvantaged communities, the European digital single market cannot be built; invites the Commission, therefore, to robustly implement the Digital Education Action Plan;
Amendment 58 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that e-health has untapped potential, and therefore welcomes the Commission’s intention to create a European health data space; emphasises, furthermore, that e-medical records are extremely useful for stimulating cross- border research and providing cross-border healthcare, emphasises the necessity of ensuring the highest level of data protection in this field;
Amendment 60 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the Commission to collect and facilitate the exchange of technologies, experiences, lessons and best practices relevant to eGovernment during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly relating to accessibility and data protection, in order to build resilient institutions prepared for future crises;
Amendment 73 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to encourage interconnection between all Member States’ business registers to facilitate transparency and the availability of up-to-date information on companieand financial reporting on companies and beneficial owners;
Amendment 75 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Underlines the importance of creating and enforcing a comprehensive and coherent EU definition of genuine economic activity for businesses in order to prevent the proliferation of letterbox companies and to protect EU social and fiscal objectives from artificial corporate avoidance structures;
Amendment 93 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 108 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Underlines that digital public administration should be inclusive and easily accessible for people with different needs, such as elderly people and people with disab, people with disabilities and economically disadvantaged communities, eGovernment applications should be inclusive, future- proof, easy to understand, have functional and simple interfaces and multilingual facilities;
Amendment 111 #
2022/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Emphasises the ongoing importance of the ‘digital by default’ principle: public administrations should deliver services digitally as the preferred option while keeping other offline options open for those unable or unwilling to use digital services;
Amendment 4 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the new Industrial Strategy was updated to reflect the lessons learned from COVID-19, and that this strategy will be key to enhancing EU competitiveness and overcoming future challenges; recalls that a strong governance system and market surveillance are essential in order to relaunch the single market; calls on the Commission to focus on ensuring that the industrial strategy helps removing unjustified barriers on the single market barriers and avoiding further fragmentation while not losing sight of putting the digital and environmental transitions at the core of the Union's strategies;
Amendment 12 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines that strengthening the resilience of the Single Market can only deliver benefits for all Member States and their citizens if focusing to consumer rights as well as the needs of businesses, including SMEs, micro enterprises and start-ups;
Amendment 13 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission to further assess the pandemic related disruptions in cross-border value-chains as the industrial strategy must provide the completion of value chains in certain industries in order to achieve the strategic autonomy of the EU; also recalls that in order to achieve strategic autonomy the green and digital transitions must be accelerated across the EU;
Amendment 15 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Recalls that the leadership of European industries in strategic sectors should be maintained and developed also by the implementation of the New Industrial Strategy, especially for those sectors that proved to be essential during the COVID-19 pandemic; underlines that during the pandemic, the supply chains of the food and pharmaceutical sectors have been massively disrupted; recalls that the European food industry must be further strengthened to prevent imbalances in the European food supply chain and to ensure EU food sovereignty; recalls that EU manufacturers and producers need more support in order to achieve the economic independence of third countries and to guarantee European self- sufficiency at pharmaceutical and medical production;
Amendment 17 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Stresses that EU industrial competitiveness relies on a fully functioning Single Market, therefore, also underlines the importance of the barrier- free transport; recalls the usefulness of the EU ad-hoc measures at the pandemic period, but also underlines the necessity to avoid uncoordinated national or regional restrictions, including border controls and closures, restricting the free movement of persons, goods and services in the future as those - inter alia - led to major disruptions of supply chains in many industrial ecosystems as well as to difficulties for cross border or seasonal workers;
Amendment 22 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges the European standardisation strategy and underlines that standardsharmonised standards can increase economic, societal and environmental welfare, including the health and safety of consumers and workers, therefore those are essential for a well- functioning single market, global competitiveness and the green and digital transitions;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the need to strengthen the competitiveness of SMEs and industry by addressing supply risks, dependencies, disruptions and vulnerabilities, especially in the green and digital economies; stresses that effective public procurement will lead to more jobs, growth and innovative investmentpublic investment hand in hand with an effective public procurement can play an important role in supporting more jobs, sustainable growth and innovative investments; recalls that also in public tenders social and ecological criteria must be equated with economic ones;
Amendment 44 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates the need to enhance European strategic autonomy by investing in skills, digital infrastructures and key technologies such as AI, cybersecurity, 5G and 6G, microprocessors and semiconductors, high-performance computing and quantum technologies, as well as data economy, smart and 3D production; Underlines that rural areas and outermost regions must also profit from these investments;
Amendment 58 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls the commitments to increase R&D investments to 3 % of GDP and to develop a single market for research and innovation; underlines that R&D investment should also focus on all industrial sectors and not just the manufacturing sector; underlines that industrial alliances and public-private partnerships are important to develop breakthrough technologies; calls on the Commission to ensure consistency and synergy in all initiatives, funding and regulatory instruments supporting industry;
Amendment 68 #
2022/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reminds that amongst the ecosystems tourism was hit hardest, and several other ecosystems also face a slow recovery, while the digital ecosystem increased its turnover during the crisis; recalls that in addition to vertical ecosystems, there is a need to have horizontal approaches, such as on enabling technologies, and that the digital ecosystem must be integrated with all other industrial ecosystems horizontally.
Amendment 184 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(aa) in paragraph 2, point (c) is replaced by the following: ‘(c) any marketing of a good, in one Member State, as bewith seemingly identical to a goodpresentation to another good, which is marketed, in other Member States, while that good has significantlyunder the same brand, trademark or designation, while that good presents differentces in composition or characteristics, unless justified by legitimate and objective factors.including its sensory profile;’
Amendment 313 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 13 a (new)
Annex I – point 13 a (new)
(3a) the following point 13a is inserted: 13a. Any marketing of a good as being identical or seemingly identical to the other good marketed in one or various Member State, while those goods have different composition or characteristics which have not been clearly marked on the packaging, so as to be visible to the consumer.
Amendment 45 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Companies should take appropriate steps to set up and carry out due diligence measures, with respect to their own operations, their subsidiaries, as well as their established direct and indirect business relationships throughout their value chains in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. This Directive should not require companies to guarantee, in all circumstances, that adverse impacts will never occur or that they will be stopped. For example with respect toWhen companies are not in a position to avoid adverse impacts from the value chains, they should be required to terminate the harmful business relationships where the adverse impaand to modify the struct uresults from State intervention, the company might not be in a position to arrive at such results. Therefore, the main obligations in this Directive should be ‘obligations of means’ of their value chains in order to ensure that that no longer contributes to or can be a cause of the adverse impact. The company should take the appropriate measures which can reasonably be expected to result in prevention or minimisation of the adverse impact under the circumstances of the specific case. Account should be taken of the specificities of the company’s value chain, sector or geographical area in which its value chain partners operate, the company’s power to influence its direct and indirect business relationships, and whether the company could increase its power of influence.
Amendment 52 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The value chain should cover activities related to the production, distribution and sale of a good or provision of services by a company, includingand any of its directly and indirectly-owned subsidiaries and branches including inter alia the development of the product or the service and the use and disposal of the product as well as the related activities of established business relationships of the company. It should encompass upstream established direct and indirect business relationships that design, extract, manufacture, transport, store and supply raw material, products, parts of products, or provide services to the company and any of its directly and indirectly-owned subsidiaries and branches that are necessary to carry out the company’s activities, and also downstream relationships, including established direct and indirect business relationships, that use or receive products, parts of products or services from the company and any of its directly- and indirectly-owned subsidiaries and branches up to the end of life of the product, including inter alia the distribution of the product to retailers, the transport and storage of the product, dismantling of the product, its recycling, composting or landfillsale of products or provisions of services to consumers whatever the means (e.g. franchising, licensing), the transport and storage of the product, dismantling of the product, its recycling, composting or landfilling. As pointed out in the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the value chain should cover the various structures that the company and any of its directly and indirectly-owned subsidiaries and branches use to operate including inter alia franchising, licensing and subcontracting.
Amendment 60 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to allow companies to properly identify the adverse impacts in their value chain and to make it possible for them to exercise appropriate leverage, the due diligence obligations should be limited in this Directive to establishedcover all business relationships. For the purpose of this Directive, established business relationships should mean such direct and indirect business relationships which are, or which are expected to be lasting, in view of their intensity and duration and which do not represent a negligible or ancillary part of the value chain. The nature of business relationships as “established” should be reassessed periodically, and at least every 12 months. If the direct business relationship of a company is established, then all linked indirect business relationships should also be considered as established regarding that company.
Amendment 66 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Under this Directive, EU companies with more than 500 employees on average and a worldwide net turnover exceeding EUR 1508 million in the financial year preceding the last financial year should be required to comply with due diligence. As regards companies which do not fulfil those employee criteriaon, but which had more than 250 employees on average and more than EUR 408 million worldwide net turnover in the financial year preceding the last financial year and which operate in one or more high-impact sectors, due diligence should apply 2 years after the end of the transposition period of this directive, in order to provide for a longer adaptation period. In order to ensure a proportionate burden, companies operating in such high- impact sectors should be required to comply with more targeted due diligence focusing on severe adverse impacts. Temporary agency workers, including those posted under Article 1(3), point (c), of Directive 96/71/EC, as amended by Directive 2018/957/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council103 , should be included in the calculation of the number of employees in the user company. Posted workers under Article 1(3), points (a) and (b), of Directive 96/71/EC, as amended by Directive 2018/957/EU, should only be included in the calculation of the number of employees of the sending company. _________________ 103 Directive (EU) 2018/957 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 June 2018 amending Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (OJ L 173, 9.7.2018, p. 16).
Amendment 70 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to reflect the priority areas of international action aimed at tackling human rights and environmental issues, the selection of high-impact sectors for the purposes of this Directive should be based on existing sectoral OECD due diligence guidance. The following sectors should be regarded as high-impact for the purposes of this Directive: the manufacture of textiles, leather and related products (including footwear), and the wholesale trade of textiles, clothing and footwear; agriculture, forestry, fisheries (including aquaculture), the manufacture of food products, and the wholesale trade of agricultural raw materials, live animals, wood, food, and beverages; the energy; extraction, transport and handling of mineral resources regardless of where they are extracted from (including crude petroleum, natural gas, coal, lignite, metals and metal ores, as well as all other, non-metallic minerals and quarry products), the manufacture of basic metal products, other non-metallic mineral products and fabricated metal products (except machinery and equipment), and the wholesale trade of mineral resources, basic and intermediate mineral products (including metals and metal ores, construction materials, fuels, chemicals and other intermediate products). As regards the financial sector, due to its specificities, in particular as regards the value chain and the services offered, even if it is covered by sector-specific OECD guidance, it should not form part of the high-impact sectors covered by this Directive. At the same time, in this sector, the broader coverage of actual and potential adverse impacts should be ensured by also including very large companies in the scope that are regulated financial undertakings, even if they do not have a legal form with limited liability; construction, logistics and infrastructures; oil and gas production and oil refining sector; financial services; auditing and certification.
Amendment 72 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to achieve fully the objectives of this Directive addressing human rights and adverse environmental impacts with respect to companies’ operations, subsidiaries and value chains, third-country companies with significant operations in the EU should also be covered. More specifically, the Directive should apply to third-country companies which generated a net turnover of at least EUR 1508 million in the Union in the financial year preceding the last financial year or a net turnover of more than EUR 40 million but less than EUR 150 million in the financial year preceding the last financial year in one or more of the high- impact sectors, as of 2 years after the end of the transposition period of this Directive. Business enterprises may have various structures resulting in a single company having a net turnover below the threshold. As mentioned in the Interpretative Guide to the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, companies may operate inter alia through various subsidiaries or follow a franchise model. Companies may also outsource or subcontract significant activities. Therefore, net turnover generated by the company in the Union should include net turnover generated directly in the Union by the company and the net turnover generated in the Union by its directly and indirectly-owned subsidiaries and branches, as well as the net turnover generated in the Union through third party undertakings with whom the company or its directly and indirectly- owned subsidiaries and branches have entered into a vertical agreement in return for payment of royalties or an outsourcing agreement.
Amendment 78 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to conduct appropriate human rights, and environmental due diligence with respect to their operations, their subsidiaries, and their value chains, companies covered by this Directive should integrate due diligence into corporate policies, identify, prevent and mitigate as well as bring to an end and minimise the extent of potential and actual adverse human rights and environmental impacts, establish and maintain a complaints proceduregrievance mechanism, monitor the effectiveness of the taken measures in accordance with the requirements that are set up in this Directive and communicate publicly on their due diligence and related information in order to support companies, their subsidiaries and business partners operating in developing countries to identify, prevent and effectively address actual or potential adverse impacts on human rights and environment. In order to ensure clarity for companies, in particular the steps of preventing and mitigating potential adverse impacts and of bringing to an end, or when this is not possible, minimising and providing for remediation of actual adverse impacts should be clearly distinguished in this Directive.
Amendment 84 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Under the due diligence obligations set out by this Directive, a company should identify actual or potential adverse human rights and environmental impacts. In order to allow for a comprehensive identification of adverse impacts, such identification should be based on meaningful stakeholder engagement and quantitative and qualitative information. For instance, as regards adverse environmental impacts, the company should obtain information about baseline conditions at higher risk sites or facilities in value chains. Identification of adverse impacts should include assessing the human rights, and environmental context in a dynamic way and in regular intervals: prior to a new activity or relationship, prior to major decisions or changes in the operation; in response to or anticipation of changes in the operating environment; and periodically, at least every 12 months, throughout the life of an activity or relationship. Regulated financial undertakings providing loan, credit, or other financial services should identify the adverse impacts only at the inception of the contract. When identifying adverse impacts, companies should also identify and assess the impact of a business relationship’s business model and strategies, including trading, procurement and pricing practices. Where the company cannot prevent, bring to an end or minimize all its adverse impacts at the same time, it should be able to prioritize its action, provided it takes the measures reasonably available to the company, taking into account the specific circumstances.
Amendment 89 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) In order to avoid undue burden on the smaller companies operating in high- impact sectors which are covered by this Directive, those companies should only be obliged to identify those actual or potential severe adverse impacts that are relevant to the respective sector.
Amendment 91 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) In line with international standards, prevention and mitig, mitigation and remediation as well as bringing to an end and minimisation of adverse impacts should fully take into account the interests of those adversely impacted. In order to enable continuous engagement with the value chain business partn and should be designed and deter minsteaed ofn termination of business relations (disengagement) and possibly exacerbating adverse impacts, this Directive should ensure that disengagementhe basis of meaningful engagement with them. Companies should engage isn a last-resort action, in line with the Union`s policy of zero- tolerance on child labour. Terminating a business relationship in which child labour was found could expose the child to even more severe adverse human rights impacts. This should therefore be taken into account when deciding on the appropriate action to taketimely manner, efficiently and meaningfully with stakeholders impacted by the decision to suspend or terminate the adverse impacts before reaching that decision, and shall address the adverse impacts derived from those actions.
Amendment 94 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) So as to comply with the prevention and mitigation obligation under this Directive, companies should be required to take the following actions, where relevant. Where necessary due to the complexity of prevention measures, c. Companies should develop and implement a prevention action plan. Companies should seek to obtain contractual assurances from a direct partner with whom they have an established business relationship that it will ensure compliance with the code of conduct or the prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners to the extent that their activities are part of the companies’ value chain. The contractual assurances should be accompanied by appropriate measures to verify compliance. To ensure comprehensive prevention of actual and potential adverse impacts, companies should also adapt their business models and strategies, including trading, procurement, purchasing and pricing practices, and make investments which aim to prevent adverse impacts, provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which they have an established business relationship such as financing, for example, through direct financing, low-interest loans, guarantees of continued sourcing, and assistance in securing financing, to help implement the code of conduct or prevention action plan, or technical guidance such as in the form of training, management systems upgrading, and collaborate with other companies.
Amendment 109 #
2022/0051(COD)
(39) So as to comply with the obligation of bringing to an end and minimising the extent of actual adverse impacts under this Directive, companies should be required to take the following actions, where relevant. They should neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent to the greatest extent possible, with an action proportionate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contribution of the company’s conduct to the adverse impact. Where necessary due to the fact that the adverse impact cannot be immediately brought to an end, companies should develop and implement a corrective action plan with reasonable and clearly defined timelines for action and qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement. Companies should also seek to obtain contractual assurances from a direct business partner with whom they have an established business relationship that they will ensure compliance with the company’s code of conduct and, as necessary, a prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners, to the extent that their activities are part of the company’s value chain. The contractual assurances should be accompanied by the appropriate measures to verify compliance. Finally, companies should also make investments aiming at ceasing or minimising the extent of adverse impact to the greatest extent possible, provide targeted and proportionate support for an SMEs with which they have an established business relationship and collaborate with other entities, including, where relevant, to increase the company’s ability to bring the adverse impact to an end.
Amendment 115 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Companies should provide the possibility for persons and organisations to submit complaintgrievances directly to them in case of legitimate concerns regarding actual or potential human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Organisations who could submit such complaintgrievances should include trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing individuals working in the value chain concerned and, civil society organisations active in the areas related to the value chain concerned where they have knowledge about a potential or actual adverse impactnd human rights and environmental defenders. Companies should establish a procedure for dealing with those complaintgrievances and inform all relevant stakeholders, including workers, trade unions and other workers’ representatives, where relevant, about such processes. Recourse to the complaintgrievances and remediation mechanism should not prevent the complainant from having recourse to judicial remedies. In accordance with international standards, complaintgrievances should be entitled to request from the company appropriate follow-up on the complaintgrievance and to meet with the company’s representatives at an appropriate level to discuss potential or actual severe adverse impacts that are the subject matter of the complaint. This access should not lead to unreasonable solicitations of companiesgrievance.
Amendment 122 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Companies should monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their due diligence measures. They should carry out periodic assessments of their own operations, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to the value chains of the company, those of their established business relationships, to monitor the effectiveness of the identification, prevention, minimisation, bringing to an end and mitigation of human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Such assessments should verify that adverse impacts are properly identified, due diligence measures are implemented and adverse impacts have actually been prevented or brought to an end. In order to ensure that such assessments are up-to- date, they should be carried out at least every 12 months and be revised in-between if there are reasonable grounds to believe that significant new risks of adverse impact could have arisen.
Amendment 123 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Like in the existing international standards set by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD framework, it forms part of the due diligence requirement to communicate externally relevant information on due diligence policies, processes and activities conducted to identify and address actual or potential adverse impacts, including the findings and outcomes of those activities. The proposal to amend Directive 2013/34/EU as regards corporate sustainability reporting sets out relevant reporting obligations for the companies covered by this directive. In order to avoid duplicating reporting obligations, this Directive should therefore not introduce any new reporting obligations in addition to those under Directive 2013/34/EU for the companieNotwithstanding the reporting requirements under Directive 2013/34/EU, Member States should ensure that companies report on the matters covered by thatis Directive as well as the reporting standards that should be developed under it. As regards companies that are within the scope of this Directive, but do not fall under Directive 2013/34/EU, in order to comply with their obligation of communicating as part of the due diligence under this Directive, they should publish on their website an annual statement in a language customary in the sphere of international businessby publishing on their website, in an accessible and timely manner, their due diligence policies, prevention action plans, correction action plans, procedures for dealing with grievances, reports on the outcome of the assessments as well as other relevant information.
Amendment 128 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 45 a (new)
Recital 45 a (new)
(45 a) A full, safe, meaningful and effective engagement of all relevant stakeholders throughout all the steps of due diligence process in the whole value chain is fundamental in order to ensure a proper implementation of this Directive. In line with international standards, that process should be interactive, responsive, continuous, gender-responsive, child- sensitive and adapted to vulnerable stakeholders. Their involvement should take place timely and prior to decisions that could cause any adverse impacts. All relevant information needed by stakeholders to make informed judgments should be made available in an accessible and transparent manner, including meaningful information about operations, projects and investments and their actual and potential adverse impacts.
Amendment 129 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to provide support and practical tools to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations, the Commission, using relevant international guidelines and standards as a reference, and in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and where appropriate with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, should have the possibility to issue guidelines, including for specific sectors or specific adverse impacts.
Amendment 135 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) The Commission and Member States should continue to work in partnership with third countries to support upstream economic operators build the capacity to effectively prevent and mitigate adverse human rights and environmental impacts of their operations and business relationships, paying specific attention to the challenges faced by smallholders. They should use their neighbourhood, development and international cooperation instruments to support third country governments and upstream economic operators in third countries addressing adverse human rights and environmental impacts of their operations and upstream business relationships. This could include working with partner country governments, the local private sector and stakeholders on addressing the root causes of adverse human rights and environmental impacts. In the same line, the Commission and Member States should provide targeted support to stakeholders in developing countries, in order to ensure their meaningful engagement in all due diligence processes. In particular, support should be provided to national and local civil society organisations to monitor corporate practices and hold companies accountable and dedicated measures and funds should ease access to justice.
Amendment 141 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) In order to ensure effective compensation of victims of adverse impacts, Member States should be required to lay down rules governing the civil liability of companies for damages arising due to its failure to comply with the due diligence process. Thefrom adverse impacts. Companies should be strictly liable for damages arising from any adverse impacts and resulting from their own operations or those of their subsidiaries. For damages arising from adverse impacts resulting from the operations of partners with whom they have a business relationships, companyies should be liable for damages if they failed to comply with the obligations to prevent and mitigate potential adverse impacts or to bring actual impacts to an end and minimise their extent, and as a result of this failure an adverse impact that should have been identified, prevented, mitigated, brought to an end or its extent minimised through the appropriate measures occurred and led to damage.
Amendment 144 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) As regards damages occurring at the level of established indirect business relationships, the liability of the company should be subject to specific conditions. The company should not be liable if it carried out specific due diligence measures. However, it should not be exonerated from liability through implementing such measures in case it was unreasonable to expect that the action actually taken, including as regards verifying compliance, would be adequate to prevent, mitigate, bring to an end or minimise the adverse impact. In addition, in the assessment of the existence and extent of liability, due account is to be taken of the company’s efforts, insofar as they relate directly to the damage in question, to comply with any remedial action required of tany person with a legitimate interest should be entitled to obtain from the company the full extent of damages resulting from any adverse impact and the company should benefit from a legal assurance to obtain compensation from the partners with whom it has an establishemd by a supervisory authority, any investments made and any targeted support provided as well as any collaboration with other entities to address adverse impacts in its value chainsusiness relationship and who are responsible for the adverse impact.
Amendment 148 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) The liability regime does not regulate who should provcompany should bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that the company’s action was reasonably adequate under the circumstances of the case, therefore this question is left to national law.
Amendment 165 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 169 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) on access to justice, including judicial and non judicial remedies for victims of the adverse impacts and persons or group of persons with legitimate interests;
Amendment 172 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 175 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall not constitute grounds for reducing the level of protection of human rights, including access to justice or of protection of the environment or the protection of the climate provided for by the law of Member States at the time of the adoption of this Directive.
Amendment 182 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the company had more than 500 employees on average and had a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 1508 million in the last financial year for which annual financial statements have been prepared;
Amendment 185 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) the company did not reach the thresholds under point (a), but had more than 250 employees on average and had a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 408 million in the last financial year for which annual financial statements have been prepared, provided thatand at least 50% of this net turnover was generated in one or more of the following sectors:
Amendment 187 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii
(iii) theenergy, extraction, transports and handling of mineral resources regardless from where they are extracted (including crude petroleum, natural gas, coal, lignite, metals and metal ores, as well as all other, non-metallic minerals and quarry products), the manufacture of basic metal products, other non-metallic mineral products and fabricated metal products (except machinery and equipment), and the wholesale trade of mineral resources, basic and intermediate mineral products (including metals and metal ores, construction materials, fuels, chemicals and other intermediate products).
Amendment 188 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
(iii a) mechanical and electronic engineering industry;
Amendment 189 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
(iii a) construction, logistics and infrastructures;
Amendment 190 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii c (new)
(iiic) oil and gas production and oil refining sector;
Amendment 191 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii d (new)
(iiid) financial services;
Amendment 192 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii e (new)
(iiie) auditing and certification;
Amendment 194 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. This Directive shall also apply to companies which are formed in accordance with the legislation of a third country, and fulfil one of the following conditions:generated a net turnover of more than EUR 8 million in the Union in the financial year preceding the last financial year.
Amendment 199 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 203 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 217 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) ‘business relationship’ means a relationship withbetween the company or one of its subsidiaries, a contractor, subcontractor or any other legal entities (‘partner’) within their value chain;
Amendment 219 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 227 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ‘value chain’ means activities related to the production, distribution or sale of goods or the provision of services by a company, or any of its directly and indirectly-owned subsidiaries and branches, including the development of the product or the service and the use and disposal of the product as well as the related activities of upstream and downstream established business relationships of the company. As regards companies within the meaning of point (a)(iv), ‘value chain’ with respect to the provision of these specific services shall only include the activities of the clients receiving such loan, credit, and other financial services and of other companies belonging to the same group whose activities are linked to the contract in question. The value chain of such regulated financial undertakings does not cover SMEs receiving loan, credit, financing, insurance or reinsurance of such entities;
Amendment 244 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n
(n) ‘stakeholders’ means the company’s employees, the employees of its subsidiaries, and other individuals, groups, communities or entities whose rights or interests are or could be affected by the products, services and operations of that company, its subsidiaries and its business relationships;:
Amendment 247 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n – point i (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n – point i (new)
i) the company’s employees, the employees of its subsidiaries and value chain workers, and other individuals, including children, groups, communities or entities whose rights or interests are or could be affected by the potential or actual adverse impacts on human rights, climate and environment caused by a company, its subsidiaries and its business relationships, including through the value chain;
Amendment 248 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n – point ii (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n – point ii (new)
ii) other legal or natural persons promoting, protecting and defending, as part of their statutory purpose or otherwise, human rights, the environment, including trade unions and workers representatives;
Amendment 252 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
(n a) ‘human rights and environmental defenders’ mean individuals, groups and structures of society, including non- government organisations, that promote, protect and defend human rights and the environment;
Amendment 253 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n b (new)
(nb) ‘vulnerable stakeholders’ means individuals and right-holder groups that find themselves in marginalised situations and situations of vulnerability, due to specific contexts or intersecting factors, including, among others, their sex, gender, age, race, ethnicity, class, education, indigenous identity, migration status, disability, as well as social and economic status, which are the causes of differentiated and often disproportionate adverse impacts, and create discrimination and an additional barrier to participation and access to justice;
Amendment 254 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n c (new)
(nc) ‘meaningful engagement’ means an interactive, responsive, ongoing and gender-responsive, child-sensitive process of engagement with stakeholders, adapted to vulnerable stakeholders, taking place at each phase of and throughout the entire due diligence process, which is proactive, takes place prior to taking decisions that may impact stakeholders, takes their interest into consideration and involves the timely provision of all relevant information needed by stakeholders to make informed judgments, in an accessible and transparent manner, including meaningful information about operations, projects and investments and their actual and potential adverse impacts;
Amendment 268 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) identifying actual or potential risks and adverse impacts in accordance with Article 6;
Amendment 270 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) preventing and mitigating potential potential and actual adverse impacts, mitigating and bringing actual adverse impacts to an end and minimising their extent in accordance with Articles 7 and 8;
Amendment 272 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) establishing and maintaining a complaints procedureeffective grievance mechanisms in accordance with Article 9;
Amendment 274 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of their due diligence policy and measures and reviewing it in accordance with Article 10;
Amendment 275 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) disclosing relevant information and publicly communicating on due diligence in accordance with Article 11.;
Amendment 276 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(f a) engaging meaningfully and safely with stakeholders throughout the due diligence process.
Amendment 279 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that companies integrate due diligence into all their corporate policies and have in place a due diligence policy. The due diligence policy shall containbe developed with meaningful engagement of stakeholders and shall contain at least all of the following:
Amendment 283 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a description of the company’s approach, including in the long term, to due diligencedue diligence strategy, including in the short, medium and long term, which includes a comprehensive description of the company’s corporate structure, business relationships, and value chains, including inter alia a list of the company’s business relationships and production sites;
Amendment 287 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a code of conduct to be established with the full engagement of trade unions and workers’ representatives as well as other stakeholders, describing rules and, principles and commitments to be followed by the company’s employees and, subsidiaries and business relationships in the company’s entire value chain;
Amendment 289 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a description of the processes put in place to implement due diligence, including: - the measures taken to verify compliance with the code of conduct and to extend its application to established business relationships.including tools, methodology, objectives and timeline of the measures; - the measures to extend its application to business relationships, including contractual provisions; and - a description of the measures to ensure the safety and meaningful engagement with stakeholders
Amendment 293 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) a strategy of co-investment to build the capacity of weaker business partners to carry out due diligence, taking into account the leverage of the company to ensure that the costs of the due diligence process are not passed on to business partners in a weaker position.
Amendment 296 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the companies review, publish and update their due diligence policy once they identify any new actual and potential adverse impacts and at least annually.
Amendment 304 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to identify actual and potential adverse human rights impacts and actual and potential adverse environmental impacts arising from their own operations or those of their subsidiaries and, where related to entities on their value chains, from their established with which companies have a business relationships, in accordance with paragraph 2, 3 and 4.
Amendment 308 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that companies map their value chains and publicly disclose relevant information including names, locations, types of products and services supplied, and other relevant information concerning subsidiaries and business.
Amendment 313 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (b), and Article 2(2), point (b), shall only be required to identify actual and potential severe adverse impacts relevant to the respective sector mentioned in Article 2(1), point (b).
Amendment 316 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall ensure that, when identifying actual and potential adverse impacts, companies also identify and assess the impacts of their business models and strategies, including trading, procurement and pricing practices.
Amendment 323 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that, for the purposes of identifying and assessing the adverse impacts referred to in paragraph 1 based on, where appropriate, quantitative and qualitative information, companies are entitled to make use of appropriate resources, including independent reports and information gathered through the complaints proceduregrievance mechanisms provided for in Article 9. Companies shall, where relevant, also carry out consultations with potentially affected groups including workers and other relevant stakeholders to gatheralso have an effective and meaningful engagement with all relevant stakeholders, and potentially affected groups to to identify and assess information on actual or potential adverse impacts.
Amendment 324 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Member States shall ensure that stakeholders have the right to request additional information from a company regarding the actions taken in accordance with Article 4. The information shall be provided in writing and shall be adequate and comprehensible. The company shall provide information within a reasonable time. If the company refuses a request for information, it shall inform the stakeholders about the grounds for the refusal. Any stakeholder whose request for information is refused may demand a more detailed justification for the refusal. The justification shall be provided in writing within a reasonable timeframe. In the event the company does not provide sufficient justification, ignores the request, or refuses to disclose, whether in part or in full, the requested information, Member States shall ensure that supervisory authorities or a court of law are entitled, at the request of any person with legal standing under national law, to order the disclosure of the information.
Amendment 325 #
2022/0051(COD)
1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 6, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this Article. The appropriate measures shall apply to a company’s own operations, subsidiaries as well as direct and indirect business relationships.
Amendment 330 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Companies shall at least be required to take the following actions, where relevant:
Amendment 331 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) where necessary due to the nature or complexity of the measures required for prevention, develop and implement a prevention action plan, with reasonable and clearly defined timelines for action and qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement. The prevention action plan shall be developed in consultation with affected stakeholders; on the basis of: - qualitative and quantitative indicators; - independent reports and information gathered through the complaints mechanisms provided for in Article 9; - the context of their operations, the impact of their business models and strategies, including trading, purchasing and pricing practices, and the impact of their business relationships’ business, models and strategies; - meaningful engagement with stakeholders, taking due account of barriers to participation faced by stakeholders and of specific needs by vulnerable stakeholders.
Amendment 340 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) make necessary investments, capacity building, joint prevention and mitigation measures such as into management or production processes and, infrastructures, to comply with paragraph 1 and product traceability;
Amendment 341 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) adapt business models and strategies, including adequate trading, procurement, purchasing and pricing practices, in order to support business relationships compliance and to prevent potential adverse impacts;
Amendment 347 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which the company has an established business relationship, where compliance with the code of conduct or the prevention action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME;
Amendment 348 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) in compliance with Union law including competition law, collaborate with other entities, including, where relevant, to increase the company’s ability to bring the adverse impact to an end, in particular where no other action is suitable or effective.
Amendment 355 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Amendment 360 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Member States shall ensure that third party auditors authorised to verify compliance are certified by public authorities, are independent and can be held accountable for the reliability and quality of the audit and for failure to conduct adequate verification.
Amendment 363 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
As regards potential adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, the company shall be required tobecause mitigation is not possible or acceptable, or there is no reasonable prospect of change, companies shall refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in connection with or in the value chain of which the impact has arisen and shall, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to,. In such cases companies shall take the following actions:
Amendment 366 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) temporarily suspend commercial relations with the partner in question, while pursuing prevention and minimisation efforts, if there is reasonable expectation that these efforts will succeed in the short- termtigation efforts;
Amendment 367 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) engage in a timely manner, efficiently and meaningfully with stakeholders impacted by the decision to suspend or terminate the business relationship before taking such decision, and shall address the adverse impacts derived from those actions;
Amendment 369 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is sevewhen mitigation and ceasing of the impact is made impossible, in particular by its systemic or state-imposed nature.;
Amendment 370 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) identify, prevent and mitigate the potential or actual adverse impacts related to the suspension or termination of the relationship.
Amendment 372 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall provide for the availability of an option to suspend or to terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws.
Amendment 375 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Amendment 382 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where the adverse impact cannot be brought to an end, Member States shall ensure that companies minimise the extent of such an impacttigate the impact to the greatest extent possible, while continuing to pursue all efforts to bring the adverse impact to an end.
Amendment 385 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Companies shall at least be required to take the following actions, where relevant:
Amendment 388 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extenttigate it, to the greatest extent possible by appropriate remedies,, including by the payment of damages to the affected persons and of financial compensation to the affected communities. The action shall be proportionate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contributipersons, groups of persons of the company’s conduct to the adverse impact;r communities.
Amendment 393 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) where necessary due to the fact that the adverse impact cannot be immediately brought to an end, develop and implement a corrective action plan with reasonable and clearly defined timelines for action and qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement. Where relevant, tThe corrective action plan shall be developed in consultation with stakeholderswith the meaningful engagement of stakeholders, including trade unions and workers’representatives, and shall be made publicly available;
Amendment 399 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) make necessary investments, such as into management or production processes and infrastructures, capacity building, joint prevention and mitigation measures and infrastructures, and product traceability to comply with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3;
Amendment 400 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(d a) adapt business models and strategies, including adequate trading, procurement, purchasing and pricing practices, in order to support compliance by business relationships and to prevent potential adverse impacts;
Amendment 405 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which the company has an established business relationship, where compliance with the code of conduct or the corrective action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME;
Amendment 406 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) in compliance with Union law including competition law, collaborate with other entities, including, where relevant, to increase the company’s ability to bring the adverse impact to an end, in particular where no other action is suitable or effective.
Amendment 410 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Amendment 415 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
As regards actual adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 that could not be brought to an end or the extent of which could not be minimised by the measures provided for in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, the company shall refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in connection to or in the value chain of which the impact has arisen and shall, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, take one of the following actions:
Amendment 418 #
2022/0051(COD)
(a) temporarily suspend commercial relationships with the partner in question, while pursuing efforts to bring to an end or minimistigate the extent of the adverse impact, or
Amendment 419 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) engage in a timely manner, efficiently and meaningfully with stakeholders impacted by the decision to suspend or terminate the business relationship before taking such decision, and shall address the adverse impacts derived from those actions;
Amendment 420 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, if the adverse impact is considered seve where mitigation and ceasing of the impact is made impossible, in particular by its systemic or state-imposed nature.
Amendment 421 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) identify, prevent and mitigate the potential or actual adverse impacts related to the suspension or termination of the relationship.
Amendment 423 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall provide for the availability of an option to suspend or to terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws.
Amendment 427 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Amendment 429 #
Amendment 431 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that companies provide the possibility for persons and organisations listed in paragraph 2 to submit early warnings and complaints to them where they have legitimate concerns regarding actual or potential adverse human rights impacts, actual or potential and adverse environmental impacts with respect to their own operations, the operations of their subsidiaries, and their value chains operations carried out by entities with which the company has a business relationship. .
Amendment 441 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensure that the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 are legitimate, accessible, predictable, safe, equitable, transparent and human- rights compatible and complaints may be submitted by:
Amendment 443 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) persons who are affected or have reasonable grounds to believe that they might be affected by an adverse impactindividuals, groups, communities or entities whose rights or interests are or could be affected by the products, services and operations of that company, its subsidiaries and its business relationships throughout the entire value chain,
Amendment 446 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the company’s employees, the employees of its subsidiaries, workers; trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing individuals working inthroughout all parts of the value chain concerned,
Amendment 452 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) civil society organisations active in the areas related to the entire value chain concerned.
Amendment 454 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) business partners that are unable to fulfil the requirements of contractual assurances as referred to in Article 7.2(b) and 8.3(c) due to unfair purchasing practices of their buyers.
Amendment 457 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the companies establish a safe procedure for dealing with complaints referred to in paragraph 1, including a procedure whenby ensuring theat company considers the complaint to be unfoundedlaints are anonymous and confidential; , and inform the relevant workers and trade unions of those procedures. Member States shall ensure that where the complaint is well-founded, the adverse impact that is the subject matter of the complaint is deemed to be identified within the meaning of Article 6.
Amendment 461 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) to meet with the company’s representatives at an appropriate level to discuss potential or actual severe adverse impacts that are the subject matter of the complaint.
Amendment 463 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)
(b a) to obtain an effective remedy from companies, as referred to in and within the meaning of Article 8(3) point (a), through the complaints mechanism and receive guarantees that harms that are the subject of the complaint will not be repeated.
Amendment 465 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 471 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that companies carry out periodic assessments of their own operations and measures, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to those of the value chains of the company, those of their established business relationships, to monitor the effectiveness of the identification, prevention, mitigation, bringing to an end and minimisation of the extent of human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out with a meaningful engagement of stakeholders. They shall be conducted at least every 12 months and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that significant new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise. The due diligence policy shall be updated and the operations and measures modified in accordance with the outcome of those assessments. The company shall provide a public report of the outcome of the assessments including copies of third- party verification audits and shall inform stakeholders, including trade unions and workers’ representatives.
Amendment 477 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Amendment 480 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 concerning the content and criteria for such reporting under paragraph 1, specifying information on the description of due diligence, potential and actual adverse impacts and actions taken on those, as well as related information in order to support companies, their subsidiaries and business partners operating in developing countries to identify, prevent and effectively address actual or potential adverse impacts on human rights and the environment. .
Amendment 482 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Amendment 485 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
In order to provide support to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations, the Commission, in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, and where appropriate with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, may issue guidelines, including for specific sectors or specific adverse impacts. the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and where appropriate with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, shall issue guidelines, including for the following aspects: – specific high-risk sectors of economic activity leading to significant adverse impacts on human rights, the environment and good governance, including but not limited to sectors referred to in Article 2(1b), - full mapping of companies’ value chains and efficient processes to monitor partners’ behaviours throughout the entire value chain, - specific adverse impacts, including adverse impacts on good governance, - responsible and sustainable trading, purchasing and pricing policies, - facilitation of access to justice for victims, including regarding collective redress, representative actions, non- discriminatory costs of proceedings and appropriate limitation periods, - prevention and mitigation of retaliation risks faced by stakeholders, including human rights and environmental defenders, for their participation, - implementation of heightened due diligence in :conflict-affected areas, occupation situations, and non-self- governing territories, - responsible disengagement from harmful business relationships, - methodology and criteria to be used by supervisory authorities to make decisions related to administrative sanctions and nature and harmonisation of effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, - assessing the integrity and fitness of industry schemes and multi-stakeholder initiatives, notably the inclusion of the perspectives of civil society and stakeholders in audits.
Amendment 491 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall, in order to provide information and support to companies and the partners with whom they have established business relationships in their value chains in their efforts to fulfil the obligations resulting from this Directive, set up and operate individually or jointly dedicated websites, platforms or portals. Specific consideration shall be given, in that respect, to the SMEs that are present in the value chains of companies.
Amendment 496 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall undertake efforts in order to provide information and support to stakeholders and their representatives to enjoy and exercise their rights resulting from this Directive, including their participation indue diligence and judicial processes. This may include setting up and operating individually or jointly dedicated websites, platforms or portals.
Amendment 517 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Amendment 519 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the supervisory authorities have adequate powers and resources to carry out the tasks assigned to them under this Directive,. Those competences shall includinge the power to requestire companies to provide necessary information and to carry out investigations related to compliance with the obligations set out in this Directive, including interviews with stakeholders and on site examination.
Amendment 520 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. A supervisory authority may initiate an investigation on its own motion orand shall initiate an investigation as a result of substantiated concerns communicated to it pursuant to Article 19, where it considers that it has sufficient information indicating a possible breach by a company of the obligations provided for in the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive.
Amendment 525 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Member States shall ensure that decisions of supervisory authorities regarding a company’s compliance with this Directive shall be without prejudice to the company’s civil liability under Article 22.
Amendment 532 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that supervisory authorities assess the substantiated concerns and, where appropriate, exercise their powers as referred to in Article 18. Member States shall ensure that, for the purpose of those assessments, companies are required to carry out meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders. Member States shall ensure that those procedures guarantee the safety of those persons, including by ensuring that concerns and information the disclosure of which could be harmful to the person concerned remain anonymous and confidential.
Amendment 535 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. The supervisory authority shall, as soon as possible and in accordance with the relevant provisions of national law and in compliance with Union law, inform the person referred to in paragraph 1 of the result of the assessment of their substantiated concern and, of its decisions, shall provide the reasoning for it and shall publish the assessment and decision.
Amendment 537 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Member States shall ensure that submission of substantiated concerns shall not preclude stakeholders from having unhindered access to public judicial mechanisms. Stakeholders shall not be required to have submitted concerns before being entitled to file a complaint to competent judicial bodies and courts, pursuant to Article 22. 5 (b).
Amendment 552 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall set up a European Network of Supervisory Authorities, composed of representatives of the supervisory authorities. The Network shall facilitate the cooperation of the supervisory authorities and the coordination and alignment of regulatory, investigative, sanctioning and supervisory practices of the supervisory authorities and, as appropriate, sharing of information among them, as well as ensuring the regular public disclosure of the activities of the Network.
Amendment 589 #
2022/0051(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In accordance with article 18(2) of Directive2014/24/EU, Article 36(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU and Article 30(3) of Directive 2014/23/EU, Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that in the performance of public procurement or concession contracts companies comply with the obligations laid down in national provisions adopted pursuant to Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of this Directive.
Amendment 1 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas while intellectual property (IP) registrationinvestments are constantly increasing and, the single market remains fragmented by differences in national legislation, which are hindering and the persisting need for parallel national validation procedures and litigation, which are hindering to address effectively some of the most important social challenges of our times through innovative solutions as well as the development of companies, in particular SMEs, and consumers’ access to innovative and safe products;
Amendment 8 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas although intellectual property rights (IPR) are well regulated in most Member States, infringements and hold-backs are jeopardising the open system that leads to innovations; whereas counterfeit products are still abundant in the single market, with most of them entering the EU through the digital market, causing financial losses of approximately EUR 60 billion per year; whereas during the current COVID-19 pandemic the Rapid Alert system (“RAPEX”)1a registered an alarming new all-time high of alerts; __________________ 1aCommission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/417 of 8 November 2018 laying down guidelines for the management of the European Union Rapid Information System ‘RAPEX’ established under Article 12 of Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety and its notification system (OJ L 73, 15.03.2019).
Amendment 15 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of better cooperation between the European Union and the Member States to harmonise IP legislation and facilitate the access of economic operators to IPR registration at EU level; underlines that EU innovators should have access to fast, effective and affordable protection tools; recommends that the current legislation be adapted in order to improve the functioning of the single market for IP and to enhance consumer protection;
Amendment 18 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines that IPR protection is a crucial component of the European Union's internal market as IPR-intensive industries generate significant part of EU gross domestic product and contribute to quality job creation; notes that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is becoming increasingly active for IPR disputes and that the Lisbon Treaty contains the still unused clause of Article 262 TFEU allowing for significantly strengthening the competences of the Union in the field of IPR;
Amendment 24 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to formulate a strategy to tackle and minimise infringements, hold-backs, counterfeiting and piracy, which continue to thrive and have proven to be even more dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic, posing severe health, safety and security threats to consumers; welcomes the Commission’s proposal for the Digital Services Act package which clarifies and upgrades the responsibilities of digital services, in particular online platforms;
Amendment 27 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of critical IP in times of crisis, including via new harmonised licensing tools and a system to co-ordinate compulsory licensing to make the EU’s internal market more resilient by tackling, among others, the lack of availability of specific products and better protection of consumers’ interests by avoiding dramatic price increases; urges in this regard for a swift launch of the Unitary Patent System to facilitate affordable licencing and transparency through a one-stop shop;
Amendment 34 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that a green and digit, digital and social recovery and an increased resilience inof the single market must be based on the full use of intangible assets; highlightsregrets that only 9% of EU SMEs have registered IP rights which is largely due to a lack of knowledge about IP; highlights therefore the importance of disseminating information about the benefits of IP and the Commission’s support programmes for all economic operators, in particular SMEs;
Amendment 40 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission to cooperate with the Member States to facilitate access to financial support and credits based on intangible assets in order to encourage SMEs to register their IP and reap the full benefits, ensuring a faster and bettermore sustainable economic recovery.;
Amendment 42 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that the use of AI systems in the realms of creation, innovation and science has grown spectacularly in recent years and is expected to continue to do so in the years to come, thus new technologies offer a unique window of opportunity to support the sustainable recovery of EU’s economy and resilience of the internal market while leaving no one and no region behind; underlines that the Commission shall incentivise and reward green technologies and inventions;
Amendment 48 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Welcomes the Commission intention to strengthen the enforcement of IPRs at EU level, by broadening the Commission’s mandate and assigning it to the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), so that the latter does not only prevent counterfeit goods from entering the single market but can also act against illicit production of counterfeit goods within the EU; urges to bridge existing enforcement silos and to substantially strengthen the capacity of law enforcement authorities in order to address efficiently security problems for consumers revealed through the alerts in the RAPEX system; calls on the Commission to promote campaigns to combat the entry of the most harmful counterfeit goods for consumers on the market; underlines that for a well- functioning data economy, global enforcement cooperation but as well the sharing of data is necessary, in order to guarantee that as well companies not head-quartered in the EU do comply with European consumer protection rules; urges the Commission to enhance further cross-topic enforcement, to ensure full consumer protection; welcomes in this regard the “Digital Clearing House” and “PEER” initiatives;
Amendment 51 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Calls on the Commission, to propose an efficient and transparent uniform mechanism for the protection of non-agricultural GIs (such as handicrafts), which are often an important part of local identity, attract tourism, retain unique skills and contribute to quality job creation as well in less developed regions; stresses that this would provide consumers with better visibility and authenticity indications for these products;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls the importance, for a properly functioning and competitive internal market, of effective better law- making tools that take subsidiarity and proportionality fully into account when drawing up scientifically based and balancedbalanced, clear and comprehensible legislation, particularly for consumers and SMEs;
Amendment 7 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that a large part of the EU’s key legislative priorities for 2017-2019 were initiatives related to IMCO's remit mainly devoted to implementation of the Single Market Strategy and Digital Single Market Strategy, focusing on regulations eliminating unnecessary barriers and seizing new opportunities for the benefit of citizens and businesses; considers that initiatives aiming for a deeper and fairer internal market while maintaining a high- level of consumer protection should remain a key pillar of future annual programming;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that SMEs in particular will continue to face serious repercussions due to the COVID-19 pandemic and need more flexibility to react quickly to the ever-changing demands of our economy; reiterates that cutting red tapereducing unnecessary administrative burden, , the ‘think small first’ principle and fostering a society that values entrepreneurship while ensuring a high level of consumer protection need to be priorities within internal market legislation;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines the need to promote regular dialogue and consultation with stakeholders, including businesses, which helps with the application of the SME test;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States’ authorities at national and regional level, and on stakeholders to become more closely involved at an early stage of the decision-making process, with subsidiarity and proportionality checks and administrative burden assessments of EU legislation; calls further on the Member States to ensure the swift and consistent transposition, implementation and enforcement of legislation, and to avoid ‘gold-plating’ that can undermine the smooth functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Is of the opinion that in the implementation and transposition of EU acts, a clear distinction must be made between cases of ‘gold-plating’, in which Member States introduce additional administrative requirements unrelated to EU legislation, and the setting of higher standards that go beyond EU-wide minimum standards for environmental and consumer protection, healthcare and food safety;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Welcomes the input received from national parliaments on initiatives related to “A New Deal for Consumers” and “More efficient Single Market law- making”;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Warns that legislation which increases unnecessary administrative burdens greatlycould affects SMEs and consumers by hindering competitiveness and preventing the single market from unlocking its full potential; further stresses that the reduction of administrative burdens does not necessarily mean deregulation, and in any event, it must not compromise environmental and consumer protection, healthcare and food safety; recalls that, while additional unnecessary administrative burdens should be avoided, this should not prevent the Member States from maintaining or taking more ambitious measures and adopting higher social, environmental and consumer protection standards in cases where only minimum standards are defined by Union law; calls on the Commission, with a view to providing evidence on the added value of EU action, and its costs and benefits, to strengthen the SME fitness check.
Amendment 34 #
2020/2262(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WarnNotes that legislation which increases administrative burdens greatly affects SMEs andmicro and SMEs should face proportionate obligations taking into account their specificities and sectorial characteristics and encourages the Commission to use strong enforcement action to limit market fragmentation, remove unjustified market barriers and ensure a level playing field by making use of all available tools, in order to avoid limiting consumers by choice, hindering competitiveness and preventing the single market from unlocking its full potential; calls on the Commission, with a view to providing evidence on the added value of EU action, and its costs and benefits, to strengthen the SME fitness check.
Amendment 132 #
2020/2260(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reiterates that dual quality of food products is unacceptable and needs to be fully counteracted to avoid discrimination and misleading of EU consumers; in this regard, calls the Commission to monitor closely the situation on the market and propose targeted legislation when necessary; in addition, stresses the importance to strengthen the role of consumer organisations in identifying potentially misleading branding practices as well as misleading information provided on the packaging;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Urges the Commission to empower consumers to put them in control of their data and to ensure that the single market for data is grounded in European values and fairness in competition; calls on the Commission to adopt a cautious approach in order to ensure that consumers should always be able to decide who gets access to their personal data and under what circumstances; believes that citizens’ data could help in developing innovative green solutions and services that would benefit European consumers and companies; asks the Commission to consider how to support data altruism in full compliance with European legislation;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls the importance of security and data protection as key elements for data sharing initiatives and the future EU data spaces; highlights that companies must comply with the GDPR in its entirety, including the principles of data minimisation, and data protection by design and by default; welcomes the Commission’s plan to adopt measures to enhance the portability right under Article 20 of the GDPR in its upcoming Data Act; encourages the Commission to facilitate the finalisation of the negotiations on the ePrivacy Regulation in order to ensure future-proof privacy in electronic communications;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to situations where data is co-generated and makes it difficult to identify to whom the data might refer to, which can pose difficulties as to who is entitled to apply data protection rights;
Amendment 71 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Encourages the Commission to establish proper mechanisms and the right conditions to make G2B data sharing widely and freely available, in a machine-readable format and through standardised Application Programming Interfaces (APIs); considers that this could include that businesses should only have access to the free data if they pay taxes in EU;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Emphasises that market surveillance authorities should have access to all relevant data in order to strengthen their actions and ensure sufficient control of products safety;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Encourages the Commission to assess possible mechanisms and tools to allow and encourage the donation of data by companies, which can be of public interest while respecting existing European legislation;
Amendment 90 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Underlines the important need to develop a cyber-secure and dynamic cloud ecosystem in Europe in order to deliver a successful and competitive Digital Single Market; encourages the Commission to develop a coherent cloud rulebook that takes into consideration the work of the Working Group on Switching Cloud providers and data porting (SWIPO) and seeks to ensure that customers can choose their cloud services providers as well as retrieve, transfer and move data to other clouds in a free and secure manner;
Amendment 101 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Suggests developing a technical and legal framework for data sharing to keep data secure and to ensure control over who access data and for what purpose; highlights initiatives such as the Nordic Smart Government which intends to enable SMEs to voluntary share data automatically and in real-time through a decentralised digital ecosystem;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Underlines that when defining standards for sharing data across sectors, the Commission should pay particular attention to the standards applying within the sector in order to ensure a coherent cross-sector data-sharing standard and avoid disadvantaging a sector towards another;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls its previous positions on lethal autonomous weapons and the necessity to develop an EU common position on lethal autonomous weapon systems ensuring meaningful human control over the critical functions of weapon systems, including during deployment;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that the obligation to respect and protect the dignity of the human person is a general principle of international law, the source and the main pillar of all fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, common to the constitutional traditions of EU Member States; stresses therefore that the principle of human dignity should always be the ultimate pattern of control when interpreting and applying the law on artificial intelligence and the essential element establishing the human-centric approach to artificial intelligence, directing its use towards the good of individuals, groups of users, consumers and society as a whole;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control; believes that the use of any tracing applications should remain voluntary and the data collected should be anonymous and should not be used neither for commercial nor for law enforcement purposes; stresses that such applications must be available only during the pandemic, and not run nor be usable during normal times;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control; considers that AI-enabled mobile apps must respect the privacy of European citizens and the General Data Protection Regulation;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to interoperable, safe and privacy-compliant AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control and whose data storage must remain decentralized to mobile devices;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the principles of proportionality needs to be respected and that questions of causality and liability non- discrimination and proportionality and the requirement for justification need to be respected and that questions of causality, liability and responsibility, as well as transparency, accountability and explainability, need to be clarified to determine the extent to which the State as an actor in public international law, but also in exercising its own authority, can actually transfer that authority to systems based on AI, which have a certain autonomy;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the principle of proportionality needs to be respected and that questions of causality and liability need to be clarified to determine the extent to which the State as an actor in public international law, but also in exercising its own authority, can actually transfer that authority to systems based on AI, which have a certain autonomy, without generating additional risks;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges, therefore, the Member States to assess the risks related to AI- driven technologies before automating activitiprofessional services connected with the exercise of State authority, such as the proper administration of justice, for example, the risks related to protection of consumers, of recipients of services and of workers, ensuring safe, healthy and secure working conditions, the proper administration of justice, ensuring high standards of education and protection of the environment; calls on the Member States to consider the need to provide for safeguards, foreseen in Directive (EU) 2018/958, such as supervision by a qualified professional and rules on professional ethics;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges, therefore, the Member States to assess the risks related to AI- driven technologies before automating activities connected with the exercise of State authority, such as the proper administration of justice; calls on the Member States to consider the need to provide for safeguards, foreseen in Directive (EU) 2018/958, such as supervision and monitoring by a qualified professional and rules on professional ethics;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that robots as mechanical objects should fall under the definition of machinery set by the directive on machinery (2006/42/EC) and should be designed and assembled in compliance with the standards and safety measures provided therein, as well as with the provisions on placing the machinery on the market and putting it into service;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AI applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the area of tax administration; underlines that explainable, unbiased and transparent algorithms are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from better, non- discriminatory and reliable public services at a lower cost.
Amendment 40 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AI applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the area of tax administration; underlines that explainable algorithms are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from better, accessible, fast, non- discriminatory and reliable public services at a lower cost.
Amendment 44 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that the Parliament foresaw in its resolution of 16 February 2017 on Civil Law Rules on Robotics the possibility that artificial intelligence may become an independent subject of civil law, which would have significant implications for the functioning of the single market; urges therefore the Commission to monitor and analyse developments of this matter in both international law and the domestic laws of the Member States.
Amendment 46 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that consumers should be adequately informed 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; recalls that humans must always be able to overrule automated decisions that are final and permanent;
Amendment 69 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines that the increased use of artificial intelligence requires a strong focus on digital security, as the large amount of data creates new risks of cyberattacks; calls on the Commission to develop clear guidelines for businesses and public agencies to take the necessary precautions when using artificial intelligence;
Amendment 102 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls for the Union to establish a European market surveillance structure for algorithmic systems issuing guidance, opinions and expertise to Member States’ authorities; emphasizes that Member States must develop risk-management strategies for AI in the context of their national market surveillance strategies.
Amendment 222 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Because of their position, gatekeepers might in certain cases restrict the ability of business users of their online intermediation services to offer their goods or services to end users under more favourable conditions, including price, through other online intermediation services or their own websites or other distribution channels. Such restrictions have a significant deterrent effect on the business users of gatekeepers in terms of their use of alternative online intermediation servicedistribution channels, limiting inter-platform contestability, which in turn limits choice of alternative online intermediation channels for end users. To ensure that business users of online intermediation services of gatekeepers can freely choose alternative online intermediation services and differentiate the conditions under which they offer their products or services to their end users, it should not be accepted that gatekeepers limit business users from choosing to differentiate commercial conditions, including price. Such a restriction should apply to any measure with equivalent effect, such as for example increased commission rates, or de-listing or less favourable ranking of the offers of business users.
Amendment 234 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To safeguard a fair commercial environment and protect the contestability of the digital sector it is important to safeguard the right of business users to raise concerns about unfair behaviour by gatekeepers with any relevant administrative or other public authoritieinstitutions. For example, business users may want to complain about different types of unfair practices, such as discriminatory access conditions, unjustified closing of business user accounts or unclear grounds for product de-listings. Any practice that would in any way inhibit or impede such a possibility of raising concerns or seeking available redress, for instance by means of confidentiality clauses in agreements or other written terms, should therefore be prohibited. This should be without prejudice to the right of business users and gatekeepers to lay down in their agreements the terms of use including the use of lawful complaints-handling mechanisms, including any use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms or of the jurisdiction of specific courts in compliance with respective Union and national law. This should therefore also be without prejudice to the role gatekeepers play in the fight against illegal content online.
Amendment 237 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Identification services areGatekeepers offer a range of ancillary services. To ensure contestability, it is crucial forthat business users to conduct their business, as these can allow them not only to optimise services, to the extent allowed under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , but also to inject trust in online transactions, in compliance with Union or national laware free to choose such ancillary services freely, without having to fear any detrimental effects for the provision of the core platform service. Gatekeepers should therefore not use their position as provider of core platform services to require their dependent business users to include any identificationuse, offer or include any ancillary services provided by the gatekeeper itselfor as part of the provision of services or products by these business users toicular their end usersd party, where other identificationancillary services are available to such business users. _________________ 33Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data andIn particular, gatekeepers shall not make their service dependent on business users including any identification service provided by the gatekeeper itself as part of the protectvision of privacy in the electronic communicationservices or products by these business usector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37)rs to their end users, where alternatives exist.
Amendment 242 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Gatekeepers should not restrict the free choice of end users by technically preventing switching between or subscription to different software applications and services. Gatekeepers should therefore ensure a free choice irrespective of whether they are the manufacturer of any hardware by means of which such software applications or services are accessed and should not raise artificial technical barriers so as to make switching impossiblemore difficult or ineffective. The mere offering of a given product or service to end users, including by means of pre- installation, as well the improvement of end user offering, such as better prices or increased quality, would not in itself constitute a barrier to switching.
Amendment 257 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) A gatekeeper may use different means to favour its own services or products on its core platform service, to the detriment of the same or similar services that end users could obtain through third parties. This may for instance be the case where certain software applications or, software application stores or ancillary services are pre-installed by a gatekeeper. To enable end user choice, gatekeepers should not preventlimit the choice of end users from un- by pre-installing any pre-installed software applicationsown service on its core platform service and thereby favour their own software applicationsis service.
Amendment 266 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Gatekeepers are often vertically integrated and offer certain products or services to end users through their own core platform services, or through a business user over which they exercise control or with which they have entered into particular cooperation agreements or which they prefer due to other reasons unrelated to their service’s actual relevance, which frequently leads to conflicts of interest. This can include the situation whereby a gatekeeper offers its own online intermediation services through an online search engine. When offering those products or services on the core platform service, gatekeepers can reserve a better position to their own offering, in terms of ranking, as opposed to the products of third parties also operating onintermediated via that core platform service. This can occur for instance with products or services, including other core platform services, which are ranked within or along in the results communicated by online search engines, or which are partly or entirely embedded in search results of online search engines results, groups of results specialised in a certain topic, displayed along with the results of an online search engine, which armay be considered or used by certain end users as a service distinct or additional to the online search engine. Such preferential or embedded display of a separate online intermediation service shall constitute a favouring irrespective of whether the information or results within the favoured groups of specialised results may also be provided by competing services and are as such ranked in a non- discriminatory way. Other instances are those of software applications which are distributed through software application stores, or products or services that are given prominence and display in the newsfeed of a social network, or products or services ranked in search results or displayed on an online marketplace. In those circumstances, the gatekeeper is in a dual- role position as intermediary for third party providers and as direct provider of products or services of the gatekeeper. Consequently, these gatekeepers have the ability to undermine directly the contestability for those products or services on these core platform services, to the detriment of business users which are not controlled by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 273 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In such situations of a conflict of interest, the gatekeeper should not partly or entirely embed such distinct product or service in online search engines results or groups of results. However, it may rank its products or services, provided that it does not engage in any form of differentiated or preferentialted treatment in ranking on the core platform service, whether through legal, commercial or technical means, in favour of products or services it offers itself or through a business user which it either controls. To ensure that this obligation is effective, it should also be ensured that the conditions that apply to such ranking are also generally fair or cooperates with or prefers for any other reason. In particular, where a gatekeeper’s online search engine results page includes the ranking of separate products or services, third parties shall be afforded equal opportunity to rank their product or service in the same format and on the same terms and conditions. Should this take place in exchange for remuneration, to avoid any conflict of interest, the gatekeeper’s separate product or service shall be treated as a separate commercial entity and shall be commercially viable as a stand-alone service, offered outside of the gatekeeper’s core platform service. To ensure that this obligation is effective, it should also be ensured that the conditions that apply to such ranking are also generally fair and the gatekeeper's own products or services do not have more access to information about the ranking or any other competition-relevant aspects than products or services of third parties. Ranking should in this context cover all forms of relative prominence, including among others order, graphic display, rating, linking or voice results. To ensure that this obligation is effective and cannot be circumvented it should also apply to any measure that may have an equivalent effect to the differentiated or preferential treatment in ranking. Such an equivalent effect can for instance be achieved by ad formats that are used by users in a similar manner to the gatekeeper's or third parties' online intermediation services, or that benefit the gatekeeper in a similar manner to the preferential treatment in ranking itself (e.g., in terms of financial gains, user access/traffic or data access). The guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 should also facilitate the implementation and enforcement of this obligation.34 _________________ 34Commission Notice: Guidelines on ranking transparency pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ C 424, 8.12.2020, p. 1).
Amendment 279 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Gatekeepers can hamper the ability of end users to access online content and services including software applications. Therefore, rules should be established to ensure that the rights of end users to access an open internet are not compromised by the conduct of gatekeepers. In particular, gatekeepers should not restrict or prevent the free choice of end users by technically preventing switching between or subscription to different software applications andonline content or services. This would allow more providers to offer their services, thereby ultimately providing greater choice to the end user. Gatekeepers should ensure a free choice irrespective of whether they are the manufacturer of any hardware by means of which such software applicationson the core platform service through which such online content or services are accessed and shall not raise artificial technical barriers so as to make switching impossible or ineffective. Gatekeepers can also technically limit the ability of end users to effectively switch between different Internet access service providers, in particular through their control over operating systems or hardware. This distorts the level playing field for Internet access services and ultimately harms end users. It should therefore be ensured that gatekeepers do not unduly restrict end users in choosing their Internet access service provider. The mere offering of a given product or service to consumers, including by means of pre- installation, as well as the improvement of the offering to end users, such as price reductions or increased quality, should not be construed as constituting a prohibited barrier to switching.
Amendment 285 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
Amendment 405 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 6
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Regulation is without prejudice to the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. It is also without prejudice to the application of: national rules prohibiting anticompetitive agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings, concerted practices and abuses of dominant positions; national competition rules prohibiting other forms of unilateral conduct insofar as they are applied to undertakings other than gatekeepersse rules are unrelated to the relevant undertakings having a status of gatekeeper within the meaning of this regulation or amount to imposing additional obligations on gatekeepers; Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200438 and national rules concerning merger control; Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Regulation (EU) …./.. of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . _________________ 38Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1). 39Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 415 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) web browsers;
Amendment 426 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h
(h) advertising services, including any advertising networks, advertising exchanges and any other advertising intermediation services, provided by a provider where the undertaking to which it belongs is also a provider of any of the core platform services listed in points (a) to (g);
Amendment 446 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
(6 a) ‘Webbrowser’ means software used by users of client PCs, smart mobile devices and other devices to access and interact with web content hosted on servers that are connected to networks such as the Internet, including standalone web browsers as well as web browsers integrated or embedded in software or similar;
Amendment 478 #
2020/0374(COD)
(18 a) ’Search results’ means any information in any format, including texts, graphics, voice or other output, returned by core platform services provider in response and related to a written or oral search query, irrespective of whether the information is an organic result, a paid result, a direct answer or any product, service or information offered in connection with, or displayed along with, or partly or entirely embedded in, the organic results;
Amendment 482 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new)
(18 a) ‘Organic results’ are ‘search results’ that are solely based upon the relevance of the information to the end user and allow the end user to access the corresponding information directly;
Amendment 513 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1
for the purpose of the first subparagraph, monthly active end users shall refer to the average number of monthly active end users throughout the largest partat least six (not necessarily consecutive) months of the last financial year;
Amendment 619 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users themselves or through third party online intermediation services at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 636 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from directly or indirectly preventing or restricting business users from raising issues with any relevant public authority or national court relating to any practice of gatekeepers;
Amendment 652 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identificationy ancillary service of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
Amendment 661 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) refrain from requiring business users or end users to use, subscribe to or register with any other core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3 or which meets the thresholds in Article 3(2)(b)any other service offered by the gatekeeper as a condition to use, access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services identified pursuant to that Article or to any other service offered by the gatekeeper;
Amendment 679 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers to which it supplies advertising services, or third parties authorised by them, upon their request, with information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 686 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) refrain from disclosing any commercially sensitive information obtained in connection with one of its advertising services to any third party belonging to the same undertaking and from using such commercially sensitive information for any purposes other than the provision of the specific advertising service unless this is necessary for carrying out a business transaction.
Amendment 712 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from using, in competition with business users, any data not publicly available, which is generated through or in the context of activities by those business users or their competitors, including by the end users of these business users or their competitors, of its core platform services or provided by those business users of its core platform services or their competitors or by the end users of these business users or their competitors;
Amendment 724 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applicationrefrain from pre-installing own services on its core platform service without prejudice to the possibility for a gatekeeper to restrict such un-installation in relation to software applicationsuch services that are essential for the functioning of the operating system or of the device and which cannot technically be offered on a standalone basis by third- parties;
Amendment 735 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow and technically enable the installation and effective use and interoperability of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow and enable these software applications or, software application stores or services to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or, software application stores or services do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper;
Amendment 753 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from embedding or treating more favourably in ranking services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking compared to similar services or products of third partyies and apply fair and non-discriminatory conditions to such ranking;
Amendment 758 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) refrain from applying bias in the display or functioning of interfaces of its core platform services that promote the use of other services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 765 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications andonline content or services to be accessed using the operating systemcore platform service of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users;
Amendment 780 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(f a) provide the information to allow third-party operating systems, software applications or ancillary services to interoperate with the gatekeeper's core platform services by making the core platform service's features and functionality available to the fullest extent as technically supported by the core platform service, for use with the third- party software application or service;
Amendment 782 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper, and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory and continuous and real-time access via high- quality application programming interfaces to the data necessary for advertisers and publishers to run their own or third-party verification and measurement tools to measure the performance of the gatekeeper’s intermediation services and the performance of an ad;
Amendment 795 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) provide effective portability of data provided for or generated through or in the context of the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide tools forfree of charge tools for business users and end users to facilitate the exercise of data portability, in line with Regulation EU 2016/679, including by the provision of continuous and real-time access ;
Amendment 821 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) In the event of a dispute about the fairness of a price or remuneration as condition of access for business users to each of its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3(7), the gatekeeper shall participate in and adhere to the outcome of a binding procedure for fixing a fair price or remuneration, be such a procedure established by law or be such a procedure proposed by the business users or by organisations or rights management organisation representing such business users. The procedure about the issue of remuneration and price should start, if the parties have not reached an agreement about terms for resolving the issue of remuneration and pricing within. This procedure shall apply in particular in the case of a dispute about the remuneration for the use of content protected by the press publisher right in Directive (EU) 2019/790.
Amendment 943 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Where consent for collecting and processing of personal data is required to ensure compliance with this Regulation, a gatekeeper shall take the necessary steps to either enable business users to directly obtain the required consent to their processing, where required under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, or, if the consent is not obtained, to comply with Union data protection and privacy rules and principles in other ways including by providing business users with duly anonymised data where appropriate. The gatekeeper shall not make the obtaining of this consent by the business user more burdensome than for its own services.
Amendment 113 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure that all relevant entities are subject to those requirements and to reduce divergences in this respect, it is important to lay down harmonised rules allowing for a consistent identification of critical entities across the Union, while also allowing Member States to reflect national specificities in the relevant existing national sectors and subsectors on their territory listed in the Annex. Therefore, common criteria, based on minimum indicators and methodologies for each sector and sub-sector to identify critical entities should be laid down. In the interest of effectiveness, efficiency, consistency and legal certainty, appropriate rules should also be set on notification and cooperation relating to, as well as the legal consequences of, such identification. In order to enable the Commission to assess the correct application of this Directive, Member States should submit to the Commission, in a manner that is as detailed and specific as possible, relevant information and, in any event, the list of essential services, the number of critical entities identified for each existing national sector and subsector referred to in the Annex and the essential service or services that each entity provides and any thresholds applied.
Amendment 116 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to facilitate cross-border cooperation and communication and to enable the effective implementation of this Directive, each Member State should, without prejudice to sector-specific Union legal requirements, designate, within one of the authorities it designated as competent authority under this Directive, a single point of contact responsible for coordinating issues related to the resilience of critical entities and cross-border cooperation at Union level in this regard. The single point of contact should also liaise, and coordinate all communication, with the competent authorities of its Member State, with the single points of contact of other Member States, with the Critical Entities Resilience Group established by this Directive and with the single points of contacts of entities identified as critical entities under this Directive. To that end, the single points of contact should use efficient, secured, standardised and harmonised reporting channels.
Amendment 117 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) In order to facilitate the cooperation and communication with the Member States, entities identified as critical entities under this Directive should also designate a single point of contact within the entity. The single point of contact should be used by the critical entity to liaise, coordinate and communicate with the Member States, on measures related to the organisational and technical aspects related to the implementation of this Directive.
Amendment 130 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) “incident” means any event having the potential to disrupt, or that disrupts,which results in a disruption of essential services or essential infrastructure or the destruction of essential infrastructure and has a significant cross-sectoral or cross- border effect on the delivery of those services in one or more Member States as a result of the failure to maintain the operations of theat critical entity;
Amendment 131 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) “essential service” means a service which is essential for the wellbeing of citizens and the maintenance of vital societal functions or economic activities and proper functioning of the internal market and the disruption of which would have a significant cross-sectoral or cross- border effect on the provision of that service, in on one or more Member States;
Amendment 134 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) “risk assessment” means a methodology to determine the nature and extent of a risk by analysingssessing the extent of potential threats and hazards and evaluatgainst the resilience of the critical entity, analysing existing conditions of vulnerability that could facilitate the disrupt theion of operations of the critical entity and evaluating the potential adverse effect the disruption of operations could have on the provision of essential services.
Amendment 156 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) the vulnerability associated with the degree of isolation of certain types of geographic areas, such as insular regions, outermost regions or mountainous areas;
Amendment 169 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that critical entities designate within three months after receiving the notification referred to in Article 5(3), a single point of contact to exercise a liaison function with the Member States on issues related to the technical and organisational measures referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 179 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the degree of isolation of the areas affected by the incident, and in particular if it affects insular and outermost regions or mountainous areas;
Amendment 701 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) ‘editorial platform’ means an intermediary service which is in connection with a press publication within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790 or another editorial media service and which allows users to discuss topics generally covered by the relevant media or to comment editorial content and which is under the supervision of the editorial team of the publication or other editorial media.
Amendment 910 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services which do not have an establishment in the Union but which offer services in the Union shall designate, in writing, a legal or natural person as their legal representative in one of the Member States where the provider offers its services. Very large online platforms shall designate a legal representative in each of the Member States where the provider offers its services.
Amendment 947 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where very large online platforms within the meaning of Article 25 of this Regulation otherwise allow for the dissemination to the public of press publications within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790, such platforms shall not remove, disable access to, suspend or otherwise interfere with such content or the related service or suspend or terminate the related account on the basis of the alleged incompatibility of such content with its terms and conditions.
Amendment 970 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12a Exclusions Articles 12 and 13 of Section 1, and the provisions of Section 2, and Section 3 of Chapter III shall not apply to: (a) editorial platforms within the meaning of Article 2(h) of this Regulation; (b) online platforms that qualify as micro and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC; (c) an intermediary service, except very large online platforms, where it would constitute a disproportionate burden in view of its size, the nature of its activity and the risk posed to users.
Amendment 1569 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, freedom and pluralism of the media, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectively;
Amendment 1579 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security.
Amendment 1586 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, how their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 1650 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 a (new)
Article 27 a (new)
Article 27a Mitigation of risks for the freedom of expression and freedom and pluralism of the media 1. Where specific systemic risks for the exercise of freedom of expression and freedom and pluralism of the media pursuant to Article 26(1)(b) emerge, very large online platforms shall ensure that the exercise of these fundamental rights is always adequately and effectively protected. 2. Where very large online platforms allow for the dissemination of press publications within the meaning of Art. 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790, of audiovisual media services within the meaning of Article 1(1)(a) of Directive 2010/13/EU(AVMS) or of other editorial media, which are published in compliance with applicable Union and national law under the editorial responsibility and control of a press publisher, audiovisual or other media service provider, who can be held liable under the laws of a Member State, the platforms shall be prohibited from removing, disabling access to, suspending or otherwise interfering with such content or services or suspending or terminating the service providers’ accounts on the basis of the alleged incompatibility of such content with their terms and conditions. 3. Very large online platforms shall ensure that their content moderation, their decision-making processes, the features or functioning of their services, their terms and conditions and recommender systems are objective, fair and non-discriminatory.
Amendment 1697 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The parameters used in recommender systems shall always be fair and non-discriminatory.
Amendment 1854 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1)(a) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may invite the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
Amendment 1865 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. When giving effect to paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission and the Board shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct clearly set out their objectives, contain key performance indicators to measure the achievement of those objectives in relation to the dissemination of illegal content, and take due account of the needs and interests of all interested parties, including citizens, at Union level. The Commission and the Board shall also aim to ensure that participants report regularly to the Commission and their respective Digital Service Coordinators of establishment on any measures taken and their outcomes, as measured against the key performance indicators that they contain.
Amendment 159 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’) provides for the establishment of an internal market and the institution of a system ensuring that competition in the internal market is not distorted. The establishment of common rules and practices in the Member States relating to the development of a framework for data governance should also contribute to the achievedevelopment of those objectivesan internal market that allows the sustainable development of SMEs and micro-enterprises and fair competition.
Amendment 165 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Action at Union level is necessary in order to address the barriers to a well- functioning data-driven economy and to create a Union-wide safe governance framework for data access and use, in particular regarding the re-use of certain types of data held by the public sector, the provision of services by data sharing providers to business users and to data subjects, as well as the collection and processing of data made available for altruistic purposes by natural and legal persons.
Amendment 169 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The categories of data held by public sector bodies which should be subject to re-use under this Regulation fall outside the scope of Directive (EU) 2019/1024 that excludes data which is not accessible due to commercial and statistical confidentiality and data for which third parties have intellectual property rights. Personal data fall outside the scope of Directive (EU) 2019/1024 insofar as the access regime excludes or restricts access to such data for reasons of data protection, privacy and the integrity of the individual, in particular in accordance with data protection rules. The re-use of data, which may contain trade secrets, should take place without prejudice to Directive (EU) 2016/94340 , which sets the framework for the lawful acquisition, use or disclosure of trade secrets. This Regulation is without prejudice and complementary to more specific obligations on public sector bodies to allow re-use of data laid down in sector- specific Union or national law. It must be ensured that companies do not have direct access to protected data and that, as a consequence, anonymization cannot be carried out by them. __________________ 40 OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1–18
Amendment 175 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Public sector bodies should comply with competition law when establishing the principles for re-use of data they hold, avoiding as far as possible the conclusion of agreements, which might have as their objective or effect the creation of exclusive rights for the re-use of certain data. Such agreement should be only possible when justified and necessary for the provision of a service of general interest. This may be the case when exclusive use of the data is the only way to maximise the societal benefits of the data in question, for example where there is only one entity (which has specialised in the processing of a specific dataset) capable of delivering the service or the product which allows the public sector body to provide an advanced digital service in the general interest. Such arrangements should, however, be concluded in compliance with public procurement rules and be subject to regular review based on a market analysis in order to ascertain whether such exclusivity continues to be necessary. In addition, such arrangements should comply with the relevant State aid rules, as appropriate, and should be concluded for a limited period, which should not exceed three years. In order to ensure transparency, such exclusive agreements should be published online, regardless of a possible publication of an award of a public procurement contract.
Amendment 178 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) CIt is necessary to establish conditions for re-use of protected data that apply to public sector bodies competent under national law to allow re- use, and which should be without prejudice to rights or obligations concerning access to such data, should be laid down. Those conditions should be non- discriminatory, proportionate and objectively justified, while not restricting competition. In particular, public sector bodies allowing re- use should have in place the technical means necessary to ensure the protection of rights and interests of third parties. Conditions attached to the re-use of data should be limited to what is necessary to preserve the rights and interests of others in the data and the integrity of the information technology and communication systems of the public sector bodies. Public sector bodies should apply conditions which best serve the interests of the re-user without leading to a disproportionate effort for the public sector. Depending on the case at hand, before its transmission, personal data should be fully anonymised, so as to definitively not allow the identification of the data subjects, or data containing commercially confidential information modified in such a way that no confidential information is disclosed. Where provision of anonymised or modified data would not respond to the needs of the re-user, on- premise or remote re-use of the data within a secure processing environment could be permitted. Data analyses in such secure processing environments should be supervised by the public sector body, so as to protect the rights and interests of others. In particular, personal data should only be transmitted for re-use to a third party where a legal basis allows such transmission. The public sector body could make the use of such secure processing environment conditional on the signature by the re-user of a confidentiality agreement that prohibits the disclosure of any information that jeopardises the rights and interests of third parties that the re-user may have acquired despite the safeguards put in place. The public sector bodies, where relevant, should facilitate the re-use of data on the basis of consent of data subjects or permissions of legal persons on the re-use of data pertaining to them through adequate technical means. In this respect, the public sector body should support potential re-users in seeking such consent by establishing technical mechanisms that permit transmitting requests for consent from re-users, where practically feasible. No contact information should be given that allows re-users to contact data subjects or companies directly.
Amendment 181 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The intellectual property rights of third parties should not be affectbe ensured by this Regulation. This Regulation should neither affect the existence or ownership of intellectual property rights of public sector bodies, nor should it limit the exercise of these rights in any way beyond the boundaries set by this Regulation. The obligations imposed in accordance with this Regulation should apply only insofar as they are compatible with international agreements on the protection of intellectual property rights, in particular the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Berne Convention), the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) and the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT). Public sector bodies should, however, exercise their copyright in a way that facilitates re-use.
Amendment 182 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Data subject to intellectual property rights as well as trade secrets should only be transmitted to a third party where such transmission is lawful by virtue of Union or national law orand with the agreement of the rightholder. Where public sector bodies are holders of the right provided for in Article 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (41 ) they should not exercise that right in order to prevent the re-use of data or to restrict re-use beyond the limits set by this Regulation. __________________ 41Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ L 77, 27.3.1996, p. 20).
Amendment 197 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In order to build trust in re-use mechanisms, it may beis necessary to attach stricter conditions for certain types of non- personal data that have been identified as highly sensitive, as regards the transfer to third countries, if such transfer could jeopardise public policy objectives, in line with international commitments. For example, in the health domain, certain datasets held by actors in the public health system, such as public hospitals, could be identified as highly sensitive health data. In order to ensure harmonised practices across the Union, such types of highly sensitive non-personal public data should be defined by Union law, for example in the context of the European Health Data Space or other sectoral legislation. The conditions attached to the transfer of such data to third countries should be laid down in delegated acts. Conditions should be proportionate, non-discriminatory and necessary to protect legitimate public policy objectives identified, such as the protection of public health, public order, safety, the environment, public morals, consumer protection, privacy and personal data protection. The conditions should correspond to the risks identified in relation to the sensitivity of such data, including in terms of the risk of the re- identification of individuals. These conditions could include terms applicable for the transfer or technical arrangements, such as the requirement of using a secure processing environment, limitations as regards the re-use of data in third-countries or categories of persons which are entitled to transfer such data to third countries or who can access the data in the third country. In exceptional cases they could also include restrictions on transfer of the data to third countries to protect the public interest.
Amendment 204 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The competent authorities designated to monitor compliance of data sharing services with the requirements in this Regulation should be chosen on the basis of their proved capacity and expertise regarding horizontal or sectoral data sharing, and they should be independent as well as transparent and impartial in the exercise of their tasks. Member States should notify the Commission of the identity of the designated competent authorities.
Amendment 207 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Legal entities that seek to support purposes of general interest by making available relevant data based on data altruism at scale and meet certain requirements, should be able to register as ‘Data Altruism Organisations recognised in the Union’. This could lead to the establishment of data repositories. As registration in a Member State would be valid across the Union, and this should facilitate cross-border data use within the Union and the emergence of data pools covering several Member States. Data subjects in this respect would consent to specific purposes of data processing, but could also consent to data processing in certain areas of research or parts of research projects as it is often not possible to fully identify the purpose of personal data processing for scientific research purposes at the time of data collection. Legal persons could give permission to the processing of their non-personal data for a range of purposes not defined at the moment of giving the permission. The voluntary compliance of such registered entities with a set of requirements should bring trust that the data made available on altruistic purposes is serving a general interest purpose. Such trust should result in particular from a place of establishment within the Union, as well as from the requirement that registered entities have a not-for-profit character, from transparency requirements and from specific safeguards in place to protect rights and interests of data subjects and companies. Further safeguards should include making it possible to process relevant data within a secure processing environment operated by the registered entity, oversight mechanisms such as ethics councils or boards to ensure that the data controller maintains high standards of scientific ethics, effective technical means to withdraw or modify consent at any moment, based on the information obligations of data processors under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as well as means for data subjects to stay informed about the use of data they made available. Legal entities should ensure that misleading marketing practices are not used to solicit donations of data.
Amendment 211 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To bring additional legal certainty to granting and withdrawing of consent, in particular in the context of scientific research and statistical use of data made available on an altruistic basis, a European data altruism consent form should be developed and used in the context of altruistic data sharing. Such a form should contribute to additional transparency for data subjects that their data will be accessed and used in accordance with their consent and also in full compliance with the data protection rules. It could also be used to streamline data altruism performed by companies and provide a mechanism allowing such companies to withdraw their permission to use the data at any moment in time. Persons who decide to withdraw their consent shall be ensured that the data for which they gave their consent is no longer used and that they have been removed from the projects for which they were used. In order to take into account the specificities of individual sectors, including from a data protection perspective, there should be a possibility for sectoral adjustments of the European data altruism consent form.
Amendment 214 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
(2) This Regulation is without prejudice to specific provisions in other Union legal acts regarding access to or re- use of certain categories of data, or requirements related to processing of personal or non-personal data. Where a sector-specific Union legal act requires public sector bodies, providers of data sharing services or registered entities providing data altruism services to comply with specific additional technical, administrative or organisational requirements, including through an authorisation or certification regime, those provisions of that sector-specific Union legal act shall also apply. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to any form of further use of data. In this respect, sensitive personal data shall not be re-used for security reasons.
Amendment 217 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) The re-use of employees’ personal data shall be prohibited. To this end, it must be ensured that public service data do not contain employees’ personal data, such as data about their mobility.
Amendment 225 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘data altruism’ means the consent by data subjects to process personal data pertaining to them, or permissions of other data holders to allow the use of their non- personal data without seeking a reward, for purposes of general interest, in accordance with the Union treaties and national legislation, such as scientific research purposes or improving public services;
Amendment 227 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) data processed in the context of employment;
Amendment 229 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) The Commission shall ensure that this Regulation does not undermine the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation.
Amendment 233 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
(2) By way of derogation from paragraph 1, an exclusive right to re-use data referred to in that paragraph may be granted to the extent necessary for the provision of a service or a product in the general interest, defined and justified why it is of general interest.
Amendment 238 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
(5) The period of exclusivity of the right to re-use data shall not exceed threewo years. Where a contract is concluded, the duration of the contract awarded shall be as aligned with the period of exclusivity.
Amendment 239 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7
Article 4 – paragraph 7
(7) Agreements or other practices falling within the scope of the prohibition in paragraph 1, which do not meet the conditions set out in paragraph 2, and which were concluded before the date of entry into force of this Regulation shall be terminated at the end of the contract and in any event at the latest within threewo years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 240 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
(1) Public sector bodies which are competent under national law to grant or refuse justified access for the re-use of one or more of the categories of data referred to in Article 3 (1) shall make publicly available the conditions for allowing such re-use. In that task, they may be assisted by the competent bodies referred to in Article 7 (1).
Amendment 243 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
(2) Conditions for re-use shall be lawful, clearly indicated, non- discriminatory, proportionate and objectively justified with regard to categories of data and purposes of re-use and the nature of the data for which re-use is allowed. These conditions shall not be used to restrict competition.
Amendment 244 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
(3) Public sector bodies mayshall impose an obligation to re-use only pre-processed data where such pre-processing aims to anonymize or pseudonymise personal data or delete commercially confidential information, including trade secretsand an obligation that data containing trade secrets is processed accordingly. They shall ensure that companies do not have direct access to protected data and consequently cannot carry out anonymization of this data.
Amendment 250 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) to access and re-use the data within the physical premises in which the secure processing environment is located, if remote access cannot be allowed without jeopardising the rights and interests of third partiesn accordance with high security standards to be established and continuously monitored.
Amendment 252 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
(5) The public sector bodies shall impose conditions that preserve the integrity of the functioning of the technical systems of the secure processing environment used. The public sector body shall be able to verify the means and any results of processing of data undertaken by the re- user and reserve the right to prohibit the use of results that contain information jeopardising the rights and interests of third parties. To this end, the public sector bodies shall be equipped with the necessary human and financial resources for monitoring and law enforcement.
Amendment 266 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
(2) Any fees shall be non- discriminatory, proportionate and objectively justified and shall not restrict competition, cover the costs of monitoring and enforcement. They shall not create incentives to sell or lower the protection of sensitive data.
Amendment 277 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
(4) The competent body or bodies shall have adequate human resources as well as legal and technical capacities and expertise to be able to comply with relevant Union or national law concerning the access regimes for the categories of data referred to in Article 3 (1), so that data protection, privacy and confidentiality are fully respected. The competences and resources of the competent body or bodies shall prohibit unjustified outsourcing.
Amendment 279 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
(5) The Member States shall communicate to the Commission the identity of the competent bodies designated pursuant to paragraph 1 by [date of application of this Regulation]. They shall also communicate to the Commission any subsequent modification of the identity of those bodies within three days after the modification.
Amendment 281 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
(3) Requests for the re-use of the categories of data referred to in Article 3 (1) shall be granted or refused by the competent public sector bodies or the competent bodies referred to in Article 7 (1) within a reasonable time, and in any case within two months from the date of the request.
Amendment 283 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) intermediation services whose sole purpose is to facilitate data sharing between data holders which are legal persons and potential data users, including making available the technical or other means to enable such services; those services may include bilateral or multilateral exchanges of data or the creation of platforms or databases enabling the exchange or joint exploitationuse of data, as well as the establishment of a specific infrastructure for the interconnection of data holders and data users;
Amendment 287 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) The Commission shall develop a mandatory certification system for data intermediaries in order to limit the risks associated with the central role of data intermediaries and thus increase trust in these organisations and their activities.
Amendment 288 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
(1) Any provider of data sharing services who intends to provide the services referred to in Article 9 (1) shall submit a notification to the competent authority referred to in Article 12 at least ten days prior to starting its activity.
Amendment 291 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
(3) A provider of data sharing services that is not established in the Union, but offers the services referred to in Article 9 (1) within the Union, shall appoint a legal representative in one of the Member States in which those services are offered. The provider shall be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of the Member State in which the legal representative is established. The provider of the data sharing service shall provide the legal representative with the necessary resources to ensure efficient collaboration with relevant national authorities. The designation of a representative by the provider of data sharing services shall be without prejudice to legal actions which could be initiated against the provider of data sharing services themselves.
Amendment 292 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point d
(d) a website where clear, complete and up-to-date information on the provider and the activities can be found, where applicable;
Amendment 294 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point f
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point f
(f) a description of the service the provider intends to provide including by specifying which types of services referred in Article 9(1) of this Regulation are provided;
Amendment 295 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point g
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – point g
(g) the estimated date for starting the activity;
Amendment 298 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 7
Article 10 – paragraph 7
(7) At the request of the provider, the competent authority shall, within a maximum of one week, issue a standardised declaration, confirming that the provider has submitted the notification referred to in paragraph 4.
Amendment 300 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 10
Article 10 – paragraph 10
Amendment 311 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) the provider offering services to data subjects shall act in the data subjects’ best interest when facilitating the exercise of their rights, in particular by advising data subjects onand ensure they understand potential data uses and standard terms and conditions attached to such uses;
Amendment 316 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
(3) Where the competent authority finds that a provider of data sharing services does not comply with one or more of the requirements laid down in Article 10 or 11, it shall notify that provider of those findings and give it the opportunity to state its views, within a reasonable time limitten days.
Amendment 317 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
(4) The competent authority shall have the power to require the cessation of the breach referred to in paragraph 3 either immediately or within a reasonable time limitten days and shall take appropriate and proportionate measures aimed at ensuring compliance. In this regard, the competent authorities shall be able, where appropriate:
Amendment 321 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
(1) Each competent authority designated pursuant to Article 20 shall keep a register of recognised data altruism organisations. That register shall be accessible to the public.
Amendment 324 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commission shall maintain a Union register of recognised data altruism organisations. The Union register shall be accessible to the public.
Amendment 326 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) be a legal entity constituted to meet objectives of general interest, in line with Union treaties and national law;
Amendment 335 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) demonstrate professional expertise in processing data activities in compliance with relevant Union and national legislation;
Amendment 343 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 7
Article 17 – paragraph 7
(7) Any entity entered in the register of recognised data altruism organisations shall submit any changes of the information provided pursuant to paragraph 4 to the competent authority within 14 calendar days from the day on which the change takes place. The competent authority which updated the register shall inform the Commission of the modifications made.
Amendment 345 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
(1) Any entity entered in the national register of recognised data altruism organisations shall keep full, comprehensible and accurate records concerning:
Amendment 346 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) all natural or legal persons that were given the possibility to process data held by that entity; and their contact details;
Amendment 349 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
(1) Any entity entered in the register of recognised data altruism organisations shall inform data holders prior any processing of their data:
Amendment 351 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) about the rights that the data subject can apply with regard to the processing of its personal data;
Amendment 352 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) about any processing outside the Union. and the associated risks and the location outside the Union where the processing will take place;
Amendment 354 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
(2) The entity shall also ensure that the data is not be used for other purposes than those of general interest for which it permits the processing and ensure that misleading marketing practices are not used to solicit donations of data.
Amendment 356 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) The entity shall ensure that the data is not used for advertising purposes.
Amendment 357 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
(3) Where the competent authority finds that an entity does not comply with one or more of the requirements of this Chapter it shall notify the entity of those findings and give it the opportunity to state its views, within a reasonable time limitten days.
Amendment 367 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
(2) The authority with which the complaint has been lodged shall inform the complainant of the progress of the proceedings and of the decision taken, and shall inform the complainant of the right to an effective judicial remedy provided for in Article 25a maximum of 30 days.
Amendment 23 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) In light of the lessons learnt during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, this Regulation should create a more robust framework for coordination at Union level. The shift for procurement of PPE, medical equipment and vaccines (under rescEU, the Joint Procurement Agreement (JPA) and the EU Emergency Support Initiative (ESI)) from national to European level has been effective and beneficial to citizens. It avoids competition between Member States and guarantees a secure, fair, equitable and affordable access to medical countermeasures. Therefore, joint procurement procedures should be applied by default for medical countermeasures to cross border threats to health.
Amendment 27 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b) To ensure resilience of the single market during future health emergency situations and in order to reduce the dependence on third countries, this Regulation should foster the creation of minimum European stocks of medical countermeasures as strategic products.
Amendment 28 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) As serious cross-border threats to health are not limited to Union borders, joint procurement of medical countermeasures should be extended to include European Free Trade Association States and Union candidate countries, in accordance with the applicable Union legislation. The Joint Procurement Agreement, determining the practical arrangements governing the joint procurement procedure established under Article 5 of Decision No 1082/2013/EU, should also be adapted to include an exclusivity clause regarding negotiation and procurement for participating countries in a joint procurement procedure, to allow for better coordination within the EU. The exclusivity clause should entail that participating countries may not negotiate and/or conclude parallel contracts with producers; otherwise they should be excluded from the group of participating countries. The Commission should ensure coordination and information exchange between the entities organizing any action under different mechanisms established under this Regulation and other relevant Union structures related to procurement and stockpiling of medical countermeasures, such as the strategic rescEU reserve under Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council16 . Transparency measures must be improved in order to guarantee rapid, equal, fair and affordable access to critical medical countermeasures as fast as possible whilst avoiding price speculation between Member States. In case that joint procurement procedures are not applied, a high level of transparency regarding pricing, reimbursement of different treatments, medical products marketing and health technology assessment needs to be guaranteed, to allow Member States equal conditions when negotiating with pharmaceutical companies. __________________ 16Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).
Amendment 39 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) In order to ensure a fair and equal procedure and access for all European citizens, the European Parliament shall scrutinize contracts concluded under the Joint Procurement Procedure.
Amendment 58 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The Member States have a responsibility to manage public health crises at national level. However, measures taken by individual Member States could affect the interests of other Member States if they are inconsistent with one another or based on diverging risk assessments. The aim to coordinate the response at Union level should, therefore, seek to ensure, inter alia, thatavoid competition between Member States seek to ensure, inter alia, fair, equitable and affordable access to medical countermeasures across Europe. The measures taken at national level arshall be proportionate and limited to public health risks related to serious cross- border threats to health, and do not conflict with obligations and rights laid down in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union such as those related to free movement of persons, goods and services.
Amendment 63 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The recognition of public health emergency situations and the legal effects of this recognition provided by Decision No 1082/2013/EU should be broadened. To this end, this Regulation should allow for the Commission to formally recognise a public health emergency at Union level through the creation of a new mechanism that increases the coordination and facilitates joint procurement procedures for the development, stockpiling and donation of medical countermeasures. In order to recognise such an emergency situation, the Commission should establish an independent advisory committee that will provide expertise on whether a threat constitutes a public health emergency at Union level, and advise on public health response measures and on the termination of this emergency recognition. The advisory committee should consist of independent experts, selected by the Commission from the fields of expertise and experience most relevant to the specific threat that is occurring, representatives of the ECDC, of the EMA, and of other Union bodies or agencies as observers, and of the European Parliament. Recognition of a public health emergency at Union level will provide the basis for introducing operational public health measures for medical products and medical devices, flexible mechanisms to develop, procure, manage and deploy medical countermeasures as well as the activation of support from the ECDC to mobilise and deploy outbreak assistance teams, known as ‘EU Health Task Force’.
Amendment 76 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) joint procurement, management and deployment of medical countermeasures;
Amendment 80 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) ‘serious cross-border threat to health’ means a life-threatening or otherwise serious hazard to health of biological, chemical, environmental, climate or unknown origin which spreads or entails a significant risk of spreading across the national borders of Member States, and which may necessitate coordination at Union level in order to ensure a high level of human health protection;
Amendment 111 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and any Member States which so desire may engage in aWith a view to the advance purchase of medical countermeasures for serious cross-border threats to health, joint procurement procedures conducted pursuant to Article 165(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council 29 with a view to the advance purchase of medical countermeasures for serious cross-border threats to heashould be conducted by defaulth. __________________ 29Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1).
Amendment 120 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) Member States, EFTA States and Union candidate countries participating in a joint procurement shall procure the medical countermeasure in question only through that procedure and not through other channels, and shall not run parallel negotiation processes for that product; running parallel negotiation processes shall lead to an exclusion from the group of participating countries.
Amendment 125 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the joint procurement shall be conducted in such a way so as to strengthen the purchasing power of participating countries, improve the security of supply and ensure fair, equitable and affordable, access to medical countermeasures against serious cross-border threats to health;
Amendment 144 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In case the joint procurement procedure for medical countermeasures is not applied, the European Commission as well as the Member States shall guarantee transparency of net pricing, delivery dates and reimbursement, to allow Member States equal conditions when negotiating with pharmaceutical companies.
Amendment 15 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the employment rate of people aged 20-64 reached 73.9 % in the EU in the second quarter of 2019, and 72.7 % in the euro area; whereas the employment rate may come close to the Europe 2020 target but is unlikely to reach it; whereas the total hours worked have reached the 2008 level;
Amendment 26 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the increase of the employment rate has been accompanied by an increase of atypical, precarious and non-formal forms of employment, including zero-hour contracts; whereas precarious workers are usually unable to enforce their rights, have little or no job security and social insurance protection, face higher health and safety risks and receive incomes which are insufficient for a decent living;
Amendment 31 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
B c. whereas the employment rate of women increased slightly faster than that of men; whereas parenthood and caring responsibilities, limited access to childcare, elderly care and other care services still result in lower employment rates for women; whereas the gender employment gap, the wage gap and the pension gap remain substantial;
Amendment 32 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
B d. whereas the youth employment rate has increased, but is still below the pre-crisis level; whereas there are substantial differences with regard to youth unemployment between and within Member States;
Amendment 33 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas early school leaving and poor educational outcomes are obstacles to employment and economic growth and they are closely related to poverty, social exclusion and segregation; whereas education systems do not provide sufficient support for social mobility;
Amendment 46 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas social dialogue is a central component of the European social model that requires strong and representative social partners; whereas social dialogue has been weakened and collective bargaining coverage has shrunk across Europe, with huge disparities between Member States; whereas the share of employees in Member States covered by any form of collective wage agreement ranged from 98% to 7.1% in 2016;
Amendment 68 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas more than one European in five is at risk of poverty and social exclusion; whereas the Europe 2020 headline target to reduce the number of persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE) by 20 million remains out of reach; whereas children continue to face a high risk of poverty or social exclusion and their average AROPE rate in 2018 was at 24.3% with several Member States registering an alarming rate above 30%; whereas in-work poverty and the risk of having a household income below the poverty threshold while working remains high;
Amendment 71 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas one European out of ten is overburdened by housing costs, especially the lowest income households and people living in cities; whereas fighting climate change may have further implications on housing costs; whereas homelessness has increased over the last decade in most Member States;
Amendment 90 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
I a. whereas 80 million Europeans have disabilities; whereas the implementation of accessibility measures continues to be insufficient; whereas the employment rate of people with disabilities was 50.6% in 2017 versus a total employment rate of 74.8%; whereas persons with disabilities are more likely to face in-work poverty;
Amendment 120 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the inclusion of the EPSR in the ASGS 2020; calls for fairness and social rights to have equal importance in the new economic model as environmental sustainability and macro- economic stability; emphasises the central role of the Social Scoreboard in the European Semester; calls on the Commission to reinforce the Scoreboard by integrating further indicators reflecting all 20 principles of the EPSR; calls on the Commission to come forward with a social action plan to turn the EPSR into binding rules that strengthen welfare systems, respect labour market models and improve living standards;
Amendment 137 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned that rates of unemployment and long-term unemployment are still high in some Member States with strong regional disparities; stresses therefore the need for individually tailored measures to integrate the unemployed into the labour market and fight poverty and social exclusion; calls for a new financial instrument to tackle long-term unemployment by providing financial support for measures and projects in regions with above-average long-term unemployment;
Amendment 156 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is concerned about the limited intergenerational social mobility and increased income inequality compared to pre-crisis levels; calls on the Commission and the Member States to tackle income inequalities including by promoting adequate minimum wages, a high collective bargaining coverage, equal opportunities in education and training, gender equality and universal access to quality services; stresses that tax and benefit systems must be designed in a way to reduce inequalities and promote fairness;
Amendment 169 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission consultation on a European framework for minimum wages; considers that wages in some Member States are being maintained at artificially low levels with a detrimental effect on the Union economy and the single market; calls for adequate minimum wage levels through collective agreements or through law, in line with national traditions and without undermining the autonomy of national social partners and well-functioning collective bargaining models; calls for a coordinated approach at EU level in order to achieve real wage growth, avoid the downward spiral of unhealthy labour cost competition and increase upward social convergence for all; calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen social dialogue, collective bargaining rights and coverage at sectorial level and the involvement of social partners in policy-making, including for the European Semester;
Amendment 182 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses that full-time wages should provide for a decent living; stresses that every worker in the Union should receive a living wage that provides not only for the mere necessities of basic food, shelter and clothing, but is also sufficient to cover healthcare, education, transportation, recreation and some savings for unforeseen events, such as illnesses and accidents;
Amendment 190 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates its concern about the high number of persons at risk of poverty and social exclusion; is especially worried about high rates of child poverty and in- work poverty; calls on the Commission to present a comprehensive European anti- poverty strategy and establish a European Child Guarantee with adequate funding and well-designed support services; to ensure that every child has the right to free quality healthcare, free quality education, free quality childcare as well as decent housing and adequate nutrition; points out that high levels of inequality diminish the output of the economy and the potential for sustainable growth;
Amendment 219 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States for an integrated response to tackle the lack of affordable housing, poor housing conditions, housing exclusion andenergy poverty and housing exclusion; calls on the Commission to propose an EU framework for national homelessness strategies, and calls on the Member States to prepare their homelessness strategies adopting the Housing First principle, prioritising the provision of permanent housing to homeless people, and stopping the criminalisation of homelessness;
Amendment 230 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to come up with specific proposals to ensure a just transition in relation to the energy efficiency-related upgrading of housing stock in the context of the Green Deal, without placing an excessive burden on vulnerable groups, especially those at the risk of poverty and social exclusion;
Amendment 235 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is concerned about the stagnating share of early school leavers and the increasing share of underperforming pupils; calls on the Member States to improve their education systems; stresses that educational outcomes are also negatively affected by social exclusion, poverty and segregation, which equally must be addressed; calls on the Commission to carry out a comprehensive analysis of the driving factors behind early school leaving including social aspects, and present a proposal to tackle the problem;
Amendment 240 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to maximise their efforts in investing in affordable, accessible and high-quality education and training, including digital and transferable skills and to promote lifelong learning and skills development to prepare workers for future needs of the labour market affected by the green and digital transformations; calls on Member States to strengthen vocational education and training systems and increase their alignment with labour market needs; highlights the importance of apprenticeships and other forms of work-based learning; takes the view that mutual recognition of qualifications will be beneficial for overcoming skills shortages and skills mismatches;
Amendment 251 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Notes the importance of skills and competences acquired in non-formal learning environments; stresses, therefore, the importance of creating a validation system for non-formal forms of knowledge, especially those acquired via voluntary activities;
Amendment 259 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve work-life balance and gender equality and to ensure equal pay for equal work at the same place; calls for more efforts to close the gender pay and pensions gaps, and to tackle disincentives for women to work; calls for accessible and affordable quality childcare and early education services, as well as care services for those reliant on care, including the elderly to facilitate women’s participation in the labour market; calls on the Commission to propose a directive on pay transparency;
Amendment 271 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the regulation of new forms of work and improve the working conditions of platform workers; stresses that people with atypical working arrangements, including involuntary part-time or temporary contracts, are especially vulnerable; is of the opinion that such practices can have negative consequences on innovation and productivity;
Amendment 278 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Considers the demographic decline a serious obstacle to economic growth; calls on the Commission and the Member States to introduce measures designed to address this challenge; calls on the Commission and the Member States to pursue policies of active ageing, social inclusion of elderly people and solidarity between generations; calls on the Commission to take action and follow-up on its evaluation report regarding the 2012 European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between generations;
Amendment 284 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. Highlights that universal access to public, solidarity-based and adequate retirement and old age pension systems must be granted to all; underlines that public pension systems alone or in combination with occupational pension systems must provide an adequate retirement income well above the poverty threshold;
Amendment 296 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. RIs of the opinion that cohesion policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, has demonstrated its effectiveness in reducing inequalities; rejects any reduction in the level of cohesion policy funding; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce funding for the European Social Fund Plus despite its enlarged scope; calls on Member States to make full use of funding available; stresses the need for greater alignment of the European Semester with social and cohesion funding and the policy objectives of the Union;
Amendment 303 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Urges the Commission and Member States to ensure that EU cohesion policy programmes for the period 2021-2027 adequately address regional differences in employment, providing a meaningful response to the concentration of employment-related, social and demographic problems and ensuring that all European regions can participate in and benefit from the Union’s economic and social reform agenda in the context of the Green Deal;
Amendment 307 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14 b. Highlights the importance of the automatic stabilisation dimension of welfare systems to absorb economic shocks; calls on the Member States to strengthen their investment in social protection systems in order to enhance their performance in tackling and preventing poverty and inequalities;
Amendment 320 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Notes that the Union continues to suffer from structural problems which austerity imposed; underlines the need to put an end to short-sighted austerity policies, to boost domestic demand by future-oriented public and private investment, and to promote socially and economically balanced structural reforms in order to reduce inequalities and generate quality jobs, sustainable growth and social investment; highlights that socially responsible reforms must be based on solidarity, integration, social justice and a fair wealth distribution to improve the living standards for all; asks for a social imbalance procedure through a revisited Social Scoreboard;
Amendment 328 #
2019/2212(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that decisive support is needed for society, workers and businesses to face the challenges of climate change and the transition to carbon neutrality; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure adequate social and environmental investment for a true ‘just transition’, the implementation of the EPSR and the achievement of the SDGs, by exempting social spending from the euro area fiscal rules and thereby allowing more investment in human capital, skills and health; calls for adaptation strategies and adequate support for those worst affected by the transition, especially vulnerable people;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
– having regard to the ECJ case law14a on the development of a European definition of “worker” (as employee), __________________ 14aCase C-66/85 Deborah Lawrie Blum v Land Baden-Württemberg(3 July 1986); Case 75/63 Hoekstra (née Unger) v. Bestuur derBedrijfsvereniging voor Detailhandel en Ambachten (19 March 1964); CaseC-428/09 Union Syndicale Solidaires Isère v Premier ministre and Others (14October 2010); Case C-229/14 Ender Balkaya v Kiesel Abbruch- und RecyclingTechnik GmbH (9 July 2015); Case C-413/13 FNV Kunsten Informatie en Media vStaat der Nederlanden (4 December 2014); Case C-216/15 Betriebsrat derRuhrlandklinik gGmbH v Ruhrlandklinik gGmbH (17 November 2016)
Amendment 4 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 b (new)
Citation 25 b (new)
– having regard to the ECJ ruling on case C-434/15, Asociación Profesional Elite Taxiv Uber Systems Spain SL (20 December 2017),
Amendment 5 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 c (new)
Citation 25 c (new)
– having regard to the mission letter of Commissioner Nicolas Schmit and the 2021 Commission work programme,
Amendment 6 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 39 a (new)
Citation 39 a (new)
– having regard to Eurofound’s ‘web repository of the platform economy',15a __________________ 15a https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/data/pla tform-economy
Amendment 8 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 41 a (new)
Citation 41 a (new)
– having regard to the ILO World Employment and Social Outlook 2021 - "The role of digital labour platforms in transforming the world of work",
Amendment 20 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas platform work can create employment opportunities, increase choice, provide additional income, and lower barriers to entering the labour market; whereas platform work facilitates flexibility for bothcan provide opportunities for both people working in or through platform companies (hereafter referred to as “platform-based workers”) and clients, and the matching of demand for and supply of services, as well ; whereas innovation in digital tools, which is a useful vector for growth in times of crisis and recovery is a precondition for platform-based work and can contribute to growth in times of crisis and recovery; whereas platform jobs can offer advantages for students and those who want to combine study and work at the same time; whereas strong safeguards are necessary to avoid that platform work results in precarious working conditions and labour market segmentation;
Amendment 32 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas platform work has also raised concerns about precariousness orand poor working conditions, a lack of access to adequate social protection, fragmented and unstable income, andunpredictable and fragmented income, deskilling, such as a lack of career opportunities, as well as a lack of occupational health and safety measures, especially for lower-skilled on-location platform-based workers and workers performing micro-tasks, as highlighted once again during the COVID-19 crisis; whereas the misclassification of platform- based workers as self-employed workers contributes to this situation; whereas platform-based work shall not lead to precariousness, insecurity or health and safety risks;
Amendment 47 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the benefits of digitalisation must be shared broadly and equitably between platforms, platform- based workers, clients and society at large;
Amendment 63 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas people working in the platform economylatform-based workers are generally classified as formally self- employed; whereas, as such, these people do not benefit from the equivalent social, labour, health and safety protection that are connected to an employment contract in most countries; regardless of their actual employment situation; whereas many platform-based workers do therefore not benefit from the equivalent social protection, labour rights, or health and safety provisions offered by an employment contract in their respective Member State; whereas recent court rulings and administrative decisions regarding on-location platform work, amongst others in Spain15b, France15c, Germany15d, the Netherlands15e and Italy15f, confirmed the existence of an employment relationship between platforms and workers, granting the latter rights and entitlements; __________________ 15b Sentencia Nº 259/2020 - Juzgado de lo Social nº 24 de Barcelona - ECLI: ES:JSO:2020:5102 15cArrêt n°374 du 4 mars 2020 (19- 13.316) - Cour de cassation - Chambre sociale -ECLI:FR:CCAS:2020:SO00374 15d Bundesarbeitsgericht, Urteil vom 1. Dezember 2020 - 9 AZR 102/20 15eGerechtshof Amsterdam, 200.261.051/01, arrest van de meervoudige burgerlijke kamer van 16 februari 2021, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2021:392 15f Sentenza n. 3570 del 24.11.2020 del Tribunale di Palermo
Amendment 74 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the blurred distinction betweenarbitrary classification of platform-based workers and thes self- employed often seen in platform work causes uncertainty as regardsdeprives workers of their rights, entitlements, and applicable rules:; whereas more and more sectors are likely to be impacted by thisplatform work and digitalisation in the future;
Amendment 92 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas Member States have developed different approaches, leading to fragmented rules and initiatives; whereas there is a need for legislative action at European level action to overcome the resulting legal uncertainty and improvesafeguard the rights of platform-based workers’ rights and end the unfair competitive advantages of the platform-based companies over traditional companies, often based on social dumping as well as tax avoidance and evasion;
Amendment 100 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the introduction of a special status for platform-based workers would undermine their rights and further distort competition between platform companies and companies in the traditional economy, especially SMEs; whereas platform-based workers should either be classified as workers or genuinely self-employed depending on their actual situation; whereas a rebuttable presumption of an employment relationship would include the possibility for platform companies to prove that their platform-based workers are not workers in accordance with the national legislation of the respective Member State;
Amendment 107 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas there is no European definition of "worker"; whereas a special status for platform-based workers would not be compatible with the national classifications of workers and genuinely self-employed in the Member States, with unpredictable legal, administrative and juridical consequences as well as a high risk of further labour market segmentation;
Amendment 108 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas platforms acting like employers have to observe all their obligations as employers and abide to their sectoral responsibilities;
Amendment 109 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F d (new)
Recital F d (new)
Fd. whereas the issue of non-paid work is particularly sensitive in the platform-based work environment;
Amendment 110 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F e (new)
Recital F e (new)
Fe. whereas the creation of cooperatives can constitute an important instrument of bottom up organisation of platform-based work and could encourage competition between platforms;
Amendment 125 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for the introduction of a rebuttable presumption of an employment relationship for all platform-based workers, which would include the possibility for platform companies to prove that their platform-based workers are not workers in accordance with the national legislation of the respective Member State;
Amendment 127 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls for the recognition of platforms as companies linked to their sector of activity;
Amendment 128 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the meaningre is no EU definition of the terms ‘worker’ and ‘self- employed’ are not uniformly defined in all Member States; notes that the boundary between these two terms is less clear for new forms of work, and that some workers are at risk of being misclassified, resulting in different interpretations at the level of the Member States; notes that platform-based workers are often at risk of being misclassified as self-employed; stresses that platform- based workers, who are not self-employed, have the same rights as any other worker;
Amendment 161 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a legislative initiative to improve the working conditions of platform-based workers; calls on the Commission, if the social partners do not express the wish to initiate the process provided for in Article 155 of the TFEU, to put forward a newproposal for a directive on platform-based workers in order to guarantee them a minimum set of rights regardlessrights, based ofn their employment status, and to address the specificities of platform workhe rebuttable presumption of an employment relationship;
Amendment 177 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to better combat bogus self-employment by means of a directive, so as to cover platform-based workers which are fulfilling the conditions characteristic of an employment relationship based on the actual performance of work, and not on the parties’ description of the relationship; is of the opinionstresses that special attention should be givenpaid to digital labour platforms that strongly organise conditions and remuneration of online and on-location platform workconclude collective agreements, which could be used as guidance for determining the degree of responsibility of platforms towards platform-based workers;
Amendment 190 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 214 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Amendment 224 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that some platform-based workers may be subject to increased health and safety risks; is of the opinion for both on-location platform work (such as road accidents or physical injury caused by machinery or chemicals) and online platform work (for example related to ergonomics of computer workplaces), which are not limited to the physical health but also affect the mental/psychosocial health; underlines that the Commission proposal must address the occupational health and safety of platform-based workers as well as establish minimum requirements tond enable them to exercise athe right to disconnect without any adverse consequences;
Amendment 233 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that platform-based workers should be entitled to receive compensation in case of work accidents and occupational diseases, and be offered sickness and invalidity insurance coverageprovided with social protection; welcomes, in this respect, the initiatives of some platforms to provide, as a first step, insurance as well as occupational health and safety measures; for platform-based workers until a legislative framework has been established and stresses the important role collective agreements can play in this context;
Amendment 251 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls in particular the importance of extending social protection rights to self-employed platform-based workers, including people transitioning from one status to another or who have both statuses, for schemes covering maternity and equivalent parental benefits, and unemployment, sickness, healthcare and old-age benefits;
Amendment 258 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recognisealls that freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are fundamental rights for all workers, and believes a directive on platform workers should ensure that these rights are effective and enforced; notes the potential for imbalanced; is concerned about the imbalanced and asymmetrical relationships between digital labour platforms and workers, who may lack the individual bargaining power to negotiate thefair terms and conditions; notes further that there are also practical issues for platform- based workers such as a lack of common means of communication and opportunities to meet online or in person, which can prevent collective representation in practice; calls on the Commission to address such impediments in its proposal; stresses the need for platform-based workers and platforms to be properly organised and represented in order to facilitate social dialogue and collective bargaining;
Amendment 270 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Underlines that the cooperative legal form could be an important tool for bottom-up organization of platform-based workers, which may also have a positive impact on internal democracy and workers’ empowerment;
Amendment 274 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls that all workers have the fundamental right to exercise the freedom of association and collective bargaining; regrets the legal difficulties in collective representation faced by platform-based workers, and is aware that the solo self- employed are falsely considered ‘undertakings’, and as such are subject to the prohibition on agreements that restrict competition; welcomacknowledges in this regard the inception impact assessment published by the Commission16 , and the planned initiative to address this obstacle without undermining collective bargaining systems; is convinced that EU competition law must not hinder the improvement of the working conditions (including the setting of remuneration) and social protection of genuinely solo self-employed platform- based workers through collective bargaining by trade unions; urges therefore the Commission to clarify that collective agreements fall outside the scope of competition law in order to ensure that also genuinely solo self- employed workers can unionize and negotiate collectively, and to guarantee a better balance in bargaining power and a fairer internal market; __________________ 16https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/ALL/?uri=PI_COM%3AAres %282021%29102652
Amendment 284 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. BelievUnderlines that basic training must be provided to platform-based workers by the platform at least on the use of their website or the application; believes further; points out that platform- based workers, in particular less qualified workerones, should be offered training enabling skilling and re-skilling to improve their employability and career paths; calls for the facilitation of the recognition, validation and portability of attainments in the field of non-formal and informal learning; believes in this regard that a ‘certificate of experience’ should be issued for platform-based workers who have participated in such training, which could be uploaded on individual learning accounts;
Amendment 299 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 310 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Is concerned about the weak respect of intellectual property rights for creative works of self-employed platform- based workers and call on the Commission and the Member States to tackle this problem and ensure proper enforcement of applicable legislation;
Amendment 314 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that waiting time and being available on the platform is working time for platform-based workers in an employment relationship;
Amendment 317 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that all online platforms must ensure full compliance with EU legislation, including non- discrimination and data protection law; believes furtherstresses that platform-based workers and trade unions should have access to all data concerning their own activities, understand how their personal information is processed, and have the right to export their ratings; believes that the possibility of a portable rating certificate, recognised between similar platforms, should be explored; highlights that algorithms must have human oversight and that their decisions must be accountable, contestable and where relevant reversible; recalls that incentive practices, including bonuses, should not lead to risky behaviours; points out that algorithms must not reinforce inequalities and stereotypes based on gender and other social criteria; stresses that safety and security standards for algorithms 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 algorithms must be clearly defined, both in the event of occupational accidents and damages caused to third parties; reiterates that any use of algorithms at work must respect and adequately safeguard the right not to be subject to a decision which is based solely on automated processing enshrined in article 22(1) of the GDPR;
Amendment 325 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses that competition between unregulated global crowdworking platforms leads to a race to the bottom as regards working and employment conditions for platform-based workers, inside and outside the Union; urges the Commission to bring up this issue when discussing labour clauses in international trade agreements and to initiate a debate on the topic in international fora;
Amendment 330 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve statistical information related to working and employment conditions related to platform-based work;
Amendment 336 #
2019/2186(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to consider establishing a European quality label which would be granted to platforms implementing good practices for platform workers in order for users, workers and consumers to make informed decisions, and which would highlight platforms withbased on collective agreements, quality working conditions and high transparent systemscy;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas despite the European-level ban on its use, asbestos remains the main cause of death linked to occupational diseases, and whereas it also affects individuals outside the working environment through a continuous increase in cancers and mesothelioma linked to passive, limited exposure; whereas many cases of asbestos-related diseases are not recognised as occupational diseases;
Amendment 11 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas a substantial share of the existing built environment in the EU is older than 50 years and according to EU Building Stock Observatory in most EU Member States, half of the residential stock was built before 1970 when asbestos was widely used; whereas the extensive use of asbestos in construction poses a threat to many different groups of people, including home-owners, building users and occupants;
Amendment 20 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the legislation in force in some Member States only puts certain obligations on owners, administrators or managers of asbestos-containing buildings when they start to use the building or intend to start its demolition, and not when selling a building equipped with asbestos-containing products;
Amendment 27 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. the screening shall consists of a diagnosis of the presence of asbestos by a professional entity with appropriate qualifications and permits provided for by national and Union law and must be followed by action to reduce the risk posed by any asbestos detected; asbestos waste disposal must be strictly controlled;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
c. the result of the screening must be communicated to a competent national body, which shall maintain a national register of asbestos risk reduction certificates and provide advice to owners about applicable laws and regulation, the correct and safe removal of asbestos detected, and financial support available;
Amendment 49 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that the planned update of provisions of directive 2009/148/EC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work, as well as the new initiatives on the European and national asbestos removal strategies make a concrete contribution to the social dimension of the single market; calls on the Commission to ensure, that these initiatives will guarantee the well- functioning and sustainable development of SMEs and micro-enterprises and support them when implementing these strategies;
Amendment 54 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Welcomes the Commission’s plan to strengthen Union measures for protecting workers from the threat of asbestos and to prevent the increment of asbestos victims in the course of the Union’s building renovation wave; believes that renovation offers a unique opportunity to modernize housing infrastructure for the benefit of all consumers in the EU and to make it fit for a greener and digital society of Europe after the recovery from COVID-19 crisis;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the provisions of Union law on market surveillance and compliance of products should be used to prevent the use and illegal placement of asbestos on the internal market and highlights in this regard the importance of digitalisation of registers of buildings containing asbestos and the facilitation of data sharing between the construction sector, financial institutions and public authorities; recalls that strengthening efforts to keep non-compliant products, also containing asbestos, from the Union market was identified as a priority in the Commission’s communication of 28 October 2015 “Upgrading the Single Market: more opportunities for people and business”;
Amendment 65 #
2019/2182(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Underlines that currently Member States can allocate European Structural and Investment Funds for handling and removal of asbestos in line with the objectives of the respective national or regional programmes; stresses within this context the unique opportunities given in this regard by the Green Deal, the Next Generation EU and the 2021-27 Multiannual Financial Framework;
Amendment 20 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises the crucial role of the European Social Fund (ESF), the Youth Guarantee (YG), the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF), the Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI) and the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD); stresses the need for these programmes to receive an adequate level of funding in 2020 and until the entry into force of the next MFF programming phase, ensuring that no gap in the financing of such important instruments is ever to take place; highlights, in this regard, that the activities implemented in these areas should always result in strategic measures with clearly defined objectives and targets and that efficient and effective spending is equally as important as the total budget ceilings;
Amendment 22 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights that the programming funds in the social and employment area should create synergies to help reduce social divergences and inequalities that have been exacerbated by the crisis; warns that any reductions in the budget for these areas will only create difficulties for these policies to be effective and reach their targets;
Amendment 24 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses in particular the role of the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) as an essential tool to fight youth unemployment, which remains unacceptably high and with significant disparities across the Member States; welcomes the commitment by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines to strengthen the Youth Guarantee by turning it into a permanent instrument with an increased budget and regular reporting; with regard to this, takes note of the Commission proposal to increase YEI allocations in 2020 by EUR 116 million, but considers such a figure insufficient; calls therefore for an increase of YEI payment appropriations by EUR 600 million;
Amendment 46 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Awaits the publication of the feasibility study on the Child Guarantee; calls on the Commission to fully take into consideration the proposals for implementation of the Preparatory Actions on the Child Guarantee, adopted in the annual budgets 2017, 2018 and 2019, which go beyond the feasibility study and which have a level of funding which will allow the implementation of a proper experimental phase of the Child Guarantee in the next programming period 2021-2027; with regard to this, welcomes the Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's commitment in her Political Guidelines to create the European Child Guarantee in order to help ensure that every child in Europe at risk of poverty or social exclusion has access to the most basic set of rights like healthcare and education;
Amendment 47 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Call for adequate funding for EURES operations to be ensured in 2020, in particular stresses that the entry into force of the European Labour Authority (ELA) should not result in a reduction of resources and capabilities for EURES, which plays a pivotal role in facilitating labour mobility of Union citizens and offers services and partnerships for jobseekers and employers, Public Employment Services (PES), the social partners and the local authorities; insists that the ELA, being a new body, requires fresh resources to run smoothly; highlights therefore the need for maintaining clear and separate budget lines for both ELA and EURES;
Amendment 17 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 48 e (new)
Citation 48 e (new)
– having regard to the Commission report of 2019 on In-Work Poverty,
Amendment 18 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 48 f (new)
Citation 48 f (new)
– having regard to the Council recommendation of 2018 on access to social protection for workers and the self- employed,
Amendment 25 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the employment rate has grown strongly among workers above 55 years of age; whereas in 2018 the employment rate of workers between 55 and 64 years in the euro area is with 58.8% still well below the average; whereas with 52.9% especially women in this age category have a lower employment rate; whereas demographics forecast a growing number of older workers; whereas demographic change has impact on pension, healthcare and long-term care systems;
Amendment 29 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the employment gender gap was 11.6 percentage points in 2018; whereas it has not improved substantially in recent years and it remained almost unchanged since 2013;
Amendment 36 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
D b. whereas aggregate household incomes grew slower than the GDP, indicating that income gains from the recovery have reached households only to some extent and suggesting that recent growth is not inclusive; whereas average wages in real terms still lag behind pre- crisis levels in many Member States and their growth remained below productivity growth in 2017; whereas income inequality is often linked to unequal opportunities in access to education, training and social protection;
Amendment 46 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas horizontal and vertical labour market segmentation persists and affects, in particular, women, low-skilled, young and older people, people with disabilities, national, linguistic, ethnic and sexual minorities and people with migrant backgrounds; whereas in 2016 the employment rate of people with disabilities was with 48.1% well below the average employment rate;
Amendment 86 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that while the economic conditions in the EU are currently favourable and overall employment is steadily growing, there is still an urgent need for improvement in terms of youth unemployment, long-term unemployment, labour market segmentation and inequalities, in-work poverty and productivity; strongly regrets that real wage growth remains below what could be expected given the positive labour market and economic performance; calls for a new financial instrument to tackle long- term unemployment, which provides financial support for measures and projects in regions with above-average long-term unemployment;
Amendment 88 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes with great concern the unacceptably high level of youth unemployment in a number of Member States; emphasises that the detachment of young people from the labour market also has significant negative consequences for social cohesion and must urgently be addressed; stresses the importance of the Youth Guarantee to reduce the number of NEETs and youth unemployment; calls on the Commission to make the Youth Guarantee a permanent instrument and to further strengthen it;
Amendment 102 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that considerable divergences in employment persist between countries, regions and population groups; considers it necessary to increase employment rates and promote decent job creation in order to achieve the Europe 2020 goal of an employment rate of at least 75 %; calls on the Commission to propose a European unemployment re-insurance scheme that plays a stabilising role when Member States face economic crises;
Amendment 112 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the need for well- designed labour market policies and reforms that create quality employment, promote equal opportunities and the equal treatment of workers, facilitate equal access to the labour market and social protection for all, facilitate labour mobility, reintegrate the unemployed and tackle inequalities and gender imbalances; strongly regrets that many Europeans are involuntarily working part-time; notes that this has detrimental consequences for their social protection; calls on Member States to improve framework conditions in order to increase opportunities for permanent and full-time employment;
Amendment 121 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that participation of women in the labour market continues to grow but that gender inequalities in terms of employment and pay persist; takes the view that efforts should be strengthenednotes with concern that the gender gap in employment remains almost unchanged since 2013 and that gender inequalities in terms of employment and pay persist at a high level; strongly regrets that the Barcelona targets of childcare availability of 90% for children between 3 years and mandatory school age will not be met; notes that only few Member States have taken actions to tackle the gender pay gap; urges all Member States to strengthen their efforts to reduce the gender pay gap, the gender pension gap and disincentives to work, improve work- life balance and provide access to affordable childcare, early childcare and long-term care facilities; calls on Member States to improve training, working conditions and wages in these services (as well as in health services); calls on the Commission to issue a directive on pay transparency in order to quickly close the gender pay gap; calls on Member States to encourage more men to take up paid family-related leave; notes with concern that women are overrepresented in lower- paid sectors and work more frequently in jobs they are over-qualified for;
Amendment 139 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. CWelcomes the progress made in the European Disability Strategy 2010- 2020 and especially the directive on accessibility; emphasises however that more needs to be done; strongly regrets that people with disabilities remain consistently disadvantaged in terms of employment, education and social inclusion; calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up efforts for the further inclusion of people with disabilities in the labour market, by removing legislative barriers to creating incentives for their employment and ensuring the accessibility of workplaces;
Amendment 192 #
2019/0000(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the social situation continues to improve and that poverty is in decline, but that itDeplores that poverty still remains unacceptably high; stresses that while the number of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE) in the EU continued to decrease in 2017, some 113 million people in the EU and 74 million in the euro area were AROPE in 2017; urges the Commission and the Member States to take the necessary steps to reduce poverty, including child and in-work poverty, in order to achieve the Europe 2020 goal; emphasises that decent job creationas well as poverty among old ages; regrets that the Europe 2020 goal of reduction of poverty will most probably be missed; emphasises that especially certain groups are at risk of poverty, namely children, people with disabilities and people with a migrant background; underlines the need to eradicate child poverty and calls on the Commission to propose legislation for the implementation of a European Child Guarantee; emphasises that decent jobs, access to social protection regardless of employment relationship or contract type, wage growth and well-resourced, quality public education systems and accessible life-long learning offers have a significant impact on reducing inequalities, the risk of poverty and social exclusion; welcomes the significant impact that social transfers have on poverty reduction; regrets however that this is not reflected in national policies of all Member States; notes that in 2017 9.4% of all employed people in the EU were at risk of poverty and that according to a study by the Commission on in-work poverty in Europe from 2019, in-work poverty is increasing in many Member States; emphasises that in-work poverty is a fundamental sign of social unfairness and urges Member States to take decisive action to ensure that people can afford themselves and their families a decent life from their wages; calls on the Commission to propose legislation on EU- wide minimum social protection floor and minimum income schemes;