Activities of Christofer FJELLNER related to 2014/2228(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (debate) SV
Amendments (55)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the TTIP is above all about regulation10 ,eliminating tariffs, duties and quotas, but also about reducing or eliminating non- tariff barriers11 , and as such about the level of protection of human health and the environment; __________________ 10See reduction of administrative burdens on European companies, espeech by EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström of 11 December 2014.http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs /2014/december/tradoc_152942.pdfially small- and medium-sized enterprises, in order to stimulate growth and job creation; __________________ 11 See 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade by the US Trade Representative, p. 45.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
- having regard to the letter signed by 14 Member States to Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker on October 21st 2014, expressing their strong support for the inclusion of the investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanism in the investment chapter in TTIP;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Having regard the results of Eurobarometer from November 2014 on the transatlantic trade and investment agreement;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas, as according to Eurobarometer of November 2014, in 25 out of 28 Member States a majority of European citizens are in favour of a transatlantic trade and investment agreement;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the degree ofre is a methodological divergence between the regulatory systems of the EU and the US is very wide in key areas for the protection of health and the environment, including food safety and consumer information, owing to different legal and political cultures (epitomised by the controversy over the precautionary principle)n some areas, owing to different legal and political cultures;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
– having regard to its earlier resolutions, in particular those of 23 October 2012 on trade and economic relations with the United States20 , 23 May 2013 on EU trade and investment negotiations with the United States of America21 , 12 March 2014 on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs22 , and 15 January 2015 on the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman 201323 , __________________ 20 OJ C 68 E, 7.3.2014, p.53. 21 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0227. 22 Texts adopted, P7_TA- PROV(2014)0230. 23 Texts adopted, P8_TA- PROV(2015)0009.
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the US Trade Representative consistently denounces EU standards in these areas as trade barriers; EU and the US's standards in the area of environment, public health and food safety are the most ambitious in the world;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas we are faced with an unregulated picture of globalisation and a well-designed trade agreement could contribute to harnessing liberalisation; whereas such an agreement should not only focus on reducing tariffs and NTBs but should also be a tool to protect workers, consumers and the environment; whereas a strong and ambitious trade agreement is an opportunity to create a framework by strengthening regulation to the highest standards at a global level in order to prevent social and environmental dumping;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes the initiative to negotiate a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the EU and the US; notes that TTIP aims at eliminating tariffs, duties and quotas, but also at regulatory convergence; considers the agreement as an opportunity to strengthen the global leadership in asserting high standards in the area of environment, public health and food safety;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers it misleadingimportant on the part of the Commission to try to appease public concerns abake into account the TTIP by stating that existing standards will not be lowered, as this disregards the fact that many standards have yet to be set in the implementation of existing (framework) legislation (e.g. REACH) or by the adoption of new laws (e.g. cloning)environmental, health and food safety standards;
Amendment 107 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Welcomes the transparency initiatives undertaken by Commissioner Cecilia Malmström and agrees that they are supporting the public debate on TTIP;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
whereas manythe various economic impact studies on TTIP should be taken with caution as they are built on computable general equilibrium economic models with very optimistic predictions about the capacity of the EU and the US to reduce regulatory barriers to trade; whereas the TTIP alone will not resolve economic problems in the EU and no false hopes and expectations should be raised in that respecarried out up to now are naturally only able to provide forecasts at this point, it can be seen at the same time, however, that all studies project a generally positive impact;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas many economic impact studies on TTIP should be taken with caution as they are built on computable general equilibrium economic models with very optimistic predictions about the capacity of the EU and the US to reduce regulatory barriers to trade; whereas the TTIP alone will not resolve economic problems in the EU and no false hopes and expectations should be raised in that respectis the most cost-effective economic stimulus package at hand;
Amendment 120 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concernedPoints out that the TTIP negotiations shave already affected Commission proposals and actions relating, for example, to food safety and climate protection (e.g. pathogen meat treatments; implementation of the fuel quality directive)ll not affect proposals and actions of the Commission, existing legislation of the EU in the area of food safety and climate protection and the independent decision taking of the European Parliament;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the wellbeing of ordinary citizens, workers and consumers has to be the benchmark for a trade agreement; whereas TTIP should be a good model for a goodfuture trade agreement responding to these requirements;
Amendment 146 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is very concernedConsiders that the objective of regulatory convergence and the cooperation and dialogue between regulatory authorities, including in particular the creation of a Regulatory Cooperation Council, will lead to a lowering of futurconfirm and strengthen the EU standards in key areas ofor the protection of human health, food safety and the environment in light of the significant differences as compared with the USwithin an open, fair, modern and global trade policy system. This is a fundament for setting global standards by the EU and the US, which are representing 50% of world`s GDP and one third of world trade; calls that this instrument shall not influence the independence of the European legislative competences;
Amendment 160 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees with Commissioner Malmström that all areas where the EU and the US have very different rules or approachestated in the Member States' mandate for the negotiations should be exincluded fromin the negotiations12 ; __________________ 12See speech by EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström of 11 December 2014.
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the secret character of negotiations as they have been conducted in the past has lnature of international negotiations demand a certain degree of discretion in order to effectively ensure results, a balance needs to deficiencies in terms of democratic control of the negotiation processbe struck to between discretion and transparency; a higher level of transparency should be possible in order to strengthen democratic control;
Amendment 176 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls for a regulatory framework on pesticides, which puts consumers safety first, enhances cooperation between authorities in the assessment procedures and methodologies for risk evaluation, and establishes a pest management cooperation in order to avoid animal and plant pests, which can cause unproportionate trade barriers;
Amendment 179 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Underlines that the negotiations on the health and pharmaceutical sector shall deliver benefits for citizens by having access to high quality medical products and services through affordable prices, by an increased cross-border scientific knowledge and through the removal of unnecessary and burdensome approval processes and inspections; calls for a speeding up of the approval of new medicines and medical devices and the establishment of a regulatory cooperation, which creates synergies and avoids burdensome approval processes and inspections in the sector while keeping the highest quality of services and products;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas President Juncker has clearly reiterated in his Political Guidelines that – while the EU and the US can go a significant step further in recognising each other’s product standards and working towards transatlantic standards – the EU will not sacrificemaintain its safety, health, social and data protection standards orand our cultural diversity, recalling that the safety of the food we eat and the protection of Europeans’ personal data are non- negotiable;
Amendment 182 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4 d. Calls on the US side to lift the ban on beef imports from the EU;
Amendment 188 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Calls on the Commission to exclude any terms in all the horizontal chapters and all the sectoral annexes of the TTIP that wouldrespect the sensitivity of the following areas:
Amendment 198 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 1
Paragraph 5 – indent 1
– involve regulations and standards in the area of chemicals and pesticides,
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas President Juncker has also clearly stated in his Political Guidelines that he will not accept that the jurisdiction of courts in the Member States is limited by special regimes for investor disputes; whereas now that the results of the public consultation on investment protection and ISDS in the TTIP are available, a reflection process – taking account of critical and constructive contributions – is needed within and between the three European institucontinued improvement of the investor-to- state dispute settlement mechanism can take place without weakening the protections on the best way to achieve investment protection and equal treatment of investorsf our investors from discrimination and expropriation without compensation;
Amendment 207 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 2
Paragraph 5 – indent 2
– affect the EU’'s integrated approach to food safety, including EU legislation on GMOs,
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas manya clear majority of Europeans support a free trade agreement with the US23d, critical voices in the public debate have shown the need for the TTIP negotiations to be conducted in a more transparent and inclusive manner, taking into account the concerns voiced by European citizens; whereas Parliament fully supports both the decision of the Council to declassify the negotiating directives and the Commission’s transparency initiative; __________________ 23dEurobarometer, November 2014. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/cf/sho wmap.cfm?keyID=3905&nationID=11,1,2 7,28,17,2,16,18,13,6,3,4,22,7,8,20,21,9,23, 24,12,19,29,26,25,5,14,10,15,&startdate=2 014.11&enddate=2014.11#fcExportDiv
Amendment 217 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3
Paragraph 5 – indent 3
– encourage or facilitate the extraction, transportation or use of fossil fuels, in particular unconventional ones, or hinderthe EU's ambitions in renewable energy, green technology, and the achievement of EU or US climate and energy targets;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas since July 2013 talks between the US and the EU have been going on, but up to now no common text has been agreed and it is now exactly the right time to undertake a reflection on the state of play without drawing new red lines;
Amendment 238 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Is convinced that the EU will benefit from including food safety in the negotiations with the US; calls on the Commission to use its leverage to pressure the US regarding their excessive use of antibiotics in their agriculture and cattle industry;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) to emphasise that while the TTIP negotiations consist of negotiations on three main areas – ambitiously improving reciprocal market access (for goods, services, investment and public procurement at all levels of government), reducing NTBs and enhancing the compatibility of regulatory regimes, and developing common rules to address shared global trade challenges and opportunities – all these areas are equally important to be included in a comprehensive package; TTIP should be ambitious and binding on all levels of government on both sides of the Atlantic, the agreement should lead to lasting genuine market openness on a reciprocal basis and trade facilitation on the ground, and should pay particular attention to structural means of achieving greater transatlantic cooperation while upholding regulatory standards and preventing social and environmental dumping;
Amendment 256 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is opposed to the inclusion of ISDS in the TTIP, as ISDS risks fundamentally undermining the sovereign rights of the EU, its Member States and regional and local authorities to adopt regulations on public health, food safety and the environmentConsiders a comprehensive chapter on investment, containing provisions on investment liberalisation and investment protection, essential to encourage and safeguard investments in renewable energy and green technology;
Amendment 268 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Notes that the EU has the highest number of Bilateral Investment Treaties including investment protection whilst having the highest level of environmental protection; believes thusly that there does not seem to be any evidence for the claim that there is a causal relationship between investment protection and undermining environmental protection;
Amendment 276 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 281 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is deeply concerned about the lack of transparency in the negotiations, and urges the Commission to give all Members of the European Parliament access to the negotiation texts, in particular the consolidated onesWelcomes Commissioner Malmström's transparency initiative; urges the Commission to continue publishing the negotiation texts as soon as possible.
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
(ii) to aim at the elimination of all duty tariffs and tariff rate quotas, while respecting sensitive products on both sides;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iv
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iv
(iv) to increase market access for services accordwhilst ensuring tohat the ‘positive list approach’ whereby services that are to be opened up to foreign companies are explicitly mentioned and new services are excluded while ensuring thaagreement does not exclude new services that will be the foundation of our future economic growth, and whilst possible standstill and ratchet clauses only apply to non- discrimination provisions and allow for enough flexibility to bring services back into public control;
Amendment 391 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
(vi) to ensure an adequate carve-out of sensitive services such as public services and public utilities (including water, health, social security systems and education) allowing national and local authorities enough room for manoeuvre to legislate in the public interest; a joint declaration reflecting negotiators’ clear commitment to exclude these sectors from the negotiations would be very helpful in this regard, knowing that the EU's negotiating mandate clearly states that the right to regulate stands firm and that public services are under the control of the Member States;
Amendment 435 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vii a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vii a (new)
(viia) to ensure that TTIP is in alignment with the EU and US' commitments already set out in the joint declaration from April 4, 2011, allowing for the full functioning of the digital ecosystem, and promoting the cross-border data flows processed for legitimate purposes; to ensure that provisions under TTIP shall not prevent service suppliers of the parties or customers of those suppliers from electronically transferring information internally or across borders, accessing publicly available information, or accessing their own information stored in other countries; to ensure that TTIP prohibits any requirements on ICT service suppliers to use local infrastructure, or establish a local presence, as a condition of supplying services 1 a ; __________________ 1a "European Union-United States Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services", April 14th, 2011. http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2011 /april/tradoc_147780.pdf
Amendment 443 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point viii
Paragraph 1 – point b – point viii
(viii) to ensure that the EU’s acquis on data privacy is not compromised through the liberalisation of data flows, in particular in the area of e-commerce and financial services; to ensure that no commitments on data flows are taken up before European data protection legislation is in place;
Amendment 478 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x
Paragraph 1 – point b – point x
(x) to keep in mind that the agreement should not risk prejudicing the Union’s cultural and linguistic diversity, including in the audiovisual and cultural servicenamely in the cultural sector given its spector, and that existing and future provisions and policies in support of the cultural sector, in particular in the digital world, are kept out of the scope of the negotiationsial status in the EU; to keep in mind that the agreement will not affect the capacity of the Union or its Member States to implement policies and measures to take account of developments in this sector, in particular in the digital environment;
Amendment 529 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiv
Paragraph 1 – point b – point xiv
(xiv) to ensure that the negotiations on rules of origin aim at reconciling the EU and US approaches and establishing effective rules of origin; given the conclusion of the negotiations for the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between EU and Canada and the potential upgrade of the EU-Mexico free trade agreement, the possibility and scope of cumulation will need to be considered;
Amendment 541 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point -i (new)
Paragraph 1 – point c – point -i (new)
(-i) to include cross-cutting disciplines on regulatory coherence and transparency for the development and implementation of efficient, cost-effective, and more compatible regulations for goods and services, including early consultations on significant regulations, use of impact assessments, evaluations, periodic review of existing regulatory measures, and application of good regulatory practices;
Amendment 548 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Paragraph 1 – point c – point i
(i) to ensure that the regulatory cooperation chapter, establishing a Regulatory Cooperation Council, promotes an effective, pro- competitive economic environment through the facilitation ofidentification and prevention of potential future non-tariff barriers to trade, for which a regulatory dialogue can facilitate trade and investment, whilest developing and securing high levels of protection of health and safety, consumer, labour and environmental legislation and of the cultural diversity that exists within the EU; to ensure that regulatory cooperation is undertaken at both a central and non- central level; negotiators on both sides need to identify and to be very clear about which regulatory measures and standards are fundamental and cannot be compromised, which ones canto be the subject of a common approach, which are the areas where mutual recognition based on a common high standard and a strong system of market surveillance is desirable and which are those where simply an improved exchange of information is possible, based on the experience of one and a half years of ongoing talks;
Amendment 573 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
(ii) to base negotiations on SPS and TBT measures on the key principles of the multilateral SPS and TBT agreements; to aim in the first place at increasing transparency and openness, strengthening dialogue between regulators and strengthening cooperation in international standards-setting bodies; to recognise, in negotiations on SPS and TBT measures,include requirements that measures introduced by each Party must be based on science and on international standards or scientific risk assessments, whilst recognising the right of both parties to manage risk in accordance with the level either deems appropriate in order to protect human, animal or plant life or health; to respect and uphold the sensitivities and fundamental values of either side, such as the EU’s precautionary principle;
Amendment 605 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c – point iv
Paragraph 1 – point c – point iv
(iv) to define clearly, in the context of future regulatory cooperation, which measures concern TBT and redundant administrative burdens and formalities and which are linked to fundamental standards and regulations and should not be altered;
Amendment 630 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
(ii) to ensure that the sustainable development chapter aims at the full and effective ratification, implementation and enforcement of the eight fundamental convensupporting the promotion of decent work through effective domestic implementations of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and their content, the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda and the core international environmental agreements; provisions should be aimed at improving levels of protection of labour and environmental standards; an ambitious trade and sustainable development chapter should also include rules on corporate social responsibility based on the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and a clearly structured civil society involvecore labour standards, as defined in the 1998 ILO Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and relevant Multilateral Environment Agreements, as well as enhancing cooperation on trade-related aspects of sustainable development;
Amendment 741 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiii
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiii
(xiii) to ensure that investment protection provisions are limited to post- establishment provisions and focus on non-discrimination and, fair and equitable treatment; standards of protection and definitions of investor and investment should be drawn up in a precise manner; free transfer of capital should be in line with the EU treaty provisions and should include a prudential carve-out in the case of financial crises, including a prohibition of unreasonable, arbitrary or discriminatory measures, national treatment, most-favoured nation treatment, protection against direct and indirect expropriation, including the right to prompt, adequate and effective compensation, full protection and security of investors and investments, other effective protection provisions, such as an "umbrella clause", free transfer of funds of capital and payments by investors, and rules concerning subrogation;
Amendment 756 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv
(xiv) to ensure that foreign investors are treated in a non-discriminatory fashion and have a fair opportunity to seek and achieve redress of grievances, which can be achieved without the inclusion of an ISDS mechanism; such a mechanism is not necessary in TTIP given the EU’s and the US’ developed legal systems; a state through state-of-the- art investment protection provisions and an investor-to- state dispute settlement system and the use of national courts are the most appropriate tools to address investment disputesmechanism;
Amendment 778 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv a (new)
(xiva) to ensure that investment dispute settlements are conducted in a depoliticised and strictly legal environment, where maintaining impartiality in the appointment of arbitrators by both investors and Parties is the highest priority;
Amendment 784 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv b (new)
(xivb) to ensure that the EU and its Member States sign the UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration without any further delay;
Amendment 785 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xiv c (new)
(xivc) to ensure that the EU affirms the loser pays principle in all investment disputes in order to assist in preventing frivolous claims;
Amendment 786 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xv
Paragraph 1 – point d – point xv
(xv) to ensure that TTIP includes an ambitious Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) chapter that includes strong protection of precisely and clearly defined areas of IPR, including enhanced protection and recognition of European Geographical Indications (GIs), and reflects a fair and efficient level of protection such as laid out in the EU’s and the US’s free trade agreement provisions in this area, while continuing to confirm the existing flexibilities in the Agreement on Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), notably in the area of public health;
Amendment 835 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e – point ii
Paragraph 1 – point e – point ii
(ii) to translate these transparency efforts into meaningful practical results, inter alia by reaching meaningful arrangements with the US side to improve transparency, including access to all negotiating documents, in order to allow Members of Parliament and the Member States to develop constructive discussions with stakeholders and the public;