Activities of Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG related to 2014/2228(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (A8-0175/2015 - Bernd Lange) PL
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (27)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Citation (new)
Citation (new)
– having regard to its earlier resolutions of 23 October 2012 on trade and economic relations with the United States1, 23 May 2013 on trade and investment negotiations with the United States of America2, 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 Affairs3,
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Citation (new)
Citation (new)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission is currently negotiating on behalf of the European Union a deep, comprehensive and high standards trade and investment partnership agreement with the United States (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – TTIP) that aims to foster and facilitate commercial exchange of goods and services and enhance investment through inter alia the removal of trade barriers; whereas a significant number of European citizens have voiced legitimate concerns that this agreement would threaten fundamental EU regulations, in particular in the fields of labour rights, environmental protection and food and safety standards
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in order to contribute to the well-being of all European citizens the objectives of the TTIP is to increase trade and investment between the European Union and the United States;should be to regulate globalisation and support sustainable trade and investment flows in a balanced way across Europe, sustainable economic growth, decent jobs creation and promotion of the European Social Model
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the negotiations have attracted unprecedented public interest, given the potential economic, social and political impact of the TTIP; and the secretive manner in which the negotiations have been conducted
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Committee on Petitions has received a number of petitions raising concerns about the EU-US trade agreement (TTIP); whereas the petitioners’ main concerns are related to risks regarding the quality of food imports, the transfer of data from the EU to the US, in particular information allegedly collected by the US regarding natural and legal persons (the right of EU citizens to ‘digital self-determination’), transparency, economic impact, and protection of investorhe lack of transparency of the negotiations, the potential negative economic impact of TTIP, in particular in terms of employment and wages, and the transfer of public authorities’ right to regulate to corporations via the Investor- State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS);
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the European Commission received a total of nearly 150,000 responses to its public consultation on investment protection and Investor-to- State Dispute Settlement in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement, 97% of which rejected the inclusion of ISDS in TTIP; whereas, unusually, many submissions came from individual respondents, which highlights the scale of public mobilisation over TTIP; whereas some respondents, such as trade unions or large civil society organisations represent a large number of individual members that is vastly in excess of the total number of responses received by the Commission;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas the European Ombudsman’s investigation of July 2014 regarding the transparency of the TTIP scrutinised the withholding of key documents and alleged granting of privileged access to certain stakeholders; whereas the European Ombudsman received more than 6000 emails in reply to its TTIP public consultation;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. Observes that the reforms incorporated in CETA for mechanisms for the settlement of disputes between States and investors represent the right approach and must be developed further for TTIPsignificantly differ from those presented in TTIP negotiations thus far and should not determine the course of future negotiations;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
c. Observes that existing dispute settlement mechanisms work well but alsin countries where there is no drisplay weaknesses and that therefore improvements are needed and they must be modernised in order to improve their legitimacy and the institutionalisation of mechanisms for the settlement of disputes between States and investors, so that they can then also be taken as a model for other partnershipsk of political interference in the justice system or legal protection system are operating smoothly and that there is consequently no need to introduce ISDS;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the importance of developing the trade relationship and bilateralbalanced trade and investment relations between the European Union and the United States of America in order to help growth and employment and generate new economic opportunitieswith adequate safeguards to provide the highest labour, social, health and environmental standards on a global level in order to generate new economic opportunities and regulate globalisation, so that social and environmental dumping is excluded;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the objective of reducing unnecessary regulatory incompatibilities between the EU and the USA in relation to goods and serviceslifting technical barriers to trade between the EU and the USA which are not justified by different approaches to protection and risk management, such as duplication of procedures, inconsistent product requirements and double testing;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to oppose the inclusion of ISDS in TTIP, as other options to enforce investment protection are available, such as domestic remedies;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d
Paragraph 1 – point d
d. Calls on the Commission, in this context, to take account of and to supplement, firstly, the constructive contributions made by the public consultation on TTIP, and, secondly, the dispute settlement mechanisms incorporated in CETAin which 97% of the almost 150 000 people polled in the 28 Member States stated that they were opposed to ISDS in its current form, in order to establish clear structures, impartial procedures, a lawful pool of judges selected by States and a code of conduct for judges, to increase the transparency and legitimacy of such dispute settlement procedures, to limit the scope for legal action in order to prevent forum shopping, to maintain the democratic legitimacy of national and European legislatures for amendments to legislation with defined standards and levels and to assess the feasibility of establishing a permanent court and a multilateral appeal system in TTIP;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. NoteDemands that regulatory compatibility is to be without prejudice to thedoes not in any way affect public authorities’ right to regulate in accordance with the level of health, safety, consumer, labour and environmental protection and cultural diversity that each side considers appropriate;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the European environment standards remain at the current levels;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has made real efforts to make the TTIP negotiating process more transparent, especially in the light of the publication of the European directives for the negotiation on the TTIP (1103/13 CL 1); regrets that this essential document was only disclosed on 9 October 2014 while the negotiations started in June 2013; believes that this delay by the European Commission and the Council in disclosing such essential documents has to date hindered the development of an informed public debate on TTIP and has contributed to reinforcing negative perceptions of the European Union and its institutions in important parts of the general public;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the decision of the European Ombudsman concerning its inquiry in relation to the European Commission’s efforts to make TTIP negotiations transparent and accessible to the public; calls on the Commission to rapidly implement the Ombudsman’s recommendations related to public access to consolidated negotiating texts, greater proactive disclosure of TTIP documents and increased transparency as regards meetings that Commission officials hold on TTIP with business organisations, lobby groups or NGOs.
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Suggests that further steps are needed in order to continue the Commission’s efforts to increase transparency and to promote more comprehensive participation and involvement of the various stakeholders in the negotiating process and in particular of civil society and consumers organisations, given the potential impact TTIP will have on the lives of European citizens;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Suggests thatCalls for a more proactive approach to transparency on the part of the Commission couldto make the negotiating process more legitimate in the eyes of citizens, and encourages the Commission to publish documents and make meeting information available;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. SuggestBelieves that a more proactive approach to transparency on the part of the Commission couldis absolutely crucial in order to make the negotiating process more legitimate in the eyes of citiz, and urges the Commission to publish all negotiating documents, and encourages the Commission to publish documentsincluding US offers to the EU, in the fashion of standards practices for all international trade negotiations conducted within the frame of the World Trade Organisation, and make meeting information available;,
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Deeply regrets that the access given to Members of the European Parliament to TTIP negotiating texts is extremely limited, as only a very partial selection of documents is made available to them, in a fashion that is not conducive to proper parliamentary scrutiny of the negotiations; highlights that documents available in the EP secured reading room do not contain any consolidated material or any text tabled by the US;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. AsksCalls on the Commission to ensure that the list of TTIP documents available on its dedicated trade policy website is comprehensive;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Regrets that the petition filed by over one and a half million Europeans was not qualified by the European Commission as a ‘European Citizens’ Initiative’, due to limitations contained in the ECI legislative framework; regrets that in effect these limitations entail that any ECI on trade issues could only be admissible after the entry into force of a trade agreement, and that ECIs aimed at influencing ongoing trade negotiations are not permitted in the current framework;
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the sensitivity of certain areas of negotiation, such as the agricultural sector, where perceptions of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), cloning and consumer health are divergent between the European Union and the United States;, therefore calls for these areas not be subjected to regulatory cooperation and any additional rules on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards and Technical Barriers to Trade; in areas in which trade in sensitive sectors already occurs, such as GMOs, calls for the establishment of clear labelling rules that would reinforce consumer choice
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Highlights the high levels of public scrutiny given to the agreement via petitions, which raised strong concerns about the transparency of the negotiations and the adverse negative effects on workers’ rights and public services including health care, social services, education, water and sanitation
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that consumer protection and compliance with higher European quality standards for foods and products should be at the centre of the negotiations on the TTIP., the highest standards of environmental protection and strictest control of industrial emissions in the EU and the US and the proper safeguards to protect citizens’ data, should be at the centre of the negotiations on the TTIP; negotiators should not consider any commitments on data protection within the framework of TTIP pending the conclusion of on-going legislative work in this field in the EU and US