9 Amendments of Morten LØKKEGAARD related to 2010/2109(INI)
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets that serious obstacles still hinder the retail sector from achieving its full potential online and offline; stresses the need to address them without delay;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises the need to further analyse the reasons for price differences in the EU, in order to ensure price transparency for consumers,throughout the entire supply chain, based on adequate statistical tools and without prejudice to national fiscal and labour market rules;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Urges Member States to fully and correctly implement the internal market – notably the Goods Package, the Services Directive, the Late Payments Directive, the E-Commerce Directive and, the Small Business Act and competition law – as well as to remove overlaps and reduce administrative burdens;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that a fragmented payment system is an obstacle to trade; calls on the Commission to improve SEPA in order to foster competition between payment means, by removing barriers to entry, developing a basic payment service available for all cards, increasing transparency in transaction costs and reducingmoving unjustified interchange fees, and to ensure faster bank transfers within the EU;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the concern expressed by parts of civil society and SMEs about the increase in shopping centres and the decrease in local shops and markets in remote areas and town centres; stresses that retailurban planning should not sacrifice consumers' freedom of choiceprovide a structural framework for all companies to compete and meet consumer demand;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes note, however, of a widespread concern about market dominance by bigger actors, who are perceived to impose unfair terms on small suppliers and tradretailers, for instance through mechanisms of selective distribution, restrictive practices, territorial supply constraints, discrimination against online trade channels, price control and delisting without notice, thereby distorting competition; underlines that the entire retail supply chain is affected by such practices;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Emphasises that, according to the LEI study on ‘The impact of private labels on the competitiveness of the European food supply chain’, the development of private labels should not ahas a positive effect on consumer choice oras well as on the possibility for SMEs to expand;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that ‘parasitic copying’, which can result from the retailer's dual role as the custo is an unacceptable practice that should be addressed without delay; supports the study requested by the Commission aimerd and competitor of brand manufacturers, is an unacceptable practice that should be addressed without delayt providing clarification on the legal frameworks and practices relating to trade secrets and ‘parasitic copying’ within the 27 EU Member States;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Notes with concern that existing legal instruments are not being fully used, especially by SMEs, to uphold their rights, due to economic dependency and concern of losing business; asks the Commission, Member States and business federations to identify ways to restore confidence and facilitate access to judicial systems, including the possibility of anonymous complaintwhile developing and promoting alternative dispute resolution mechanisms as an efficient way to solve conflicts and to allow operators in the retail sector to maintain good business relations;