7 Amendments of Paulo RANGEL related to 2014/2228(INI)
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1.- Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.)
Paragraph 1.- Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.)
ii.) while the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is an appropriate tool to protect investors and assure that investments are treated in a fair and non- discriminatory way, to oversee that it does not undermine the capacity of the European, nat Union and national, regional and local authorities to legislate their own policies, in particular social and, environmental, health and consumer protection policies, and therefore respect the constitutional framework of the Member States;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.) a (novo)
Paragraph 1. - Point (d) - Subpoint (ii.) a (novo)
(ii.)a Establish a transparent dispute settlement mechanism between investors and the State, to ensure the independence and impartiality of arbitrators, and the consistency of the decisions taken, in particular by the introduction of a binding code of conduct for arbitrators, which includes rules to prevent conflicts of interest, the establishment of a permanent arbitration tribunal and the provision of an appeals mechanism for arbitration decisions;
Amendment 202 #
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, but that it should be noted that investors encounter problems to which national judicial systems are not always capable of responding effectively, not least because the rights granted to investors within the scope of international trade agreements are not directly enforceable in North American courts; 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 institutions on the best way to achieve investment protection and equal treatment of investorsway the dispute resolution mechanism between investors and States should be configured in order to achieve the correct balance between investment protection and equal treatment of investors and protection of the right of the EU and its Member States to legislate;
Amendment 322 #
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, as well as the elimination and/or reduction of non-tariff barriers, while respecting sensitive products on both sides;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iii
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iii
(iii) to keep in mind that there are important offensive interests for the EU in the services sector, for instance in the areas of engineering, telecommunications and transport services, as well as in the area of mobility, and that it is important to help service providers gain access to the US market;
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
(iiia) promote the mutual recognition of professional qualifications;
Amendment 760 #
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 withoutby means of the inclusion of an transparent ISDS mechanism; such a mechanism is not necessary in TTIP given the EU’s and the US’ developed legal systems; a state-to- state dispute settlement system and the use of national courts are the most appropriate tools to address investment dispute, which does not compromise or unduly limit the right of the European Union and/or of its Member States to legislate in the public interest in areas like health, security, consumer defence or the environment; such a mechanism must ensure the independence and impartiality of arbitrators, as well as the consistency of decisions adopted, specifically by introducing a binding code of conduct for arbitrators including rules to prevent conflicts of interest, the establishment of a permanent arbitral tribunal and the existence of an appeals mechanism against arbitral decisions;