Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2014-04-16-Speech-3-744-000"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20140416.83.3-744-000"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the EU gained competence on foreign direct investment (FDI) and started to negotiate investment protection provisions, including ISDS, as part of its free trade agreements with third countries (Singapore, Canada/CETA, possibly US/TTIP). These new circumstances brought about the need to clarify as part of a regulation who – the EU in its own legal personality or a Member State – would be the respondent in international arbitrations where a third country investor (the claimant) would bring a case against a measure of a Member State or the EU that would be allegedly hampering its investment in the EU. The underlying principle of the deal reached in trialogues is the “polluter pays principle’: if the measure that is being challenged in arbitration is a Member State’s one, the Member State shall be the respondent and in case it loses the arbitration, it shall bear all the costs. The same applies mutatis mutandis when EU-level measures are being challenged in arbitration. I agree with the proposed deal that it is an acceptable compromise, and consider that failure to adopt this regulation would put in danger the legal certainty investors need to engage in EU-inwards FDI. For these reasons, I voted in favour of the report."@en1
|
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples