Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
4 October 2012
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 117
Philippe Boulland (PPE)

 Subject: Canada-EU Trade Agreement (CETA)

Allegations that there is a striking resemblance between the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which was rejected by the European Parliament, and the draft trade agreement between the European Union and Canada (CETA) currently under negotiation, have recently appeared in the press and are causing reverberations in civil society, particularly among the anti-ACTA community.

Whatever the arguments and however much democratic pressure has been put on the European Parliament, is the Commission aware that a repeated attempt to have a text with the same criteria and purpose adopted through the back door will lead to even greater distrust of the institutions of the EU on the part of European citizens? Does the Commission intend to make frequent use of this means of having legislative texts adopted, in spite of the opinion of the European citizens’ representatives?

Original language of question: FROJ C 294 E, 10/10/2013
Last updated: 19 October 2012Legal notice