Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-13-Speech-1-145"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991213.8.1-145"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the fourth directive on motor vehicles forms an important step in the process to fill the blanks in the EU directives on motor vehicle insurance and to reinforce the internal insurance market in this respect. As you know, more than 500,000 car accidents occur within the Community every year. The existing system for damages to EU victims of accidents which take place outside their country of residence, is inadequate. A swift and pragmatic solution is required in order to protect a very large number of visiting car drivers.
Thirdly, these amendments would lead to incompatibility with Article 5(3) of the directive concerning the information centre and Article 7 concerning the impossibility of identifying the vehicle or the insurance company.
These four amendments concerning accidents in third countries, in my opinion, cannot be accepted at this stage and in their current form. In the event that a consultation procedure proves to be inevitable, the Commission can consider extending the scope of the directive, taking the above into account.
I would like to make another comment regarding this possible extension. As already stated, this directive is based on the green card system. There are 39 countries who take part in this system. Of these 39 countries, alongside the European Union, alongside the fifteen Member States, there are also six countries which have signed the multilateral guarantee agreement. These countries are Switzerland, which is of key importance because many accidents occur there, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Croatia and Slovenia. These are six countries, in other words, which form a sub-group of the group of countries which participate in the green card system. In an attempt to meet the wishes of the European Parliament, the Commission is prepared to back a compromise proposal, whereby the directive, at least the scope thereof, is extended to include the countries mentioned by myself but not to include other countries.
I would like to extend a warm thanks to Parliament for having requested this directive. This is the first occasion on which Parliament has used its new competences pursuant to Article 192 of the Treaty. The Commission has fully backed this request and has urged swift approval of its proposal. I would especially like to thank Mr Rothley for all his efforts to bring this debate and this directive to the point it has reached today.
The Commission is of the opinion that the common position established by the Council is well-balanced and coherent. It faithfully represents the problems which have caused Parliament to press for EU legislation. It adopts the salient points of the Commission’s proposal and takes account of 24 of the 36 amendments, either wholly or in part, which Parliament requested at first reading. This is quite something.
In its reaction to the amendments proposed by the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, the Commission is mainly led by the ambition to bring about a legal instrument which meets all the requirements of the policy holders of an EU motor-vehicle insurance as effectively as possible.
I would now like to expand on the amendments. I applaud Amendments Nos 10, 11 and 12, because they reinforce certain principles of the common position, such as the freedom of the insurer to choose a claims representative, the possibility of such a claims representative working for more than one insurer, as well as linguistic requirements.
I can also accept Amendment No 13 which promotes the reinforcement of consumer protection, although the word “immediately” used in this text needs to be elaborated on further in order to avoid discrepancies in the application of this provision by the Member States.
I would now like to concentrate on Amendments Nos 1, 2, 8 and 9 which have been submitted by the rapporteur and which are intended to further extend the directive to include accidents occurring in third countries between two parties resident within the European Union and who are covered by insurance taken out with EU insurance companies.
Allow me to remind you of the reasons which led the Commission to reject these amendments at first reading. Firstly, the indemnity mechanism laid down in this directive and other directives on motor vehicle insurance is based on the green card system. This cannot be extended to include third countries which do not take part in this system and which do not recognise the validity of European insurance agreements. Insurance companies would not agree to cover these risks or would command extremely high premiums. Whichever way, the authorities of third countries would require vehicles visiting from the EU to conclude insurance agreements with companies based on their territory, at the border.
Secondly, the application of the directive, especially the provision which offers the possibility of lodging a direct claim against insurance companies, may contravene rules of law of third countries concerning legal liability and international private law, particularly when the direct claim is not recognised under these rules of law."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples