Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-14-Speech-2-173"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991214.7.2-173"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Despite the mysterious quantities
your question was very clear. I think I have understood what Mr Beysen’s question is. The Commission is aware that breweries often provide café owners with financial, material and technical support. Nevertheless, the Commission does not share the fear, voiced by Mr Beysen, that the proposed new policy on vertical restrictions could harm Belgian breweries or the hotels, restaurants and cafés sectors. On the contrary, effective competition will guarantee consumers good service in terms of numbers of bars and the variety of beers they offer.
Firstly, the proposed exemption per category of agreements exempts contracts on the supply of beer that contain a clause prohibiting competition, entered into between brewers who have a market share lower than 30% and owners of bar or commercial concerns. For Belgian breweries, this means that they will all, with the exception of
be able to continue to operate on the basis of the current distribution agreements.
Moreover, the proposed exemption per generalised category allows these breweries greater contractual freedom compared with their freedom on the basis of the current specific exemption in the sector.
Secondly, the proposed exemption per category does not presuppose that non-competition agreements, entered into with a brewery with a market share greater than 30%, are illegal. A brewery that reaches this market share can notify the Commission of its network of non-competition agreements. The Commission will then, firstly, evaluate the actual impact of the competition agreements; if the impact is considerable, the Commission can in any case take into account the economic benefits of these non-competition agreements
in its evaluation of the possible applicability of an individual exemption under Article 81(3) to the agreements.
Thirdly, if an individual exemption is not applicable to the agreements, the Commission will examine the possible solutions within the existing distribution system. In other words, the Commission will attempt, as a matter of principle, to resolve any competition issues that might occur, firstly by amending the existing agreements, taking into account the economic benefits they bring. Mr Beysen will certainly agree that because of its role as the European authority on competition, the Commission must assess very carefully the agreements entered into between operators who benefit from considerable market force. Indeed, because of their possible effects of closing the market, these agreements can jeopardise competition, not only with regard to producers in other Member States, but also with regard to small Belgian breweries. This is another reason why the Commission recently launched proceedings against
.
In conclusion, Mr President, the Commission does not believe that the new policy on vertical restrictions is liable to bring about major structural changes, in the beer, hotels, restaurants and cafés sectors in Belgium, which would put the beer culture in that country at risk."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Interbrew"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples