Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-03-Speech-3-129"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000503.8.3-129"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first I want to thank the rapporteur who, in my view, has done a quite excellent job on a very difficult subject. The
commerce directive is such a very difficult subject because it is a typical example of how runaway technological advances and market growth can outstrip legislation. European legislative procedures happen to be particularly complex and the market is simply developing at a faster pace. Another problem facing us when we had to consider this directive at both first and second reading was that we realised that in many areas EU harmonisation has not made enough progress yet, for much of what was said in the discussion of this draft directive in fact showed up serious weaknesses and major problems here.
By way of example let me just take the debate on the country of origin principle or, alternatively, the country of destination principle. In both cases, both alternatives, we as the legislator looked rather like the Odysseus of ancient times negotiating his way between Scylla and Charybdis, quite simply because we will create injustices in either case, whether for the producer or for the recipient of the product or service. We might also create other problems, which would later prove difficult to resolve in legal practice, for instance if a Portuguese judge suddenly has to apply German law, or indeed if a Spanish judge suddenly has to apply Italian law, in relation to a fairly simple case of secondary importance, simply because such combinations of circumstances could arise.
So I must admit that I am not entirely satisfied with all the points of the common position before us. I still have criticisms about many of them. On the other hand, at the moment we do not need a second reading consultation, and certainly not a conciliation procedure. We must come to a rapid decision so that we can finally offer the users on this market a legal framework, even if, as the rapporteur rightly pointed out, it may not be perfect in every way and may still have a number of weaknesses.
But that is why I also expect the European Commission to monitor the implementation of this directive carefully and, if this should prove necessary, to submit practical proposals for amending it during the current legislative term. I also believe that we may then have made further progress towards harmonising many areas of the law. Let me just give you as an instance the forthcoming harmonisation of civil law. Here the Commission has already given the appropriate instructions. The Tampere Council called for reports and voted on them. The European Parliament will also be considering this matter again in the near future and I think the decisions that emerge from this process could also serve as the basis for the further development of this
commerce directive."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"e"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples