Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-13-Speech-2-344"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000613.19.2-344"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I would like to start by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Maaten. The Commission proposal reflects the compromise which has been reached between Sweden and the Commission regarding prolonging the possibility of applying restrictions to products subject to excise duties which may be brought into Sweden by travellers from other Member States. This arrangement would normally have expired at the end of this month. Sweden has requested more time to adapt its alcohol policy. This has also been stressed by Mr Färm who said that we need time to adapt our policy. Well, the European Commission is prepared to give Sweden until the end of the year 2003 at the latest.
I believe that the compromise which has been reached is fair and reasonable. It guarantees that the restrictions for travellers will disappear once and for all by the end of the year 2003, as I have already mentioned. But at the same time, it provides for a short, further period of adjustment. The gradual liberalisation during the transitional period underlines Sweden’s commitment to finally do away with derogations and will ensure that Swedish citizens will finally be able to benefit from the unified market in the same way as other EU citizens.
I am also delighted that Mr Maaten’s report supports the Commission proposal. But the Commission cannot accept the tabled amendments, although it very much understands the reasons which have led to their tabling. The Commission is of the opinion that it is not advisable to make reference to general issues, such as the connection between alcohol policy and health policy or the need to aim for more coordination of excise levels on alcohol, within the context of a proposal on derogations applied by one Member State. These derogations from fundamental principles of the internal market have been granted in order to allow Sweden to adapt its alcohol policy. As such, – and I would also address Mr Sacrédeus here – we are dealing here with fundamental principles of the common internal market.
Whatever the justification was for Sweden enjoying this derogation since joining the Community – and if I could once again address Mr Sacrédeus – as far as I can remember, no exceptions which were to apply forever were made at the time. The derogation was supposed to lapse at the end of this month, and this has always been provided for. But as I have said before, Sweden was granted a few more years to adapt its alcohol policy. But – once again – this exception was certainly not meant to last forever. I repeat: whatever the justification was for this derogation, the Commission is of the opinion that the transitional period will have been sufficiently long, namely nine years from Sweden’s accession to the EU until the end of 2003, and that it is now time to establish a definite expiry date for this derogation from the principles of the free movement of goods and persons.
Maybe you will allow me, by way of concluding, to address a few points which have been raised by Members of Parliament this evening. I would especially like to stress once again that the public health aspect which Mr Maaten mentioned is, of course, important. All countries, all EU Member States have alcohol-related problems, and know about alcohol-related problems, and all EU Member States are adopting an anti-alcohol policy. It is only natural and very sensible that Sweden should do the same, but this should be possible without prejudicing the rules for the free movement of goods which, as has been mentioned before, is one of the European Union’s cornerstones.
So once again, it is very understandable that that health policy is pursued in Sweden. Mr Färm and Mrs Carlsson have already clarified the way in which it should be pursued. It is important to take measures in the form of information campaigns, information in schools and vis-� -vis the public, as happens elsewhere in the Community. This is the first point which I wanted to raise.
The second point concerns the harmonisation of excise duty on alcohol products. Could I inform you that, as the Members of this House are aware, the Commission does not have any instruments at its disposal to impose a specific excise policy? The Commission might wish it had, but it has not. What the Commission can do, however, is to ensure that the minimum tariff, which is the only rule which pertains to the whole of the European Union, is maintained. Furthermore, the Commission will, as it is required to do, be drawing up a report either at the end of this year or at the beginning of next year which will outline the state of affairs within the EU with regard to excise. This report will thus be available around the beginning of next year, and the Commission will naturally make some recommendations in this report because, after all, the huge discrepancies in excise levels between Member States lead to distortions within the internal market, something which the Commission does not like to see. So the report will contain recommendations, but the Commission does not have instruments at its disposal.
I would recommend Parliament to adopt Mr Maaten’s report without amendments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples