Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-20-Speech-3-098"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000920.8.3-098"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, perhaps I can begin by saying the introduction of the title of our debate no doubt had many
journalists salivating, but the issues that we are considering are fundamental issues that go to the heart of what the European Union is all about. That is the development of a true, single market; because if we were able to achieve a true, single market, not only might we find more unanimity within this Chamber, but we should be well on the way to serving our constituents by ensuring that we achieve real economic progress in Europe. Therefore, this particular piece of legislation falls within that context.
There are a number of ways in which competition policy is important in driving this agenda forward. The Commissioner, and I congratulate him for it, has seized the initiative in terms of the application of state-aid policy; we will be debating that in the second session in Strasbourg in connection with another report which I am currently taking before the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. The other major area that Commissioner Monti has been busy with is the modernisation of competition policy itself. We are awaiting the outcome of the Commissioner’s review of over 100 responses to his White Paper on the reform of restrictive trade practices and the abuse of market power. Earlier today I heard that we may receive the result before the end of this month; perhaps we will hear more from the Commissioner about that in due course.
The reform that we are looking at, according to the Commission itself, forms part of the overall agenda of reform. Within that context, I want to say to the Commissioner that business is looking for a number of things. It is certainly looking for the things that the Commission was seeking consultees from about whether the current regulations have become too legalistic, too bureaucratic and could be simplified. I have no doubt that the Commissioner’s proposals will achieve that simplification. Business is looking for the development of confidence in the whole range of new mechanisms which the Commissioner is seeking to bring forward as part of its overall reform package. I would therefore ask the Commission how he sees this specific reform, which is not controversial, in the context of his wider reform of competition policy which, as he well knows, might be generously said to be slightly more controversial.
May I turn to some of the detailed areas in the particular proposals that the Commission has asked Parliament to comment upon. Firstly, I welcome this process. The Commissioner is inviting Parliament to express its views in relation to the paper that was produced in April of this year. In essence there are a number of areas where, having agreed with the thrust of the reform being taken forward, I feel that the Commission might give the matter further thought. Firstly, I would like the Commissioner to explain why there is a contrast between the treatment of horizontal restraints and vertical restraints. I would like the Commissioner to indicate whether, in due course, it is his intention to see further exemption categories specified in the legislation. I have indicated that businesses are strongly of the view that the duration of exemption in the cases of research and development should be expanded up to a period of ten years. Since the Commission’s own papers make it clear that horizontal cooperation agreements are generally not made in order to work against the interests of consumers, I would be grateful to see what the Commissioner’s response is in that particular area.
I would also be grateful to have clarification of the position regarding trade supplies, not least because that is an issue that troubles Mr Berenguer Fuster. I know he has tabled amendments in relation to that.
I am particularly concerned to ensure that we take all steps to avoid a re-nationalisation of EU competition law and I would be grateful to hear what reassurances we can have from the Commissioner in that area.
Finally, business would prefer a lengthier transition period; they would also prefer the Commission to look at more than just the market share in assessing market power. For these purposes what the Commission proposes may be appropriate, but deciding market power solely by assessing market share is too inexact a science."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples