Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-03-Speech-2-060"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020903.4.2-060"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, it is a great pleasure to introduce, albeit briefly, the topic of today, indeed of the moment, in the knowledge that I shall have another opportunity to explain the Commission's opinion on this matter at the end of the MEPs' interventions.
I should like to say the following by way of introduction. The draft regulation on sales promotions aims to establish an internal market in the area of discounts, free gifts, premiums and promotional contests and games. The Commission has established that the current regulatory fragmentation in this field hinders the cross-border provision of these services. Parliament has, in this connection, requested swift measures. The proposed regulation aims to respond to this request by harmonising information requirements and lifting obsolete national restrictions in this field.
I am delighted with Parliament's motion for a resolution drafted by Mr Beysen. Although quite a few amendments have been tabled on the Commission's text, the result is in line with the planned modernisation and the internal market's goals. The proposal's objective is to lift a number of limits on the value of sales promotions and to harmonise a series of information requirements at the same time. This balanced approach must be retained. In fact, the need for this is recognised in most of Parliament's amendments, but the Commission is less impressed with the amendments in which a limit on the value of sales promotions is re-introduced, as in Amendment No 29, or the amendments in which the information requirements are deleted, as in Amendments Nos 49 and 54.
This proposal has caused concern in the following four areas: the handling of national bans on below cost resale; the connection between this proposal and the Commission's current activities concerning a much wider initiative with regard to fair trading practices; the provisions governing promotional games, in which connection the Commission has been accused of encouraging illegal gaming activities; and finally, the Commission was also criticised for making too much use of mutual recognition as a basis.
I should like to confine myself to these introductory remarks. As I already mentioned, at the end of the MEPs' interventions, the Commission will be given another chance to discuss these four major objections in more detail. Before the Commission does this, it would like to hear MEPs' opinions. This would enable the Commission to give better responses this evening."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples