Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-13-Speech-4-040"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-03-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Consumer Policy Strategy 2002-20062
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030313.1.4-040"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-03-13-Speech-4-0412
lpv:speaker	lp:Riitta Myller2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Suomen Sosialidemokraattinen Puolue/Finlands Socialdemokratiska Parti (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 vice-chair; PES (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I want to thank all three rapporteurs. It has been said here that this is not a matter of legislation, but in my opinion these issues must be dealt with right at this stage while we are discussing with the Commission what we expect from future legislation. For that reason I myself wish to focus on those principles that I think should be incorporated into EU legislation on consumer protection. The main principle, one which has been raised here very often, is that levels of consumer protection must be as high as possible. It therefore follows that when the Commission proposes legislation that is harmonised as fully as possible in the EU, I agree with this basic standpoint only if that means these very highest levels of consumer protection are implemented though harmonisation. I do not agree with harmonisation, however, if it means even one Member State having to forsake higher levels of consumer protection. For this reason I am pleased with the view expressed by Mr Whitehead in his report, that each act should be examined on a case-by-case basis. This same principle must also apply to mutual recognition. Account here must also be taken of the notion that not one Member State, neither a current nor a future one, should downgrade its standards of consumer protection. The advantage of minimum harmonisation from the point of view of consumer protection at least is that nationally one can go further in terms of legislation if the European Union does not attain that level. It is also necessary that existing consumer protection legislation should be fully implemented so that consumers can be really confident that they can engage in commercial transactions and fulfil themselves as consumers throughout the entire internal market area. Future legislation must also be sufficiently clear and must take the principles of subsidiarity, necessity and proportionality into consideration. I also think it is important that we do not enact too much detailed legislation but concentrate on realising our goal, which is these highest possible levels of consumer protection. If we have too much detailed legislation those who do not want to adopt these principles will focus their energy on looking for loopholes and this will create problems for court hearings."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph