Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-19-Speech-1-058"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040419.6.1-058"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, just a year ago this Parliament adopted its resolution on the Commission's new consumer policy strategy for the next five years. We are discussing today three key proposals within the context of that strategy. I am particularly pleased that Parliament has decided to discuss them jointly, as all three pursue the objective of boosting consumer confidence in the internal market.
This is the last legislative part-session of this Parliament before the elections. It is therefore also your final opportunity to ensure that when you have to inform your voters about precisely what you have done to further consumer interests and the enforcement of law, you have a tangible example to show them.
The second proposal on the table today is the proposed directive on consumer credit. There is broad agreement that a new directive on consumer credit is both necessary and desirable. The market and the products have evolved considerably since the mid-1980s and the existing directive is no longer adapted to new developments in the area of credit. This new directive is necessary to allow the emergence of a real single market in consumer credit. It is desirable in order to achieve a high level of consumer protection in line with the consumer policy action plan endorsed by the European Parliament.
This is the reason why I consider a full harmonisation approach the only means to really create a level playing field for lenders throughout the EU. Many of you have called, and will call, for minimum harmonisation, allowing Member States to top up the rules at national level. This would, however, mean maintaining differences between national legislations. It will continue to ensure that the credit market remains a domestic and local market, depriving consumers of all the advantages a single credit market could offer them. It would not improve legal certainty for creditors and consumers contracting across borders. It would not help to develop a genuine single market in consumer credit. The full harmonisation approach will not lead to a lowering of consumer protection standards, as we have rightly chosen a high common level of protection as the starting point. Moreover, I would stress that the harmonisation applies to only those areas actually covered by the directive. In areas that fall outside the scope of the directive, Member States remain free to maintain their own national provisions. Full harmonisation will improve the overall level of consumer protection in the EU and facilitate the provision of cross-border credit.
Last, but not least, I come to the framework directive on unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices. This proposal aims to put in place a high common level of consumer protection against unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices EU wide. In doing so, it will stimulate consumer confidence and ensure that rogue practices can be addressed wherever in the EU they arise. Just as importantly, it will reduce the barriers that prevent legitimate businesses from making the most of the internal market and reaching new consumers. Both businesses and consumers will benefit from the security of having one set of rules rather than 15 or, from 1 May, 25. Both business and consumers will therefore be better placed to take advantage of the enlarged internal market. This in turn will have a positive effect on the competitiveness of the EU economy as a whole.
I will leave it at that for the time being and look forward to hearing your views.
Consumer purchases represent close to 60% of the EU's GDP. A loss of consumer confidence – even by a small amount – can have significant repercussions for our economy and collective wealth. Last month, at the spring European Council, the Heads of State and Government took stock of our pursuit of the Lisbon Agenda, which aims to boost the competitiveness of our economy. It would be no exaggeration to say that there is definitely room for improvement in this respect. Consumer confidence is good for business and would contribute to boosting our competitiveness.
The European Union has come a long way in eliminating barriers in the single market. In tearing down regulatory barriers we must, however, realise that consumers – the demand side of the market – are also confronted with barriers, namely confidence barriers. Not addressing these confidence barriers would not only be irresponsible but also very damaging to the interests of consumers and businesses alike. It would also put a heavy burden on our ability to meet our competitiveness objectives set out in the Lisbon Agenda.
The proposals we are discussing today will allow us to maximise the benefits of the single market for consumers. I would like to thank the three rapporteurs from the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market for their hard work on these proposals, as well as the rapporteurs from the committees providing opinions for their time and effort.
I turn first to the proposed regulation on enforcement cooperation. It addresses what has always been the weak point in consumer protection: the effective application of the law. In cross-border cases, problems increase because national enforcement mechanisms are not designed to deal with such cases. Rogue traders who seek to cheat consumers have spotted this and are more prevalent in cross-border cases than in domestic ones, targeting consumers across borders through the post, by e-mail or via websites. To deal with this, the proposed regulation sets up a network of public enforcement authorities, with at least one in each Member State. The effect of the proposal will be that national authorities can cooperate quickly and effectively in tracking down rogue traders and stop them from harming consumers and legitimate businesses.
This regulation will send a strong message to European citizens, telling them that the EU is relevant to their day-to-day concerns and that they can have greater confidence in shopping throughout Europe.
I would like to thank Mrs Gebhardt and colleagues who worked with her towards a compromise agreement with the Council allowing for the adoption of the proposal in a single reading. The compromise that was negotiated between the institutions ensures that enforcement authorities will at last have the necessary tools at their disposal genuinely to cooperate in cross-border cases. At the same time, it respects the various traditions that exist among the different Member States, with some relying more on public enforcement and others relying more on private actions.
I am aware and indeed concerned that some of you would prefer the opinion of the lead committee, which is expressed in Amendment No 29, over the compromise solution contained in Amendment No 76, which has been worked out with the Council. Pursuing this approach risks leading to prolonged discussions with the Council and to a second reading, further delaying the creation of an effective enforcement mechanism capable of dealing with rogue traders.
I see no reason why either our businesses or our consumers would in any way benefit from such a delay. The amendments tabled and supported by some in no way enhance the effectiveness of the mechanism, neither do they present a meaningful contribution to safeguarding established national mechanisms and traditions. I therefore urge all Members to stick to the compromise."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples