Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-11-Speech-1-145"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061211.15.1-145"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, ‘modernised Customs Code’, ‘paperless Customs’, ‘Customs 2013 programme’, these three reports that we are discussing in this session demonstrate the growing importance of customs and their role in the European Union’s desire for competitiveness and efficiency.
Those then, very briefly, are the main points of the report and, as I said just now, it is very closely linked with the report concerning the Customs 2013 programme. Reading the mid-term evaluation of the Customs 2007 programme has demonstrated that this programme is well adapted to the needs of administrations and that it plays a crucial role in helping participating countries to share their experiences. This evaluation recommended strengthening the activities carried out in the field of training and information exchange. The programme has a budget of EUR 322.8 million over a period of six years and its aim is to help the customs administrations of the participating countries to encourage legitimate exchanges, to simplify and speed up customs procedures and to ensure the safety and security of citizens and the financial interests of the Community.
The amendments adopted in the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection are in line with the work of the Council and I wish to thank the Finnish Presidency in particular because, in order to satisfy the European Parliament’s legitimate budgetary demands, it has on many occasions negotiated with Member States and defended our position. Therefore, we shall be able, I hope, to conclude this matter at first reading.
The reports concerning customs are eminently technical and complicated. That is why I wish to thank most warmly the various people I have spoken to within the Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union who have always responded to my every request and allowed me to tackle these subjects more easily. I thank also my fellow Members and the Chairman of our Committee for their help and support. At a time when trade is speeding up, when organised crime and counterfeiting threaten our security and our market, customs and economic operators need our full support.
These three reports are closely linked but, in the interests of greater clarity, I shall first present the modernised Customs Code and then move on to the Customs 2013 programme.
The Customs Code – as you said, Mr Kovacs – dates from 1992. It was legitimate to modernise it in order to adapt it to the evolving range of tasks undertaken by Customs and the radical changes that have taken place in international trade. It is a matter of rationalising customs procedures by laying the foundations of customs clearance systems that are accessible and interoperable within the European Union. That is why this proposal is accompanied by a proposal for a decision on electronic customs, for which Mr Heaton-Harris is the rapporteur.
The new Code includes 200 articles and we have concentrated on the principal points, or at least the most controversial points, that is, the customs representative, the authorised economic operator, centralised customs clearance and comitology.
Article 11 is concerned with the customs representative. Until now, national legislation has made it possible to reserve the right of representation to a professional category. In the context of the Single Market and the electronic environment, however, there is no longer any grounds for this monopoly. Furthermore, some businesses are able to have an integrated service that takes care of customs formalities. The right to customs representation, therefore, must be open to all. Nonetheless, in many Member States, using a customs agent is traditional and remains very useful for small businesses. That is why, without wishing to retain a monopoly, the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection adopted an amendment that, among the criteria for the status of customs representative, provides for recognition of the existence of practical standards of competence or professional qualifications in order to satisfy those Member States for whom the abolition of this monopoly is difficult to accept.
We have not yet found the ideal solution and this question will certainly be raised again at second reading because certain delegations within the Council are still expressing reservations and going so far as to demand regulated access to the profession.
The authorised economic operator was introduced into the Customs Code by means of Regulation 648 of 13 April 2005, known as the ‘security regulation’. This statute is not yet properly in existence because the provisions for its implementation have just been adopted by the Commission. The Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection has introduced a clarification, making a clear distinction between the ‘customs simplification’ Authorised Economic Operator, and the ‘security and safety’ Authorised Economic Operator.
Centralised customs clearance is a facilitation that, in principle, has been well received but the Member States are wondering about the collection of customs duties. The Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection has adopted a fairly radical position in demanding that electronic customs clearance operations should be free of charge and that customs-offices should be open 24 hours a day. Indeed, in the interests of fair competition between national customs authorities, the rule must apply to all. It is necessary, however, to ensure that there is harmonisation of the checking processes.
Finally, the provisions in the proposal make constant reference to comitology. This procedure is necessary because reference needs to be made to experts to establish the provisions for implementation of the Code. In accordance with the new interinstitutional agreement of July 2006, certain provisions of the Code are subject to the new procedure for comitology with scrutiny. Therefore, having sought the opinion of the European Parliament’s legal service, we have adopted, in the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, amendments that are aimed at adapting the comitology procedure corresponding to the different articles. The Committee on International Trade adopted amendments for the codecision procedure for certain provisions that would normally fall within their competence by virtue of the strengthened cooperation procedure. We considered, however, that its position was contrary to that of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection and we had to reject those amendments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples