Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-01-Speech-1-211"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080901.23.1-211"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, Madam Commissioner, colleagues, and interpreters who are staying this late on such an interesting day as today with the European Council discussing Georgia, I hope you will have a little time and energy to focus on another report which is, despite its technicality, quite important for all of us.
This is the gist of the report that we are debating tonight.
It goes back to an issue raised in this House when the fourth Motor Insurance Directive was adopted. Back then, this House decided to ask the Commission to undertake a more in-depth study of a number of questions that were raised by Parliament but were not addressed in the fourth Motor Insurance Directive itself. Namely these three sets of questions: the first being to look into whether the national penalty provisions are effectively implemented across the European Union; then to look at how the claims representative system set up under the directive functions and whether there is a need to harmonise across the European Union; and finally to look at perhaps the most important and controversial issue that is intimately connected to questions raised by consumers which is whether the current availability of voluntary legal expenses schemes for motor insurance in Europe should be converted into a compulsory scheme to cover cross-border accidents across the European Union.
Let me start with the last question because that is perhaps the most important question and clearly one of the questions which is of most interest to European consumers. I myself when I went looking into this report was very much tempted to argue for harmonisation and to argue for compulsory legal expenses insurance across the European Union. But detailed study suggested that that might not be in the interests of the consumers or in the interests of the European insurance industry.
It would, if that were adopted, raise the costs of motor insurance for consumers in many Member States. It would create incentives for higher and unjustified claims to be made. It would create many delays in addressing existing claims and it would create a very strong disincentive for people to go for out-of-court settlements.
Finally, it would create a very strong and unfortunate burden on the judicial systems of our Member States, something which I do not believe any one of us really wants to do. So perhaps the other approach which this report suggests is the better approach and that is to increase awareness of existing voluntary schemes across the European Union.
Now, in many of the old Member States, they exist and function quite well and are now developing in the new Member States. In the new Member States in particular they need to be promoted more, perhaps through including them in pre-contractual information on taking out such options across the European Union with a particular focus on new Member States.
As far as the question of claims representatives is concerned, the European Commission did undertake a study. We looked at that study very carefully. We consulted with industry and we consulted with consumer organisations across the European Union, and national information centres have been set up in all Member States. Through these national information centres, consumers can pursue their claims and can find the information that they need.
Now what we do need to do there is to make consumers actually more aware of the existing system rather than try to set up a new system on top of it.
Finally, on the question of national penalty provisions and whether to harmonise them or not, the report argues that we should uphold the principle of subsidiarity. That means that existing national penalty provisions in European Member States have to be upheld. There is no need to harmonise. There is, however, a need for the European Commission to monitor the situation in more detail across the European Union and make sure that, when national authorities do need help, they receive that help from the European Commission."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples