Internal Market MEPs back consumers' rights directive despite concerns

The rights of consumers when buying goods abroad is at the heart of a proposed new consumers' rights directive narrowly approved by MEPs on the Parliament's Internal Market Committee. MEPs were divided over the merits of the complicated directive. In an age of online shopping the need for clarification on the legal rights of people when buying these and other products is growing in urgency.

In all the discussions the extent to which European rules should apply in the same way in every country ("Harmonisation" in euro-speak) has been key.

The Committee divided on the first reading of the Consumer rights Directive 22-16 with the EPP, ECR, ALDE and  GUE/NGL groups in favour and the S&D, Greens against.

Parliament's rapporteur for the issue Andreas Schwab (EPP) explained the reasoning behind his support for the directive: "The euro crisis has shown that if we want to have a common currency we need also rules. It is similar with internal market: if we want it, we must have common structures."

"1596 amendments, 4 directives to merge"

With a total of 1596 amendments, 4 directives to merge and 36 months of work "this is the most complex piece of legislation since the birth of the internal market. The Council already had 65 meetings, and it's only the first reading", explained the Chair of the Parliament's Internal Market Committee and British MEP Malcolm Harbour (ECR).

Some of the fields covered include the information to be given before purchase, rules on delivery, cooling off periods, repairs, replacement, guarantees and unfair contract terms for all kinds of sale, be it online or in a shop.

The main issue has been the level of harmonization required. "All the political groups in the Parliament had a problem with the maximum harmonization proposed by the European Commission", explains Mr Harbour. "It would have simplified life for business, but in most of the countries important aspects of consumers' rights would be lost, and this is not acceptable".

Mr Harbour went on to say that "there are areas where a common level helps striking the balance between consumers and business' needs, such as online shopping. Others, where we still need to see the added value".

"I want to know which my rights are"

Despite months of negotiations, the Committee didn't manage to find an agreement. The level of harmonisation remains the main obstacle.

As Andreas Schwab explained "we must have a strong set of common rules all over Europe. It is true that member states lose a little bit of flexibility but for a common market is necessary. We have seriously checked if there is a decrease of consumers' protection: I can insure that there is no decrease, but in most of the cases there is an increase".

"If I shop online - and more and more people nowadays want to- I don't check where the business is based, I want to know which my rights are" he said.

Parliament's shadow rapporteur Evelyne Gebhardt (S&D) told us that "we do not want to have in any country less rights than consumers have now. I would have liked to have a better mixed approach: in the areas where we have a common level of consumers protection there is the possibility to make a full harmonization, but in the areas where there are very different rules, the EU cannot impose common standards".

She went on to say "for example. In Scandinavian countries guarantees cover all the life of a product, in Germany 2 years, in France 3. How can we manage a full harmonization?. If you don't want to decrease rights for consumers, you should take the highest level of protection, but it is not possible because it would be a problem for Small and Medium Size Enterprises. The easier and best possibility is to go step by step, to harmonize little by little".

The directive could appear on the agenda of the March session of the European Parliament.