You may yourself have been deceived by misleading promotional material and acquired a product at a bargain price, without realising that it was not an original but a copy. You may also have found yourself incorrectly persuaded that the after-sales service included in your guarantee can only be provided in the country where the product was sold. Equally, you may have found a letter in your mailbox telling you that you have won a prize, apparently with no strings attached, when in reality either the prize does not exist or you will have to pay to receive it. These are just a few examples of unfair commercial practices.
With a view to combating such practices more effectively, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection unanimously adopted, this Wednesday, a report by Mercedes BRESSO (PES, IT). Its objectives are: to outlaw such practices, as set out in the directive; to create common rules at EU level which would replace the existing diversity of national laws; and to improve the protection of consumers considered to be 'vulnerable'.

The 'blacklist' attached to the directive has been substantially amended by MEPs. No Member State can now introduce further alterations other than by revising the directive according to the rules laid down in the Treaty. Under the amended text, it would be unambiguously forbidden to use advertising as a direct means of inciting children to buy a product or persuade their parents that it has to be bought. The MEPs also favour tackling traders who pose as consumers of their own product to boost sales without revealing the commercial purpose of their action, as well as insurers who, to deter clients from exercising their contractual rights, ask for unnecessary documents or systematically ignore important correspondence.

The MEPs have insisted on improving the definition and protection of vulnerable consumers. The point of reference remains the 'average' consumer, in line with the Commission's position, but the definition and the reference to Court of Justice case-law have been made more specific. Member States will have 24 months from the entry into force of the directive to adopt and publish the necessary national rules. After that they may continue to apply previously existing national rules for six years where those rules are more restrictive than those of the directive or derive from the implementation of other directives introducing minimum levels of harmonisation.

In order to avoid going to conciliation, the MEPs reached compromises on some of their initial proposals and withdrew others. The Council, which had already agreed to a majority of Parliament's 58 first reading amendments, made it clear that it would not accept some of the MEPs' resubmitted proposals. In particular, with regard to the 'common market' clause, the Council refused to reintroduce (as in the Commission's initial proposal and as favoured by certain MEPs) the 'country of origin' principle (under which the law of the Member State where the trader is established is applicable). This point serves to link this directive on unfair commercial practices to the services directive (now being debated by Parliament) and the text regulating sales promotions (currently blocked in Council over the issue of the 'country of origin' principle).

Although a report that has been unanimously adopted does not have to be debated in plenary, the MEPs nonetheless wish to hold a debate on the issue, in view of the importance of the proposals for the internal market and for consumers. They also believe the vote on the report should be brought forward from the March to the February part-session. A formal request will be made to that effect.

02.02.2005 Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection
       In the chair: Phillip WHITEHEAD (PES, UK)
       Procedure: Codecision, second reading
       Vote in plenary: February or March

Press enquiries:
Cezary Lewanowicz - tel. (32-2) 28 44659
e-mail: imco-press@europarl.eu.int

Organic food production and organic farming need more encouragement. This Thursday, Parliament's Agriculture Committee adopted, unopposed with one abstention, the report by Marie-Hélène AUBERT (Greens/EFA, FR) on the European action plan in this field.

In the EU-15, the total surface area given over to organic farming rose from 0.1% to 3.3% between 1985 and 2002. In total, organic food production accounts for an estimated turnover of €11bn in the EU and €23bn worldwide. Since 1992, the EU has supported organic farming in the context of agri-environmental policy. MEPs welcome the Commission's recognition, in its new action plan, of the important role of this type of farming in the context of achieving the objectives of the new CAP. They note, however, that the Commission does not find it necessary to provide human or financial resources from the Union budget.

MEPs stress that more needs to be done: organic farming, they believe, makes a major contribution to the multipurpose role of European agriculture, as well as reducing pollution, protecting biodiversity and farmland and, not least, creating jobs.

The three priorities under the plan are:

• to develop a market in organic food products based on information and enhanced consumer awareness;
• to increase the effectiveness of state aid at national level to organic farming;
• to improve and strengthen the Community rules on organic farming and the import and inspection requirements.

MEPs insist on the need to encourage state aid to organic farming and to the industries linked to organic food production, with quality systems being promoted. They regret the Commission's failure to present concrete proposals on sectoral organisation, and call for support (especially financial) for the organisation of production and for processing and marketing. They endorse the idea of promoting organic food products in catering, starting with public institutions and schools.

They also ask the Commission what line it intends to take on coexistence between GMOs and organic crops. They consider that in cases of contamination the financial responsibility must lie entirely with those who market GMOs illegally, and certainly not with the agricultural sector as a whole. They deplore the failure of the action plan to contain any specific measures to promote research, and propose that the EU's framework programme for research should prioritise organic farming and the coexistence of organic crops with conventional crops and GMOs.

On GMOs, MEPs want the same rules to apply to Community products and imports. Along the same lines, they suggest that the production and marketing of organic foods should be taken into account in development aid and the promotion of fair trade practices.

03.02.2005  Committee on Agriculture
       In the chair: Joseph DAUL (EPP-ED/FR)
       Procedure - Own-initiative report

       Press enquiries:
Pernilla Jourde - Tel. (32-2) 28 43411
e-mail: pjourde@europarl.eu.int

Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee voted on Wednesday to ask the Commission to present a fresh proposal on the patenting of computer-implemented inventions (CII). The decision, taken by 19 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention, means that Parliament President Josep BORRELL will now formally present this request to the Commission, under rule 55 of the EP's Rules of Procedure, after consultation of the Conference of Presidents.

Parliament's first-reading position on the controversial proposed directive in September 2003 adopted a number of amendments designed to ensure that patents would not be issued for pure software, thus seeking to address concerns expressed by the open source community. It also sought a strict definition of "invention" as a contribution to the state of the art in a technical field. To deserve a patent, a technical contribution should be new, non-obvious and susceptible to industrial application. However, most of Parliament's amendments were rejected by the Council, which has since been unable to reach agreement on the proposal.

Before the vote, the rapporteur Michel ROCARD (PES, FR), pressed Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCREEVY to say how he would proceed in light of the current deadlock but the Commissioner refused to be drawn, simply saying, "I am leaving all my options open in this matter."

Procedural questions

Although a large majority of the committee called for a fresh proposal under Rule 55, some MEPs, notably Klaus-Heiner LEHNE (EPP-ED, DE), stressed that the Commission is still at liberty to decide what to do. That observation was made in reply to Mr Rocard's impassioned plea against a new referral, which he feared would result in a long delay in the adoption of legislation which is necessary - even if unacceptable in its current form. While some Members clearly thought that the proposal has no future, others argued that a compromise solution can be found, as long as the Council and Commission are willing to work on a fresh draft, incorporating the Parliament's first-reading amendments.

02.02.2005 Committee on Legal Affairs
       In the chair: Giuseppe GARGANI (EPP-ED, IT)

Press enquiries:
Gonçalo Macedo - tel. (32-2) 284 1361
e-mail: gmacedo@europarl.eu.int

Competition Commission Neelie KROES told MEPs on Thursday that she had three main priorities for the years ahead: to reform the state aid regime, to ensure effective enforcement of modernised competition law and to encourage competitive practices. Speaking to an open meeting of the bureau and co-ordinators of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee, she reiterated that "growth and jobs are the most urgent challenges facing Europe. Growth is not an end in itself, but only through sustained, dynamic growth can we sustain the standard of living Europeans have come to expect."

Reform of the state aid regime was top of her agenda, she said. "Not just because the European Council has argued for less, but better, state aid. The real reason is that it is a waste of taxpayers' money to spend it only to maintain people temporarily in unproductive jobs rather than investing in sustainable jobs. It is not acceptable for firms working hard to create and maintain growth and jobs to face competitors with the artificial advantage of state aid. State aid can prevent the market from favouring competitive firms, leaving society with less wealth and a smaller choice of products." Better state aid, she said, would be intelligently targeted on filling the gaps caused by genuine market failure and supporting innovation, research and development, in particular for SMEs and business start-ups.

Turning to regional aid, she said this should be targeted at the regions most in need in the context of the enlarged EU, but there should be no discrimination between similar regions because they were in different Member States. She would also be seeking more flexibility for smaller amounts of aid, with a change to the de-minimis threshold and a reduction of the administrative burdens involved.

Effective enforcement of competition law
The Commissioner promised to follow the line of her predecessor in "effective enforcement of modernised competition law. I will also encourage the mainstreaming of enforcement, involving national authorities and private sector actors. This is vital if we are to ensure the spoils of the single market are not carved up by a handful of businesses. Proper competition rules are an essential prerequisite for competitiveness: only with a fair competitive environment at home can firms prepare to compete abroad." She insisted there was no misunderstanding between her and Commissioner Verheugen: he was not seeking changes to merger rules and was in full agreement with her policy.

Active promotion of competitive practices
Ms Kroes said it was not enough to stand waiting for anti-competitive behaviour to occur and then correct it. It should be tackled at source. "This is why I am planning investigations in a limited number of key sectors where competition may not be functioning as well as it might. We will do this with an open and constructive attitude." In particular, she mentioned the energy, transport and financial services sectors in this regard.

The challenge for Europe was clear, she said. "Either we continue with low growth and high unemployment and see our social values eroded, or we adapt, to stimulate and promote growth of the economy, which is the foundation for our vision of society. It is time to take the bull by the horns," she concluded.

Among the specific points made in response to MEPs, she insisted her aim was not to get rid of German Landesbanks, merely to prevent unfair competition, and, on the London Stock Exchange takeover, she said she would be delighted to examine the situation if the national competition authorities requested her to do so.

03.02.2005 Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs:
       Bureau and co-ordinators meeting open to all Members
       In the chair: Pervenche BERÈS (PES, FR)

Press enquiries:
Ralph Pine - tel. (32-2) 28 42941
e-mail: econ-press@europarl.eu.int

A public hearing at the European Parliament on Wednesday on the future of regional policy focussed on how regional policy can contribute to the Lisbon agenda and how it must adapt following enlargement. Regional Policy Commissioner Danuta HÜBNER outlined the latest position on the financial negotiations, while two experts gave their insights. MEPs gave their views on how, over the period 2007-2013, the cohesion instruments which represent about one third of the EU budget or a total of €336.1 billion should be spent.

Describing the latest developments in the negotiations on the financial perspective, Commissioner Hübner said most Member States wanted to conclude the negotiations during the Luxembourg Presidency and an overwhelming majority were also in favour of the cohesion policy as proposed by the Commission.

Member States, she explained, were concerned about the method of allocating financial resources among them, the 4% cap - the rule that annual EU transfers must not exceed 4% of the recipient country's GDP (a concern particularly for the new Member States) - and the transitional arrangements for the regions phasing out from Objective 1 or phasing in to Objective 2. Commissioner Hübner also outlined the difficulties in reaching a compromise on the financial envelope for cohesion policy: "This is a major concern for me. Reaching a deal under the Luxembourg Presidency before the end of June would allow for timely adoption of the regulations and strategic guidelines and for the negotiations on strategic national reference frameworks prepared by the Member States to be completed. In this way we will be able to ensure a smooth transition to the new programmes in January 2007, and to avoid an interruption in funding that would have a very real negative impact in the regions."

Cohesion Policy regulations - good progress

Turning to the new structural funds, the Commissioner stated that good progress had been made on the Commission's proposals under the Dutch and Luxembourg Presidencies. As to the strategic guidelines, the Commission had put forward a number of themes for economic growth, from freight transport networks to greenhouse emissions, smart administration, better access to finance for SMEs and faster innovation.

The Commission has presented five new draft regulations for the reform of cohesion policy for the period 2007-2013 and these are set to be adopted by the Parliament and the Council later this year. There is a general regulation laying down a common set of rules for all instruments, together with specific regulations for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Cohesion Fund. In addition, a new regulation is proposed to provide an optional framework for Member States and regions to set up authorities for cross-border co-operation (EGCC).

Cohesion Policy in an enlarged EU - No to a renationalisation

Ms Marjorie JOUEN from Notre Europe presented the conclusions of an external study on the adaptation of Cohesion Policy to the enlarged Europe and the Lisbon and Gothenberg Objectives after 2007. "Enlargement has meant that regional disparities have increased two-fold and made the peripheral regions of the Union even more distant". Ms Jouen spoke out strongly against any renationalisation of cohesion policy, saying "such a policy would not support solidarity."

EU budget is relatively small - no simple answers

"No part of the patient needs to be amputated." This was the metaphor used by Professor Pascual FERNÁNDEZ of the Universidad Autónoma of Madrid in referring to the size of the EU budget. The aim, he said, should not be to cut funding for Cohesion Policy but rather to increase it, given the sharp cut-off for the former Cohesion countries of Spain, Portugal Greece and Ireland and the arrival of the new Member States. "Maintaining the 1.24% ceiling would be essential if the EU wanted to continue making progress towards the Lisbon goals." There was in real terms, he said, a 4.5 per cent reduction in the part of the EU budget spent on Cohesion Policy between the present financial perspective (2000-2006) and the next one (2007-2013). Professor Fernández also pointed out that the trade balances of the net contributors with the less well-off Member States far outweighed their contributions to the EU's budget.

Commissioner Hübner too stressed the importance of maintaining the necessary funds. In response to questions from Ritta MYLLER (PES, FI) and Rolf BEREND (EPP-ED, DE) she said some Member States wanted to see a reduction in cohesion funds across the board. She continued "We cannot divide the Union into net contributors and net recipients. It is not as simple as that." As to transition measures for countries that have lost Objective 1 status due to the so-called statistical effect of an overall reduction of the EU's average GDP post-enlargement, Commissioner Hübner stated that "it would be a great mistake to remove or reduce these transitional measures."

Jan OLBRYCHT (EPP-ED, PL), Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Regional Development, stressed that the priority should be the poorer regions in the new Member States and the debate should focus on strategy rather than technocratic details.

The study carried out by Notre Europe and an executive summary are available here.

http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/2004_2009/organes/REGI/REGI_20050202_1500_audition.htm

02.02.2005 Committee on Regional Development
       In the chair: Gerardo GALEOTE QUECEDO (EPP-ED, ES)

Press enquiries:
Richard Freedman - tel. (32-2) 28 41448
e-mail: region-press@europarl.eu.int

Seriously concerned at the economic and social situation in the Western Balkans, Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee is calling on the EU to adopt a clearer strategy for the Balkans and provide a step-by-step integration agenda. In a draft resolution adopted unanimously on Wednesday, MEPs also called on the Western Balkan countries themselves to coordinate their regional infrastructure better. And they stressed that these countries could facilitate EU integration more by fulfilling certain conditions, such as cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal on Yugoslavia in The Hague, favouring the return of refugees, actively fighting corruption and organised crime and respecting human and minority rights.

As regards Bosnia-Herzegovina, MEPs were worried about the continuing serious political problems and the country's precarious stability. They called for a quick handover of Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic to the Hague tribunal. Turning to Serbia and Montenegro, MEPs said that the next two years will be crucial for finding a mutually satisfactory solution to problems with the State Union. They also recognised that future decisions on the status of Kosovo will have political implications for Serbia, for which reason Belgrade and Priština should engage in a cooperative dialogue. In that respect, they referred to the upcoming review of the Kosovo "standards" - the state of the rule of law, the return of refugees, property rights, a functioning economy - which may lead to opening discussions on the status of Kosovo.

Albania caused MEPs concern as regards its political climate, its administrative capacity, the need to fight corruption and organised crime and to improve the judicial system, respect for minorities, such as the Greek community, and the economy. The failure of the referendum in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on a territorial division of the country would seem to have paved the way for reconciliation between the two main ethnic groups. Efforts to decentralise should be backed up by EU support programmes, says the resolution.

MEPs said they were looking forward to the opening of accession negotiations with Croatia, but that the date of accession should not be linked to that of any other country. Croatia should cooperate fully with the tribunal in The Hague, settle its border disputes with Slovenia, make greater efforts to facilitate the return of refugees and guarantee fair and effective domestic war-crime trials.

02.02.2005 Committee on Foreign Affairs
       In the chair: Elmar BROK (EPP-ED, DE)

       Procedure: Motion for resolution (Rule 108.5)

       Press enquiries:
Marjory van den Broeke - tel. (32-2) 28 44304
e-mail: foreign-press@europarl.eu.int