Zappalà (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – (IT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as the Parliament’s rapporteur I must thank the Commission and Commissioner Bolkestein for initiating this important piece of legislation.

There are tens of millions of professional persons in the Union. By virtue of the activities they perform they regulate and govern the life of every citizen. The professions are the most important productive social group in existence. Their activities embrace every aspect of cultural and educational experience, individual creativity, assertiveness, advocacy and responsibility. It is the social group most concerned with care and protection, most in need of clear-cut rules to be respected.

Each State independently and legitimately organises, in keeping with its own social and historical traditions, educational courses and lays down its own rules for entering the various professions. The Union must guarantee freedom of movement and freedom of establishment, equal rights of access to employment, competition, safety, health and freedom, whilst fully completing the internal market by providing reliable guarantees for professionals and consumers on an equal footing.

In real life there are huge differences within national legal systems and enormous discrepancies between different States. The complexity of the subject-matter coupled with the different nature of various professional activities, self-serving interests and errors of political judgement give rise to out-and-out confusion and in-fighting within the political and professional classes. The professions must learn to pursue an all-embracing unity of purpose in their own interests and in the interests of the consumers who rely upon them from day to day.

Politicians must abandon their superficial and partial view of the issue and tackle the sector as a whole. The attitude of some politicians and of certain representatives, together with ignorance coupled with the arrogance of those who deliberately confuse themselves and others, harm the professions and the community. I call on the Commission, which I thank again for having drafted the proposal, to consider Parliament’s amendments not as an obstructive act, but rather as the legislature making use of its legitimate and rightful power as a democratic representative body and, for this reason, I call for the utmost cooperation in the interests of the Union.

Professionals are atypical providers of services precisely because they are more productive in intellectual terms than in terms of specific resources. The services they provide are not the same and often cannot be compared with each other, nor can the principle of competition easily be applied to the sector because, over and above price, a professional service is primarily the result of intellectual creativity which stems from both the cultural background and a lively intellect. Not all professions are equal; the professions more at the cutting edge, such as those concerned with health, freedom and safety, are not on a par with those concerned with commercial, craft, industrial or economic activities. Access to such professions is regulated by States in accordance with local tradition and culture and is also subject to responsibilities and assurances offering minimum guarantees for consumers.

Harmonisation does not mean bland similarity. The British system should not be exported but harmonised with other systems for the purpose of achieving a level playing field within the Union. No one person represents everybody, only the legislature has general responsibility. We have the duty to legislate not in the interests of some arrogant lobbyist but in the general interest: hearing the arguments put by all sides and reaching an individual decision is the primary duty of those mandated to work on behalf of the Community. The proposal is based on the following assumptions: recognition of five levels of qualification, initial continuous training, the free movement of professional services and not of pieces of paper; consultation with the professions; the thresholds proposed by recognised bodies; compliance with authorised national structures, whether bodies, colleges or associations; pro-forma registration; equality of rights and duties; legislative certainty; the elimination of bureaucratic red tape; the mutual recognition of professions exercised in individual States and, where necessary, at levels higher than corresponding qualifications; compliance with insurance, social security and trade union rules.

Any objections are self-seeking rhetoric designed to stymie the progress of the internal market and this important sector. Any objections run the risk of being seen as a sop to self-interested lobby groups which do not act in the collective interest. The directive is important irrespective of its individual contents. I am not putting up barriers; the overall picture is more important than the detail. I hope that everyone views this from a European perspective and not from a lobbyist’s position.