Verbatim report of proceedings

Thursday, 16 February 2006 - Strasbourg

9. Statistics on foreign affiliates (debate)

  President. The next item is the debate on the report (A6-0332/2005) by Enrico Letta, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community statistics on the structure and activity of foreign affiliates (COM(2005)0088 C6-0084/2005 2005/0016(COD)).

  Joaquín Almunia, Member of the Commission. (ES) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like firstly to thank the rapporteur, Mr Letta, and all of the members of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for the excellent work they have done on the proposed Regulation on this type of statistic.

I would like, in particular, to emphasise the fact that, in its work, Parliament has stressed the need to make the data provided for in this Regulation available as soon as possible. There is no need for me to remind you that our most direct competitors, the United States and Japan, have had detailed information about their companies’ external investments for more than twenty years, and this puts their governments and economic actors at a considerable advantage compared to Europe when it comes to drawing up their strategies and commercial policies.

The Commission therefore considers it very desirable for Parliament and the Council to reach an agreement on this proposal for a Regulation at first reading, so that the collection of this type of data can begin this very year. I believe that both institutions are very close to an agreement, and we hope that it is reached as soon as possible.

As I have said, the Regulation responds to a vacuum in the Community statistics that puts us at a disadvantage. At the moment, we only have the data that certain Member States collect on a voluntary basis, either within the context of structural economic statistics or the compilation of its balance of payments statistics. It is not possible to calculate aggregates for the European Union of twenty-five, however, given the diversity of the methods used and the type of information compiled.

There is no need to point out the importance of completing the internal market and the importance for all of us of the Lisbon Strategy and its objectives of increasing growth and employment and of making the European Union an attractive area for investments and one that favours entrepreneurial activity. Furthermore, this is a year in which the importance of defending European interests in multilateral commercial negotiations is particularly obvious.

The data that this Regulation is intended to obtain is extremely useful in all of these respects. At the end of the day, ladies and gentlemen, we are talking about a type of statistic that is essential to increasing the dynamism, vitality and competitiveness of European companies and economic actors.

In this regard, the Commission believes that the amendments that the honourable Members have presented and discussed and that are aimed at speeding up the implementation of the compilation of this data provide an excellent basis for reaching a compromise at first reading.

Nevertheless, for the same reason, the Commission does not agree that it is necessary to maintain the amendments relating to Parliament’s role in implementing the Regulation, since, given its very technical nature, this kind of amendment would provide relatively little added value, while almost certainly preventing an agreement with the Council at first reading; I am referring, of course, to Amendments 1, 2 and 9, which are aimed at extending the procedures of the so-called Lamfalussy process, in relation to the legislation on financial services, to the field of the compilation of statistical data.

The honourable Members, and in particular the members of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, which is also responsible for the negotiation of the directives on financial services, are in a privileged position to appreciate the differences between the two sectors. There is no need to remind you of the different levels of implementation of the legislation on financial services and the reasons, very different to those in relation to the case we are discussing today, why the Commission considered it appropriate, on some of these levels, for Parliament to have a greater capacity for scrutiny than that laid down in the current rules on comitology.

Nevertheless, before I finish, I would like to stress two factors to the honourable Members, in the hope that you will reconsider your position on these three amendments: 1, 2 and 9.

Firstly, account must be taken of the existing agreement amongst the institutions to set the definitive parameters for the compilation of data, once the results of the pilot studies are known, by means of the codecision procedure. In this way, Parliament will have full capacity, together with the Council, to play its role as legislator in the essential aspects of the implementation of this Regulation.

Secondly, I would like to point out that the current Austrian Presidency has expressed its political will to reach a satisfactory agreement with Parliament on the review of the rules on comitology. As you are well aware, a compromise in this field that will reflect more fairly Parliament’s legitimate aspirations to play its role as legislator fully is within sight.

Under these circumstances, Mr President, while repeating, of course, that the Commission is willing to keep Parliament fully informed at all times of the work of the different committees, I hope that this Parliament’s vote will facilitate an agreement on this Regulation at first reading.

  Enrico Letta (ALDE), rapporteur. – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to thank the Commission and Commissioner Almunia for his speech and for the valuable work done by the two institutions during the preparatory phase leading up to this debate.

Beyond its seemingly technical character, this directive is very important, and our aim in drafting it is to regulate two types of data on foreign affiliates, namely inward statistics, which relate to all the businesses and sectors that are under foreign control, and outward statistics, which relate to foreign enterprises that are controlled by a company located in the European Union.

As Commissioner Almunia said, the Commission proposes to establish a mandatory reference framework for the compilation of Community statistics on the structure and activity of foreign affiliates.

The Commission proposal includes two different modules for collecting inward and outward data. The module for inward FATS is based on the Structural Business Statistics Regulation, while the one for outward FATS is the same as that used for foreign direct investment in the Regulation for Balance of Payments Statistics. Whereas the provisions for inward FATS would be for the most part mandatory, the provisions for outward FATS include a voluntary experimental phase based on pilot studies aimed at assessing the feasibility and costs of collecting data.

The critical element for this directive is the fact that, as Commissioner Almunia just pointed out, the United States and Japan have already had this kind of information available to them for over 20 years, in even greater detail than what is provided for in the directive.

The Commission proposal includes pilot studies and comitology procedures with long transition periods. That is liable to leave European political officials without adequate data for a long time yet, while their US and Japanese counterparts can now already access better information on the economic strategies and trends of their own enterprises and transnational companies, including in the area of outward FATS.

For all these reasons, we believe that the Commission proposal must be supported, but with a few requirements taken into consideration. Firstly, the provisions of this regulation must not represent an excessive bureaucratic and financial burden for the companies involved. Secondly, it must not take too long to implement the regulation and therefore to make the data available, so that the policy makers in Europe can be on an equal footing with their US and Japanese counterparts as quickly as possible.

The comitology procedure, which has been widely debated within our committee as an alternative to the legislative procedure for the implementation of outward FATS, must be assessed very carefully and in the knowledge that every effort will be needed to fulfil the objective of making uniform data available in the short term.

Lastly, the European Central Bank and other institutions that are particularly in need of adequate statistical information should be involved in the development of common standards.

Our preparatory talks before today’s debate saw a divergence open up between Parliament, the Commission and the Council. We have always tried to reach a compromise that would lead as quickly as possible to the directive being approved at first reading. However, our impression that the Council did not want this text to be approved at first reading prompts us to regard the discussions held in committee on the subject of comitology as an issue that Parliament must bear in mind, particularly when the amendments on comitology are put to the vote.

For all these reasons, we believe that it is useful and important to recommend that this Chamber vote in favour of the directive. This is an important vote because it will succeed in making our European international trade system focus more carefully on data relating to competitiveness. From the start, our aim has been to have this directive approved at first reading. Beyond its seemingly technical character, this directive has a highly important content that prompts me to suggest to this Chamber that it vote in favour of it as soon as possible.

  John Purvis, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Mr President, I should like to thank Mr Letta for his cooperation in preparing our position on this report.

My group is committed to two main points. Firstly, the collection of these statistics is urgent and needs to be as complete as possible, as soon as possible. It is difficult to see how one can conduct meaningful trade negotiations without them. This means that the mandatory collection of statistics on both inward and outward FATS is the best solution. It is amazing to me that apparently some Member States are just not willing to consider providing them. The Council has introduced a derogation for Member States which have not yet tested this process to deal with just those situations in Article 6, point D. Is this not enough?

Both inward and outward FATS should therefore be collected on a mandatory basis and mandatory pilot studies should be set up for imports and exports. If not, just a few years on Member States that have not volunteered to do pilot studies will claim that it is still not necessary and will still refuse to collect the data.

My group’s second issue is comitology, which is raising its head yet again. If Parliament’s position on this means that we will have to go to a second reading, so be it. My group will stick with its position on comitology until the Council shows itself to be serious about giving the European Parliament reasonable expectations in this area. Even now, a reassuring statement by the Council might still be enough for us to reconsider our position.

My group will therefore vote in favour of the text that was adopted in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs.

  Manuel António dos Santos, on behalf of the PSE Group. – (PT) I should like to begin by congratulating Mr Letta on his excellent work culminating in the report before us. I should also like to thank Mr Almunia for the very precise clarifications that he contributed to this debate, which will certainly help us to reach a solution in time for the vote taking place not in this part-session but in the next.

Much has already been said about the nature and origin of this debate. Its origins lie in the proposal for a regulation on Community statistics and the structure and activity of foreign affiliates. It has been said here – and reiterated by Mr Purvis – that these statistics provide vital help to national and Community policy-makers to formulate appropriate policy and to help businesses assess ongoing developments in a business world affected by economic globalisation.

Although voluntary data collection on the structure and activity of foreign affiliates – that is, inward statistics – takes place in virtually all Member States, proving that a concerted procedure is possible, the same cannot be said of outward statistics, which only occurs in a small number of Member States.

This information is only really useful if it is available promptly and consistently and if data collection is harmonised, hence the need to establish a common framework at the earliest opportunity.

I agree with Mr Almunia on the importance of reaching a solution at first reading, although I also agree with Mr Purvis that it would not be a disaster if such an agreement is not obtained at first reading.

Although there is a great deal of common ground, as all speakers have said, arising from the pressing and timely nature of the directive itself, there are aspects that we would normally see as upholding the comitology principle rather than the codecision procedure, but which in practice form part of what ought to be Parliament’s role as regards all such procedures, in particular those of a financial nature.

This is what must be guaranteed. I was somewhat comforted by Mr Almunia’s remarks about the changes pending to the comitology process in order to take into account the importance of Parliament’s role in decision-making and monitoring these processes. It strikes me, however, that it is not entirely guaranteed. I would therefore reiterate that if it is not necessary to reach agreement at first reading, I do not think that is particularly serious given that the most important thing is that we find a sound, properly thought through, common platform from which to implement the regulation in question effectively.

The need to introduce improvements has also been mentioned, and my group accepts this completely. In this regard, there will not be any difficulties with either the Council or the Commission, as regards the pilot studies or periods of regulation and the deadlines to be observed for obtaining this kind of information.

To my mind, anything that helps to make the pilot projects mandatory, to remove from the pilot projects mandatory conclusions and to reduce periods allowed for derogations and the deadlines for establishing definitive data is of vital importance.

We accordingly endorse the rapporteur’s proposals, the significance of which lies in the fact that they specifically address those areas.

My group is amply prepared to make full use of the time remaining before the final vote for us to reach an agreement, in the context of bilateral contacts, enabling this report to be adopted at first reading. I repeat, however, that I do not believe that failure to do so will lead to insurmountable obstacles.

We also hope that the Council, which at times during this process has struck us as being too insular, will begin to show some openness, along the lines of the openness that came through from the accommodating and significant words of Mr Almunia.

I should like to close by once again congratulating the rapporteur. The debate in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs was most interesting. Given that the report was adopted unanimously, I feel sure that we will find an appropriate solution to the problem, in conjunction with the Council and the Commission.

  Joaquín Almunia, Member of the Commission. (ES) Mr President, I simply wish to thank the rapporteur, Mr Letta, and Mr Purvis and Mr dos Santos, once again for their speeches and the willingness they have shown to cooperate in order to achieve what I believe we all want to see, which is a negotiation that leads to the prompt approval of this Regulation for reasons on which we all agree: that it is important for the European institutions, in multilateral trade negotiations or any other kind of strategy, to have the data that is not available to us at present but which our competitors have been using for some time.

With regard to the comitology problems, which we have all mentioned, I would like to reiterate what I said in my first speech: we hope that the work of the Austrian Presidency will allow us, during this six month period, to find a solution which suits and satisfies all of us. I would therefore like to say once again that the Commission is willing to take account of the difficulties being faced at present until that final agreement is reached, but I would also ask that these problems not interfere with the prompt approval of this Regulation, at first reading if possible.

  President. The debate is closed.

The vote will take place during the next part-session.

(The sitting was suspended at 1.00 p.m. and resumed at 3.00 p.m.)

IN THE CHAIR: MR MAURO
Vice-President