Verbatim report of proceedings

Tuesday, 13 March 2007 - Strasbourg

14. Commission statement: Consumer policy strategy 2007-2013 (debate)

  President. The next item is the Commission statement on consumer policy strategy 2007-2013.

  Meglena Kuneva, Member of the Commission. Mr President, it gives me great pleasure to be able to present to you the new EU consumer policy strategy for 2007-2013, adopted today by the Commission. I see this as our contribution to making every citizen safe and confident everywhere in the Union. I hope this House will give its support to this goal. This is also our contribution to increasing the economic wellbeing of our citizens and the competitiveness of the EU economy.

I know the importance of consumer policy to Parliament and welcome the support that has been given to consumer policy in the past. Your support for my nomination as Commissioner for Consumer Policy clearly indicated your expectations of the Commission, and I trust the strategy will be in line with your priorities.

What is important for the consumer financial programme 2007-2013, in relation to which Parliament has been a key actor in the legislative process in terms of ensuring the smooth adoption of that programme? The programme is an important tool for the delivery of the strategy, and the changes made in the programme to take account of your views have also been factored into the strategy. The strategy and, indeed, my appointment as the first Commissioner for Consumer Affairs are the beginnings of a response to the vision of this Parliament. Some of you have been calling for a stronger consumer dimension to all EU policies for some time now.

Consumer policy seems to me to be equally well placed to tackle the two big challenges the EU faces today: boosting growth and jobs, and reconnecting with our citizens.

On growth and jobs, it is clear that the internet is fundamentally changing the retail sector, but these changes have, in practice, so far been limited to national markets.

On the retail side of the internal market, we see fragmentation into 27 national mini-markets, and this is both a pity and a missed opportunity as the internal market has the potential to be the largest retail market in the world, with significant benefits to consumers and to the competitiveness of the EU economy.

Opening up cross-border retail is the key to unlocking the full potential of the internal market. If cross-border shopping becomes a credible alternative to domestic shopping, then competitive pressure will increase, not only in cross-border shopping but also in domestic retail markets. The integration effect does not require all, or even most, consumers to do most of their shopping across borders. Our experience in removing obstacles to the cross-border sale of new vehicles shows that it is enough for cross-border shopping to be a credible alternative for competition to be enhanced in the domestic markets. This would be good for growth and jobs.

However, we need a strategy that also responds directly to the aspirations of all our citizens. For them, an active consumer policy should be a central part of our efforts to show that they can improve their daily lives by taking advantage of opportunities created by Europe in terms of broader markets, lower prices and guaranteed rights and protection.

Putting consumers at the heart of all EU policies and regulations is important. This is not just about a narrow consumer policy strip of European policy; the strategy commits us all, in Parliament as well as in the Commission, to look harder at all EU policies to be sure that we have properly taken account of the impact of consumers and have adjusted policies to maximise their benefits.

President Barroso has therefore decided to expand the mandate of the competitiveness group of Commissioners to address the consumer dimension so that all proposals with a significant impact on consumers will in future undergo closer scrutiny.

Under our consumer policy, we see three main objectives over the next seven years. First, I want to empower Europe’s consumers. This means creating the right market conditions for them to be able to make informed, considered and original choices and equipping them with the tools to do so. Second, I want to enhance the economic and non-economic welfare of Europe’s consumers in terms of price, choice, quality and affordability. Third, I want to protect consumers effectively. Market failures for consumers fall into two categories – those that individuals cannot address and those that they should address themselves. Consumer laws should effectively protect consumers from the former and equip them to deal with the latter.

In short, I want the Commission to be able to tell all EU citizens by 2013 that they can shop anywhere in the EU, from the corner shop to the website, confident that they are equally effectively protected and to be able to tell all retailers that they can sell anywhere on the basis of a single, simple set of rules.

We are a long way from those goals now. Important progress has been made, with the help of the European Parliament: the directive on unfair commercial practices, the regulation on consumer protection cooperation and the network of European consumer centres have made significant progress. We need to complete this work and act on a number of fronts: better rules on contracts, better enforcement, information, advice and redress all need to work as well in the internal market as at home if consumers and SMEs are to be persuaded to make this leap.

Harmonised rules in targeted areas are central to an integrated market – but not to keep lawyers and bureaucrats happy. A simple clear set of rules helps SMEs, consumers and enforcers, and I am not sure it is possible to encourage consumers and SMEs to see the EU market as a truly single territory without simple rules, but harmonised rules will not create this necessary increase in current levels of consumer confidence if harmonisation is agreed in a way that provides inadequate substantive levels of protection.

My preference is for harmonised rules and good protection. This Commission has recently launched an important consultation in this area and I welcome Parliament’s opinion on these matters.

In conclusion, in such a short time I can only give a brief flavour of the strategy. I think it sets out an ambitious agenda and on that we will require Parliament’s support in order for it to be successfully delivered.

  Zita Pleštinská (PPE-DE). – (SK) My question for the Commissioner is: ‘What tools and specific projects will the Commission be backing in order to enforce consumer protection policy?’ I refer to the emphasis put on the EU diary, a sensible choice that appeals to students throughout Europe and that also provides insights into what the new EU generation thinks about consumer rights. The primary ambition is to ensure that within Europe all EU citizens have equal rights wherever they decide to live, eat or do their shopping.

The project has been financed from EU funds. Is the European Commission going to continue supporting this project?

  President. Thank you very much. Thank you too for the good wishes. There are certainly no secrets between us in this House.

  Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE). – (DE) Mr President, I, too, would like to wish you all the best on your birthday, and extend warm congratulations to Commissioner Kuneva on her work. Your statement just now, Commissioner, to the effect that the consumer must be at the heart of policymaking is a very important one, and makes a vital point that I wish to underline.

If your policy in this area tends to exemplify the view that it is not the people who exist for the sake of the economy, but rather the economy – and the internal market – that exist for the people, then we are on the right track. While we are on this subject, I should like to know in which specific directions you intend to move this policy forward. Do you intend to limit yourself to doing so at the sectoral level, or are you contemplating drafting a framework directive?

  Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE). – (NL) Mr President, I too should like to wish you a very happy birthday, of course, but I should also like to congratulate the Commissioner, because I think it is fair to say that the ink of the multi-annual programme on consumer protection is not quite dry, and the Commission has already prepared a concrete strategy to implement it faithfully.

The speed of your reactions, Commissioner, along with your refreshing take on policy, is something which has brought the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats great pleasure. We share the view of other Members of this House that it would be welcomed if you managed to place the consumer at the heart of internal market policy, because that would give the European project a fresh heart, and some will say a soul. We must see to it that we receive wide support from society for the integration projects we are working on.

Needless to say, we are still waiting for concrete proposals, I mean the content of those proposals, because you have definitely compiled a list. Two things stand out, though. Firstly, with regard to legal remedies, which remedies do you have in mind to improve enforceability and retrieval recourse for the consumer compared to now? Secondly, maximum harmonisation is also something that intrigues me in connection with more uniform legislation. How do you think we could bring this about in practice? Is it your ambition to move towards maximum harmonisation or do you have something else in mind?

  Malcolm Harbour (PPE-DE). – Mr President, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group in the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, first of all I would like to congratulate the Commissioner on her first major statement to this House, which I am sure will be the first of many, and also to thank her very much for the very comprehensive approach that she is taking. I think that, in particular, Commissioner, you have clearly set out that EU consumer policy has to be at the heart of the whole internal market debate. I echo very much what my colleague Mrs Gebhardt said, i.e. that we are here to make an attractive internal market for consumers and encourage them to participate in that internal market and therefore we want that package to come together.

Now the question I wanted to pose to you, Commissioner, is that you specifically identified your role as a champion for consumer issues and that you will be looking at other policies in other parts of the Commission. I think that, in particular, many of us are very concerned about the developing issues to do with the Rome Conventions, which, in some ways, may work against your vision of making a legal framework that is simple for SMEs. I wonder if you could assure us that you are going to tackle those issues as well?

  Andreas Schwab (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, although I would like, right now, to sing the President a birthday song, perhaps, in view of the short time available to me, I would be better advised not to, but I would like to congratulate you, Commissioner, for you, of course, through your dedicated participation in the Competition Council, embody the truth that, in the European Union, consumer protection policy is a horizontal task and of equal status with competition and internal market policy, something for which I am very grateful to you.

Where e-commerce is concerned, the European internal market must be a single market for consumers, for, if we are to put consumers in a more secure position within it, we will also achieve a greater volume of cross-border trade across the board.

There are two points I would like to raise. The first is that complete harmonisation of the kind you have proposed might well make perfect sense in certain fields – in e-commerce, for example – but cannot be a model for the internal market as a whole, something for which good arguments still need to be found by way of a proper impact assessment.

Secondly, we want the consumer to be put in a stronger position in the European internal market, but I venture to doubt whether, in a system such as exists in the European Union, collective actions are the right way to go about it.

Perhaps you could tell us about the reasoning that underlies these proposals of yours?

  Meglena Kuneva, Member of the Commission. Thank you, Mr President. I do not know whether you will all be disappointed or not, but my birthday is on 22 June. Today is Commissioner Frattini’s birthday. If you will allow me, I will pass on all these good wishes and congratulations to him. I can assure you that he fully deserves it. Anyway, thank you and I hope that on 22 June I can somehow be here at Parliament again to receive my fair share!

Let us start with the questions. Mrs Pleštinská, it is really very important to for all our policies to be financially supported, and we will do our best to accommodate them within the framework of our budget. I believe that the most important thing for you is how you see the policy and how we can maximise what we have in terms of resources through our budget. This relates to education, information, European Consumer Centres and strengthening enforcement. We can think of many other ways of spending the money, but these are the priorities. In this respect, I am more than happy that you mentioned the EU diary. Just today, I distributed several copies during the meeting of the College of Commissioners as a reminder of how important it is as a tool. This will remain one of the best ways in which we can be in touch with the younger generation.

Talking about the younger generation, I think that we what we have in mind about digital rights is very much in line with what they are looking for. The day after tomorrow, I have a meeting in Berlin on digital rights and I will specially address the younger members of the audience. In this way they could become more interested in what it means to be a consumer in this, our evolutionary world – Europe.

And now I come to Mrs Gebhardt’s question. It is always very important to have a precise policy and a precise vision about how we can use the framework directive, what kind it should be – because there can only be one – and what kind of sectoral influence we could pursue. I am in favour of this mixed approach. I am sure that this horizontal set of rules equally applied to typical consumer contracts and typical consumer rights, relating to enforcement or whatever – this is maybe not in the soul but in the core of consumer protection – is very important.

But we cannot exhaust all the sectoral problems. That is why I think we should also focus our attention very much on having sound performance in consumer protection, most importantly in energy, in transport and in telecommunications. That is why I think that being part of the Competitiveness Council is very important. Also, the competition Commissioner is a natural ally for consumer policy.

So, coming to Mrs Thyssen’s question about redress, I do not have in mind the United States type of class action. This is not a John Grisham story. We have another, European narrative, and this is much more related to collective redress. We have this collective redress in at least ten countries and, in one country, Holland, it is closer to a class action, but is still not the same. This is not the only collective redress. We can use alternative dispute resolutions, which are important, test cases and many other things. This is not about maximum harmonisation, but about bottlenecks – when and how we can identify them – and about focusing our attention on this in respect of the highest possible level of harmonisation.

So, Mr Harbour, thank you for saying that I am trying to be a consumer champion. I would gladly share this role with any of my fellow Commissioners, because I dream of having a consumer champion from the other sectors.

As regards the Rome Convention, I think that through full harmonisation we can at least overcome some of the shortcomings of Rome I. Right now, as regards Rome I, businesses should comply with the rules of the country from which the problem originates, which does not significantly increase the burden on the business side.

I think I have virtually answered Mr Schwab’s question about what kind of harmonisation we are targeting and about class action. I do not want to challenge the President’s patience by giving quite long answers, but I will be glad to continue this conversation with all of you.

  Béatrice Patrie (PSE). – (FR) Mr President, Commissioner, I should like to thank you for your speech and your answers.

I should like to ask you what you mean by the introduction of better redress procedures for consumers, since you told us that you do not envisage any collective redress.

The fact is that consumer rights are regularly violated en masse whether – in terms of the mobile telephone sector – these violations take the form of excessive prices, of deductions of unowed bank charges or of failings on the part of Internet access providers, and that, very often, individual losses do not amount to much but, when added together, represent significant collective losses, thus bringing extremely large sums into play.

Faced with that, individual redress is ineffective and only class actions, in fact, may appear to be a satisfactory solution since they make it possible not only to provide consumers with a means of redress and a single form of compensation proceedings but also, and above all, to drive back businesses. This is what happens in Portugal, for example, and it does not involve any US-style excesses.

Could you therefore give us some clarification on what you refer to as effective redress?

  Alexander Stubb (PPE-DE). – Mr President, I have three points.

One: I think the paper provided by the Commissioner is a breath of fresh air. There is no false dichotomy between consumer policy on the one hand and the single market on the other and I think this is the first paper that brings it out fairly clearly.

Second, I really appreciate that the Commission is reinforcing the economic dimension of consumer policy because that has not been done previously and I think this is a very welcome step.

The third point I have is about communication. I admit it. I will come out of the closet: I am a mega-shopper myself. I like shopping, but sometimes I do not do too well on the internet or something like that. So, my point to you is please communicate consumer policy better to the European citizens. People sitting around here do not know that the EU actually gives you a lot of rights when it comes to consumer policy.

My question is, what are the priorities of the group of Commissioners dealing with competition and consumer policy? What issues could that group deal with?

  Olle Schmidt (ALDE). – (SV) Mr President, I wish to thank the Commissioner for a quite extraordinarily constructive and important document. Many of my fellow Members have said that, if the internal market is to operate properly, well-informed and knowledgeable consumers, a properly functioning market and keen competition are needed. As we all know, this is an issue in which national interests in some degree conflict with the EU’s and consumers’ interests.

My question to the Commissioner is this: what possibilities do you think there are for gaining a better hearing for a common consumer policy in which there is also scope for more measures to be taken now than have been taken before in terms of EU and EC legislation? We know that it has been difficult to obtain a hearing in the Member States when it comes to further commitment to these issues on the part of the EU.

  Christel Schaldemose (PSE) . – (DA) Mr President, I should like to thank the Commissioner for issuing this communication. I am bowled over by the Commissioner’s energy and desire to do something for consumer policy, and I am also particularly pleased that she is focusing on the whole issue of Internet commerce and on the rights and opportunities that there need to be in this area. I believe that what is being done will be of great interest to many Europeans. However, my question to the Commissioner concerns what was said in the communication about the objective being that, irrespective of where in the EU trade is conducted, people should be protected in the same way. Perhaps I am alone in lacking a fully clear understanding of what is meant. Does the Commissioner want us to harmonise the rules so that the same rules apply throughout the EU, or are there to be minimum rules whereby certain countries may, if they so wish, have rules that go further?

  Мартин Димитров (PPE-DE). – Г-жо Кунева, поздравления за вашия доклад. Започвате много добре кариерата си на еврокомисар, пожелавам ви успех.

Моят въпрос към Вас е как ще се справите с прекомерните, затормозяващи регулации, които се представят като защита на потребителите? И за да ме разберете добре, Ви давам конкретен пример от България. Законът за защита на потребителите забранява авансовото плащане при поръчка на стоки по интернет. Според текста на закона, доставчикът няма право да изисква или да приема плащане преди да изтекат седем работни дни от получаването на стоката от клиента или от сключването на договора.

Свръхрегулациите не са в полза нито на бизнеса, нито на потребителите. Подобни регулации спират много търговци въобще да доставят стоки в интернет. Това е точно пречка за малкия и среден бизнес. Смятате ли, че на европейско ниво трябва да се вземат мерки за решаването на този и на други такива случаи?

  Toine Manders (ALDE). – (NL) Commissioner, welcome and thank you for your dynamic take on this proposal. We share the view of the coordinators in the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Mrs Gebhardt and Mr Harbour, that the internal market must be attractive and that the consumer must be at the centre of it. As a free-marketeer, I see the market as encompassing supply and demand, but the question is who for? The consumer.

I am worried, though, that our tactic in the past has been too paternalistic, overprotecting the consumer who is inundated with information and cannot see the wood for the trees. I rather like your style, the breath of fresh air, because you seem to be moving away from this paternalistic stance, and I hope – and am, indeed, confident – that the action plan will not prescribe additional restrictions and rules.

I have a question for you. Do you intend to investigate existing legislation to see whether it can be simplified, as a result of which the internal market can be attractive, and can remain so in future, especially with consumers in mind? After all, information is great, and so is freedom of choice, but we must not inundate people with information and we must not patronise them either.

  Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE). – Mr President, first I would like to thank the Commissioner for her excellent approach to the problem. I would like to hear more about the impact assessment and analyses you have carried out, Commissioner. What is really the problem when it comes to consumer confidence? Can we increase consumer confidence with maximum harmonisation? Or is it a chicken and egg problem, with perhaps no real demand for cross-border trade? Which comes first?

My second point concerns unfair commercial promotions. As you mentioned, we did some very good work during the last parliamentary term, but, unfortunately, some unfair competition is actually protected by consumer protection rules in Member States. I would like to ask how you can guarantee that a new approach to consumer law will not actually bring new obstacles, if the Member States use it in the wrong manner.

  Barbara Weiler (PSE). – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, since I cannot say that I completely go along with what has been said by the last two speakers, I am glad to be able to reassure you of our support for your ambitious objectives.

Although the mix of different options that you have described sounds very appealing, we doubt that it is efficient in real terms, for you will have to contend not only with the different objections from the Member States, but also with very powerful economic interests, and so we would remind you that your fellow Members of the Commission – men and women like Mrs Kroes, Mr Verheugen, Mr McCreevy, and Mr Kyprianou – first earned the respect of the European public by imposing effective and substantial sanctions in their own areas of responsibility. We would suggest that you do likewise.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE-DE). – (PL) Mr President, the fact is that we take too little interest in consumer policy, particularly as regards health and the protection of young consumers. The state of our society’s health governs our efficiency and productivity. These influence the rate of our economic growth, which in turn ensures a specific standard of living and therefore also of consumption.

Essentially, the fundamental problem relates to children and young people’s living conditions, which are determined by social, health, educational and environmental factors. They all contribute to the number of births and the upbringing of healthy and educated young people, who will decide our future.

How should we tackle these tasks at Union level? What ought however to be undertaken within the Member States?

The Commissioner was right when she said that these tasks and questions form part of every Commissioner’s remit.

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). – Mr President, I have two points. First, to follow on from a point made not too long ago, how is the Commission protecting consumers in its latest statement of objections issued in its competition case against Microsoft? Or is this just upping the publicity stakes in this long-running dispute which has little to do with consumers themselves and everything to do with competitors and forum shopping?

My second point involves class acts or representative action – which does already exist in Member States. There is already a representative action taking place in the UK taken out by the ‘Which?’ consumer group against JBB Sports relating to the sale of England and Manchester United football shirts in 2000 and 2001 using what is called Section 47b of the UK Enterprise Act of 2002. Do you think that Europe needs to dabble in this area any further?

  Meglena Kuneva, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I shall start with the group of questions concerning collective redress, beginning with that by Mrs Patrie. As I said, last week we launched a study on collective redress, and once we have received all the results, we will present them and discuss the outcome with Parliament.

However, there is no doubt that the collective interest of consumers, in a case such as the small-scale complaint that you mentioned, is very important for ensuring the fairness of the market and also for shaping the market behaviour of producers. We will therefore pursue our efforts in this area, which concerns precisely the first and third pillars of our consumer policy – to empower the consumer and to protect the consumer, not in a paternalistic way, but quite the opposite. This means that we will need more active citizens and more tools available for them.

With regard to Mr Stubb's question about priorities, the competitiveness commissioners will start to systematically review policy initiatives to ensure consumer outcomes are given greater weight. This concerns the information society, the digital world, energy liberalisation and trade instruments. The first initiatives are in our work programme. I believe that once this is done, if I may borrow from one of Mr Stubb's articles, we will be able to say that Europe is becoming more 'cool' and easier to understand for citizens.

As regards the question by Mrs Schaldemose on de minimis rules, I do not think we can label the rules as minimalist or as maximalist. We need a certain amount of very well measured regulation, precisely implemented, and I do not believe that de minimis rules would always be helpful.

I shall now turn to the question by Mr Dimitrov. Allow me to switch into Bulgarian.

Г-н Димитров, Вие представихте това, което считат за правилно провайдърите на такъв тип услуги. Вие буквално прочетохте тяхното писмо, с което аз съм запозната отдавна. Но аз имам и друго писмо и това е от гледна точка на потребителските организации.

В събота, в София, аз ще участвам в една конференция, която е специално насочена към тези права онлайн. И се надявам, че тогава ще могат да се чуят и двете страни. В противен случай, от тук да коментираме чл. 56 на националното ни законодателство, не е може би най-доброто време за това. Но мога да Ви уверя, че цялото внимание ще бъде отдадено на това да има повече информация и да могат да се видят различните гледни точки.

Then, the impact assessment and cross-border problems – how the new approach could go in the right direction: I think this is exactly what the new approach is targeting, but, unfortunately, I do not have a recipe as to how we can avoid any trouble and make implementation go smoothly. This very much depends on the individual country. The only way I know is to communicate more, to explain more and to rely on the European Consumer Centres, on enforcement bodies in the Member States and on consumer organisations. That is why I believe that adding a strong consumer dimension to Member State governments’ policies and to non-governmental organisations is absolutely crucial for development.

Regarding tangible penalties: if there is an infringement I will not hesitate to start such a procedure, but first let us think how better to implement and to enforce, and then, if necessary, we can go further.

On the last question about Microsoft: frankly, I do not think that I have enough information to speculate on this case.

Concerning the young generation, I could not agree more that this is one of the Commission’s main targets. I very much appreciate the approach taken by my colleague Commissioner Kyprianou on the health programme, and I think that it would be useful if we had the same approach on the consumer side targeting the young generation. We should really educate and teach the young generation of consumers – somebody called them ‘digital natives’!

  President. We shall now proceed to the next item.

IN THE CHAIR: MRS WALLIS
Vice-President