Az ülések szó szerinti jegyzőkönyve

2007. március 13., Kedd - Strasbourg

14. A Bizottság közleménye - Fogyasztóvédelmi politikai stratégia, 2007-2013

  Przewodniczący. Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest komunikat Komisji w sprawie strategii w zakresie polityki konsumenckiej 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). – Moja otázka pre pani komisárku znie: Aké nástroje a konkrétne projekty na uplatňovanie politiky ochrany spotrebiteľa bude Komisia podporovať? Mám na mysli vyzdvihnutie Európskeho diára: Rozumný výber, ktorý oslovuje študentov v celej Európe a zároveň aj počúva, čo si nová generácia Európskej únie myslí o právach spotrebiteľa. Základnou snahou je zabezpečiť, aby všetci občania Európskej únie mali v rámci Európy tie isté práva, nech sa rozhodnú žiť, jesť alebo nakupovať kdekoľvek.

Projekt bol financovaný z prostriedkov Európskej únie. Bude aj naďalej Európska komisia podporovať tento projekt?

  Przewodniczący. Dziękuję bardzo. Dziękuję również za życzenia. Parlament jest taką instytucją, w której nic się nie ukryje.

  Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE). – Herr Präsident! Ich möchte Ihnen ebenfalls zum Geburtstag gratulieren. Frau Kuneva, herzlichen Glückwunsch auch zu Ihrer Arbeit. Sie haben gerade einen sehr wichtigen Satz gesagt, nämlich dass der Verbraucher im Herzen der Politik stehen muss. Das ist ein ganz wesentlicher Punkt, den ich unterstreichen möchte.

Wenn Ihre Politik in dieser Frage in die Richtung geht, dass nicht der Mensch für die Wirtschaft da ist, sondern dass vielmehr die Wirtschaft und der Binnenmarkt für den Menschen da sind, dann sind wir auf dem richtigen Weg. In diesem Zusammenhang würde mich sehr interessieren, in welchen konkreten Bereichen Sie diese Politik voranbringen möchten. Wollen Sie sich darauf beschränken, diese Politik auf sektoraler Ebene voranzutreiben, oder wollen Sie nicht auch einmal eine Rahmenrichtlinie ins Auge fassen?

  Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE). – Voorzitter, op mijn beurt natuurlijk een heel gelukkige verjaardag voor u, maar ook felicitaties aan de commissaris, want ik denk dat we mogen zeggen dat de inkt van het meerjarenprogramma inzake consumentenbescherming nog niet droog is, of de Commissie is al klaar met een concrete strategie om daar echt werk van te maken.

De snelheid van uw reactievermogen, mevrouw de commissaris, maar ook de verfrissende aanpak van het beleid, is iets wat ons als PPE-DE-Fractie verheugt. Wij delen de mening van andere collega's dat, als u erin zou slagen om de consument in het centrum van het beleid inzake de interne markt te plaatsen, dat een goede zaak is, want dat geeft het Europese project opnieuw een hart - sommigen zullen zeggen een ziel. We moeten zo ver komen dat we brede maatschappelijke steun krijgen voor de integratieprojecten waaraan we werken.

Op de concrete voorstellen moeten we natuurlijk nog wachten. Ik bedoel dan op de inhoud van die voorstellen, want u heeft wel degelijk een lijstje opgemaakt. Maar twee dingen springen toch in het oog. Ten eerste de rechtsmiddelen. Aan welke middelen denkt u om de afdwingbaarheid en het verhaalrecht voor de consument te verbeteren in vergelijking met nu. En ten tweede: de maximumharmonisatie is ook iets dat mij bezighoudt, als u het heeft over eenvormige wetgeving, meer uniforme wetgeving. Hoe ziet u ons dat in de praktijk tot stand brengen? Is het uw droom om te gaan naar een maximumharmonisatie of heeft u iets anders voor ogen?

  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). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Ich würde Ihnen, Herr Präsident, jetzt sogar noch ein Geburtstagsliedchen singen, aber ich verzichte angesichts der kurzen Zeit besser darauf. Ich möchte Ihnen, Frau Kommissarin, gratulieren, weil Sie natürlich durch Ihr Engagement im Wettbewerbsrat verdeutlichen, dass die Verbraucherschutzpolitik in der Europäischen Union eine Querschnittsaufgabe ist, die gleichberechtigt neben der Wettbewerbspolitik und der Binnenmarktpolitik steht. Dafür bin ich Ihnen sehr dankbar.

Der Binnenmarkt in Europa muss ein Binnenmarkt der Verbraucher sein, gerade was den elektronischen Handel angeht. Denn wenn wir dort zu mehr Sicherheit für die Verbraucher kommen, werden wir auch zu einer insgesamt größeren Menge des grenzüberschreitenden Handels kommen.

Zwei Punkte würde ich gerne ansprechen. Erstens: Die Vollharmonisierung, so wie Sie sie vorgeschlagen haben, kann zwar in bestimmten Bereichen – wie beispielsweise beim elektronischen Handel – durchaus sinnvoll sein, kann aber kein Muster für den gesamten Binnenmarkt sein. Man braucht dafür immer gute Argumente durch ein gutes impact assessment.

Zweitens: Wir wollen, dass der Verbraucher im Europäischen Binnenmarkt gestärkt wird. Ob aber Sammelklagen in einem System, wie es in der Europäischen Union vorliegt, das richtige Mittel sind, wage ich zu bezweifeln.

Vielleicht können Sie für diese Vorschläge noch Ihre Gründe nennen?

  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). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, je vous remercie pour votre intervention et vos réponses.

Je voudrais vous interroger sur ce que vous entendez par instaurer des meilleures procédures de recours pour les consommateurs, puisque vous nous dites que vous n'envisagez pas de recours collectif.

Le fait est que les droits des consommateurs sont régulièrement et massivement violés que ce soit, en matière de téléphonie mobile, par des prix excessifs, ou par des prélèvements de frais bancaires indus, ou par des défaillance des fournisseurs d'accès Internet, et que bien souvent, les préjudices individuels sont peu importants, mais représentent, s'ils sont additionnés les uns aux autres, des préjudices collectifs considérables, mettant en jeu des sommes extrêmement importantes.

Face à cela, les recours individuels sont inopérants et seules, en effet, les class actions peuvent apparaître comme une solution satisfaisante dès lors qu'elles permettent, non seulement de fournir aux consommateurs un moyen de recours et un procès unique en réparation, mais aussi et surtout de faire reculer les entreprises, comme c'est le cas, sans qu'il y ait d'ailleurs des dérives à l'américaine, notamment au Portugal.

Pourriez-vous donc nous apporter des éclaircissements sur ce que vous appelez des recours efficaces?

  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). – Herr talman! Jag vill tacka kommissionären för ett alldeles utomordentligt bra och viktigt dokument. Många av kollegerna har sagt att för att den inre marknaden skall fungera så behövs det väl upplysta och kunniga konsumenter, en väl fungerande marknad och god konkurrens. Detta är, som vi alla vet, en fråga där nationella intressen står mot EU:s och konsumenternas intressen i viss mån.

Min fråga till kommissionären är hur ni bedömer möjligheterna att få större gehör för en gemensam konsumentpolitik där det också finns möjlighet till vidare åtgärder inom EU:s och EG:s lagstiftning idag jämfört tidigare. Vi vet att det har varit svårt att få gehör hos medlemsstaterna för ett vidare EU åtagande i dessa frågor.

  Christel Schaldemose (PSE). – Hr. formand! Jeg vil gerne rette en tak til kommissæren for fremlæggelsen af denne meddelelse. Jeg er begejstret for kommissærens energi og vilje til at ville gøre noget for forbrugerpolitikken, og jeg er også særlig glad for, at hun sætter fokus på hele spørgsmålet omkring internethandel og de rettigheder og de muligheder, der skal være på dette område. Det tror jeg vil være vældig interessant for mange borgere. Men mit spørgsmål til kommissæren vedrører det, der her blev sagt om, at målet er, at uanset hvor man handler i EU, skal man være beskyttet på samme måde. Måske er det bare mig, der ikke forstår det helt tydeligt. Ønsker kommissæren, at vi skal harmonisere reglerne, således at der gælder ens regler over hele EU, eller skal der være minimumsregler, således at der er visse lande, der - hvis de vil - kan have regler på et højere niveau?

  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). – Commissaris, welkom en dank voor uw voortvarende aanpak met dit voorstel. Met de coördinatoren in de Commissie interne markt, mevrouw Gebhardt en de heer Harbour, zijn we het eens dat de interne markt aantrekkelijk moet zijn en dat daarin de mens centraal moet staan. Als marktliberaal denk ik dat de markt bestaat uit aanbod en vraag. Wie is de vraag? Dat is de consument.

Wel ben ik bang dat wij in het verleden teveel de nadruk hebben gelegd op de paternalistische aanpak, het te veel beschermen van de consument die wordt overvoerd met informatie en door de bomen het bos niet meer ziet. Uw stijl, de nieuwe wind die u laat waaien, past mij wel want daarop wilt u toch iets minder de nadruk gaan leggen. Ik hoop dat het actieplan niet met extra restricties en extra regels komt, maar ik heb er vertrouwen in dat dat niet gebeurt.

Ik heb een vraag aan u. Bent u ook voornemens om de bestaande wetgeving door te lichten om de mogelijkheid te bezien of die kan worden vereenvoudigd waardoor de interne markt aantrekkelijk is en blijft ook in de toekomst, vooral voor de consumenten? Want informatie is prima, keuzevrijheid is prima, maar we moeten de mensen niet overvoeren met informatie en we moeten hen als volwassenen behandelen.

  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). – Herr Präsident, liebe Frau Kommissarin! Ich bin mit den Ausführungen der letzten beiden Redner nicht ganz einverstanden. Darum freue ich mich, noch einmal sagen zu können, dass wir Ihre ambitionierten Ziele unterstützen.

Der Mix, den Sie für verschiedene Optionen genannt haben, hört sich sehr gut an, aber wir bezweifeln, ob er wirklich effizient ist, denn Sie haben nicht nur mit den unterschiedlichen Bedenken der Mitgliedstaaten zu tun, sondern auch mit sehr mächtigen Wirtschaftsinteressen. Deshalb möchten wir Ihnen mit auf den Weg geben, dass Ihre Kolleginnen und Kollegen in der Kommission – nämlich Neelie Kroes, Günter Verheugen, Charlie McCreevy, Markos Kyprianou – sich in der europäischen Öffentlichkeit erst Respekt verschafft haben, indem sie in ihrem Fachbereich wirksame, handfeste Sanktionen verhängten. Das möchten wir Ihnen mit auf den Weg geben.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE-DE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Prawdą jest, że zbyt mało zajmujemy się polityką konsumencką, a w szczególności jej obszarem zdrowotnym i ochroną młodego konsumenta. Stan zdrowotny społeczeństwa decyduje bowiem o naszej wydajności, produktywności, a to wpływa na wielkość wzrostu gospodarczego, co z kolei zapewnia określony poziom życia, a więc i konsumpcji.

Wreszcie problem zasadniczy to warunki życia dzieci i młodzieży, które określone są przez warunki socjalne, zdrowotne, edukacyjne i środowiskowe. To wszystko przyczynia się do wzrostu urodzeń i wychowania zdrowych, wykształconych młodych ludzi, którzy decydują o naszej przyszłości.

Jak będziemy wspierać te zadania na szczeblu Unii? Co natomiast powinno być realizowane w państwach członkowskich?

Prawdą jest to, co powiedziała pani komisarz, że jest to zadanie i pytanie do wszystkich komisarzy.

  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’!

  Przewodniczący. Przechodzimy do kolejnego punktu obrad.

IN THE CHAIR: DIANA WALLIS
Vice-President