Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-10-Speech-1-093"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2005-01-10"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Müükide edendamine siseturul⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050110.14.1-093"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-01-10-Speech-1-094⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Bill Newton Dunn⁶
lpv:spoken text	". Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@en⁴
lpv:spokenAs	member; ALDE (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² unknown; Liberal Democrat Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² substitute; LIBE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)²² substitute; CONT (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)²² member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)²² member; IMCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²²
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@cs¹ ". Fru formand, det glæder mig, at kommissæren er til stede i dag for at hjælpe os med denne forespørgsel. Det var oprindeligt en forespørgsel rettet til Kommissionen og Rådet, fordi forslaget, der blev godkendt af Parlamentet ved førstebehandlingen, har været blokeret i Rådet alt for længe. Formålet med forespørgslen og forhandlingen var at få Rådet til at forklare, hvorfor forslaget er blokeret, og hvad Rådet gør for at komme videre i processen og få sagen tilbage til Parlamentet af hensyn til offentligheden. Desværre har Formandskonferencen i sin visdom overført forespørgslen til denne forhandling, og vi retter nu kun forespørgslen til Kommissionen. Rådet er her slet ikke, men jeg formoder, at en forhandling med den ene part er bedre end ingen forhandling! Forespørgslen omhandler salgsfremmende foranstaltninger. I alle 25 medlemsstater er der forskellige nationale regler om, hvad der er tilladt - lokkevarer, tre for to, gratis prøver. Der er ikke noget indre marked med rettigheder for forhandlere, der krydser grænserne for at operere med samme tilbud og forretningsmæssige værktøjer over hele Europa. Kommissionens oprindelige forslag - som var grundlæggende godt - var at have et indre marked for salgsfremmende teknikker. Forslaget går helt tilbage til forslaget om det indre marked i 1992. Så vidt jeg ved, blev det første gang foreslået i en grønbog i 1996 - for otte år siden. Forslaget blev vedtaget ved førstebehandlingen i 2002 - for to et halvt år siden - men vi har siden da ventet på, at Rådet skulle handle. Der er tydelige fordele, hvis vi kan få forslaget igennem. Større konkurrence og flere valgmuligheder for offentligheden, lavere priser og mere gennemsigtighed. Der vil være mere fleksibilitet for forhandlere på det indre marked og et andet værktøj for markedsføring og erhvervsvirksomhed, som vil skabe velstand og beskæftigelse. Men så længe vi ikke har grænseoverskridende faciliteter, er omkostningerne højere, fordi forhandlerne skal markedsføre forskellige planer for hver af de 25 medlemsstater. Den seneste betænkning om Lissabon-strategien fremhævede det indre marked som en af prioriteterne, og dette er en del af det indre marked. Der er bekymring om behandlingen af børn og mindre virksomheder, og det vil indgå i det forslag, som vi ønsker at få gennemført. De spørgsmål, som jeg ønsker at stille Kommissionen, er dobbelttydige - Rådet mødes i hemmelighed, og Parlamentet kan ikke være til stede, men kommissæren får i det mindste lov til at deltage i møderne og kan fortælle os, hvad der foregår. For det første, hvordan kan vi få spørgsmålet behandlet i Rådet og videre i processen til fordel for borgerne? For det andet, siden forslaget blev stillet for nogle år siden, er euroen blomstret, og der er sket en stor udvikling i e-handelen - handel via internettet - og udvalget ønsker at vide, om det forslag, der oprindeligt blev stillet af Kommissionen, stadig er aktuelt i dag, eller om det er overhalet af udviklingen? Og griber forslaget til direktivet om tjenesteydelser og forslaget til direktivet om illoyal konkurrence ind i det oprindelige forslag om salgsfremmende foranstaltninger? Vi vil gerne have en ny vurdering af, hvor direktivet om salgsfremmende foranstaltninger står. Skal direktivet revideres, eller skal vi blot skubbe på for at få Rådet til at handle hurtigst muligt?"@da² "Frau Präsidentin! Ich bin dem Kommissar sehr dankbar, dass er heute hier ist und uns bei dieser Anfrage unterstützt. Ursprünglich sollte sie an Rat und Kommission gemeinsam gestellt werden, da der Vorschlag, der die erste Lesung im Parlament absolviert hat, im Rat schon viel zu lange blockiert wird. Der Zweck der Anfrage und der Aussprache bestand darin, vom Rat eine Erklärung zu erhalten, warum die Blockade erfolgt und was er zu unternehmen gedenkt, um hier Fortschritte zu erzielen und den Vorschlag zurück ins Parlament zu bringen, damit die Öffentlichkeit davon profitieren kann. Bedauerlicherweise hat die Konferenz der Präsidenten in ihrer Weisheit den Vorschlag auf diese Aussprache gelegt, sodass sich die Anfrage nunmehr nur an die Kommission richtet. Vom Rat ist überhaupt niemand anwesend, aber ich denke, eine halbe Aussprache ist besser als gar keine! Wir haben es mit einem Vorschlag zur Verkaufsförderung zu tun. In jedem der 25 Mitgliedstaaten gibt es andere Gesetze darüber, was gestattet ist – Lockartikel, drei Artikel für den Preis von zweien, das Verteilen kostenloser Proben. Für die Rechte der Einzelhändler, die Grenzen überqueren, um in der gesamten Union mit denselben Angeboten und kommerziellen Instrumenten zu arbeiten, gibt es keinen Binnenmarkt. Der ursprüngliche Vorschlag der Kommission, der wirklich gut durchdacht war, bestand darin, einen Binnenmarkt für Verkaufsförderungsmethoden zu schaffen. Das geht ursprünglich auf den Vorschlag zum Binnenmarkt von 1992 zurück. Soweit ich weiß, wurde dies erstmals 1996 in einem Grünbuch vorgebracht – vor acht Jahren. Die erste Lesung fand 2002 statt – vor zweieinhalb Jahren –, doch seitdem warten wir darauf, dass der Rat etwas unternimmt. Wenn wir den Vorschlag durchbringen könnten, dann wäre das ganz eindeutig mit Vorteilen verbunden. Mehr Wettbewerb und Wahlmöglichkeiten für die Menschen, niedrigere Preise und mehr Transparenz. Die Einzelhändler könnten auf dem gesamten Binnenmarkt flexibler handeln, und es gäbe ein zusätzliches Instrument für Vermarktung und Handel, wodurch Wohlstand und Arbeitsplätze geschaffen werden. Doch solange wir hier keine grenzübergreifenden Regelungen haben, sind die Kosten höher, da die Einzelhändler für jeden der 25 Mitgliedstaaten einen extra Plan ausarbeiten müssen. Im jüngsten Bericht über die Strategie von Lissabon wurde der Binnenmarkt als eine der Prioritäten hervorgehoben, und das ist Teil des Binnenmarktes. Es gibt Bedenken in Bezug auf die Behandlung von Kindern und kleinen Unternehmen, und das wäre ein Teil des Vorschlags, mit dem wir uns unbedingt befassen wollen. Die Fragen, die ich dem Kommissar stellen muss, betreffen zwei Aspekte – der Rat trifft sich im Geheimen, und das Parlament kann nicht dabei sein, doch wenigstens der Kommissar darf im Rat sitzen, damit er uns sagen kann, was geschieht. Erstens: Wie können wir dies durch den Rat bekommen und zum Nutzen der Bürger wieder zum Leben erwecken? Zweitens: Da der Vorschlag vor einigen Jahren verfasst wurde, der Euro sich gut entwickelt hat und der elektronische Geschäftsverkehr – der Handel über das Internet – sich enorm entwickelt hat, würde der Ausschuss gerne wissen, ob der ursprünglich von der Kommission vorgebrachte Vorschlag weiterhin gültig oder mittlerweile überholt ist? Außerdem würden wir gerne wissen, ob die vorgeschlagene Dienstleistungsrichtlinie und die vorgeschlagene Richtlinie über unlautere Geschäftspraktiken im Widerspruch zum ursprünglichen Vorschlag zur Verkaufsförderung stehen? Wir hätten gerne eine neue Einschätzung darüber, wo die Richtlinie über Verkaufsförderung nun steht. Ist eine Revision erforderlich, oder müssen wir lediglich den Rat so schnell wie möglich dazu veranlassen, etwas zu unternehmen?"@de⁹ ". Κυρία Πρόεδρε, είμαι πολύ ευγνώμων στον Επίτροπο που είναι εδώ για να μας βοηθήσει με αυτήν την ερώτηση. Αρχικά, επρόκειτο να τεθεί και στο Συμβούλιο και στην Επιτροπή μαζί, επειδή η πρόταση, η οποία πέρασε την πρώτη της ανάγνωση στο Κοινοβούλιο, έχει συναντήσει εμπόδια στο Συμβούλιο για υπερβολικά μεγάλο διάστημα. Ο σκοπός της ερώτησης και της συζήτησης ήταν να ζητήσουμε από Συμβούλιο να εξηγήσει γιατί έχει παρεμποδιστεί η πρόταση και τι κάνει για να την προωθήσει και να την στείλει πίσω στο Κοινοβούλιο προς όφελος του κοινού. Δυστυχώς, η Διάσκεψη των Προέδρων, παρόλη τη σοφία της, αναπροσάρμοσε αυτήν την πρόταση για αυτήν τη συζήτηση και τώρα θέτουμε την ερώτηση μόνο στην Επιτροπή. Το Συμβούλιο δεν εκπροσωπείται καθόλου εδώ, αλλά υποθέτω ότι είναι καλύτερα να γίνει μισή συζήτηση παρά καθόλου συζήτηση! Αυτή είναι μια πρόταση σχετικά με τις πρακτικές προώθησης των πωλήσεων. Σε καθένα από τα 25 κράτη μέλη υπάρχουν διαφορετικοί εθνικοί νόμοι σχετικά με το τι επιτρέπεται – πώληση κάτω του κόστους, πώληση τριών προϊόντων στην τιμή των δύο, προσφορά δωρεάν δειγμάτων. Δεν υπάρχει ενιαία εσωτερική αγορά ως προς τα δικαιώματα των επιχειρήσεων λιανικού εμπορίου που περνούν τα σύνορα για να λειτουργήσουν με τις ίδιες προσφορές και τα ίδια εμπορικά εργαλεία σε ολόκληρη την Ένωση. Η αρχική πρόταση της Επιτροπής –μια πολύ καλή πρόταση– ήταν να υπάρχει ενιαία αγορά ως προς τις πρακτικές προώθησης των πωλήσεων. Αυτό ανάγεται αρχικά στην πρόταση για την Ενιαία Αγορά του 1992. Εξ όσων γνωρίζω, προτάθηκε για πρώτη φορά σε ένα Πράσινο Βιβλίο το 1996 – πριν από οκτώ χρόνια. Πέρασε την πρώτη ανάγνωση το 2002 –πριν από δυόμισι χρόνια– όμως, από τότε, περιμένουμε τις κινήσεις του Συμβουλίου. Αν μπορέσουμε να περάσουμε αυτήν την πρόταση, τα οφέλη είναι προφανή. Μεγαλύτερος ανταγωνισμός και περισσότερες επιλογές για το κοινό, χαμηλότερες τιμές και περισσότερη διαφάνεια. Για τις επιχειρήσεις λιανικού εμπορίου, θα υπήρχε περισσότερη ευελιξία σε ολόκληρη την ενιαία αγορά και άλλο ένα εργαλείο για την εμπορία και τις συναλλαγές, για την παραγωγή πλούτου και τη δημιουργία θέσεων εργασίας. Όμως, όσο δεν έχουμε διασυνοριακές διευκολύνσεις εδώ, το κόστος είναι υψηλότερο, επειδή οι επιχειρήσεις λιανικού εμπορίου αναγκάζονται να κινηθούν στην αγορά με διαφορετικά σχέδια για καθένα από τα 25 κράτη μέλη. Η πρόσφατη έκθεση για τη Στρατηγική της Λισαβόνας τόνισε ότι η εσωτερική αγορά αποτελεί μία από τις προτεραιότητες, και αυτό είναι μέρος της εσωτερικής αγοράς. Υπάρχουν ανησυχίες σχετικά με την αντιμετώπιση των παιδιών και των μικρών επιχειρήσεων, και αυτό επίσης εντάσσεται στην πρόταση με την οποία επιθυμούμε διακαώς να ασχοληθούμε. Οι ερωτήσεις τις οποίες πρέπει να θέσω στον Επίτροπο έχουν δύο σκέλη – οι συνεδριάσεις του Συμβουλίου είναι μυστικές και το Κοινοβούλιο δεν μπορεί να παρίσταται, όμως τουλάχιστον ο Επίτροπος μπορεί να συμμετέχει στο Συμβούλιο, επομένως μπορεί να μας πει τι συμβαίνει. Κατά πρώτον, πώς μπορούμε να περάσουμε την πρόταση από το Συμβούλιο και να την κάνουμε και πάλι να προχωρήσει προς όφελος των πολιτών; Κατά δεύτερον, εφόσον η πρόταση συντάχθηκε πριν από κάποια χρόνια, το ευρώ ακμάζει και το ηλεκτρονικό εμπόριο –το εμπόριο μέσω του Διαδικτύου– έχει γνωρίσει τεράστια ανάπτυξη, η επιτροπή επιθυμεί να μάθει εάν η πρόταση, όπως είχε κατατεθεί αρχικά από την Επιτροπή, εξακολουθεί να είναι έγκυρη σήμερα ή εάν έχει ξεπεραστεί από τα γεγονότα. Επίσης, μήπως η προτεινόμενη οδηγία για τις υπηρεσίες και η προτεινόμενη οδηγία για τις αθέμιτες εμπορικές πρακτικές έρχονται σε σύγκρουση με την αρχική πρόταση για τις πρακτικές προώθησης των πωλήσεων; Θα θέλαμε μια νέα εικόνα για το στάδιο στο οποίο βρίσκεται τώρα η οδηγία για τις πρακτικές προώθησης των πωλήσεων. Χρειάζεται αναθεώρηση ή πρέπει απλώς να πιέσουμε το Συμβούλιο να δράσει το ταχύτερο δυνατόν;"@el^10,10 ". Señora Presidenta, estoy muy agradecido al señor Comisario por estar aquí para ayudarnos en esta cuestión. En un principio, la pregunta se pensaba plantear al Consejo y a la Comisión conjuntamente, dado que la propuesta, que ha pasado la primera lectura en el Parlamento, lleva demasiado tiempo bloqueada por el Consejo. Con esta pregunta y este debate se pretendía conseguir que el Consejo explicara los motivos de dicho bloqueo y las medidas que ha tomado para sacar la propuesta adelante y devolverla al Parlamento en beneficio del público. Lamentablemente, la Conferencia de Presidentes, con toda su sabiduría, ha readaptado esta propuesta para este debate y por tanto la pregunta solo se plantea a la Comisión. El Consejo no está presente, pero supongo que un debate a medias es mejor que nada. Se trata de una propuesta sobre las promociones de ventas. La normativa nacional de los 25 Estados miembros regula de forma diferente las actividades admisibles: artículos de gancho, tres al precio de dos, distribución de muestras gratuitas. No existe un mercado interior único en lo que respecta a los derechos de los minoristas que operan en varios países para lanzar las mismas ofertas e instrumentos comerciales en toda la Unión. La propuesta original de la Comisión –completamente acertada– consistía en establecer un mercado único de técnicas de promoción de ventas. Esta iniciativa se remonta originalmente a la propuesta de mercado único de 1992, que según tengo entendido se incluyó por primera vez en un Libro Verde en 1996, hace ocho años. Aunque fue aprobada en primera lectura hace dos años y medio, en 2002, desde entonces seguimos esperando a que el Consejo mueva ficha. De la aprobación de esta propuesta se derivan una serie de ventajas evidentes. Mayor competencia y más posibilidades de elección para el público, precios más bajos y mayor transparencia. Los minoristas contarían con mayor flexibilidad en todo el mercado único y con otro instrumento para el marketing y la actividad comercial, la creación de riqueza y la generación de empleos. No obstante, mientras no existan autorizaciones transfronterizas en este terreno, los costes seguirán siendo superiores porque los minoristas tienen que comercializar planes diferentes para cada uno de los 25 Estados miembros. En el último informe sobre la estrategia de Lisboa se destaca el mercado interior como una de las prioridades, y esta cuestión forma parte del mercado interior. Inquieta el trato de los niños y las pequeñas empresas, y esto formaría parte de la propuesta que deseamos abordar. Las preguntas que tengo que formular al Comisario tienen dos vertientes; el Consejo se reúne a puerta cerrada y el Parlamento no puede asistir, pero al menos el Comisario sí se sienta en el Consejo, de modo que podrá contarnos qué sucede. En primer lugar, ¿cómo podemos lograr que el Consejo tramite la propuesta y esta se ponga en marcha de nuevo por el bien de los ciudadanos? En segundo lugar, teniendo en cuenta que la propuesta se elaboró hace ya algunos años, el euro ha prosperado y el comercio electrónico –a través de Internet– ha experimentado un crecimiento extraordinario, la comisión parlamentaria querría saber si la propuesta de la Comisión sigue siendo válida tal como se presentó originalmente o está superada por los acontecimientos. Por otro lado, queremos preguntar si las directivas propuestas sobre servicios y sobre prácticas comerciales desleales interfieren con la propuesta original sobre las promociones de ventas. Quisiéramos tener noticias acerca de la situación actual de la Directiva sobre promociones de ventas. ¿Es preciso revisarla o basta con presionar al Consejo para que actúe lo antes posible?"@es²⁰ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@et⁵ ". Arvoisa puhemies, olen hyvin kiitollinen komission jäsenelle, että hän on täällä auttamassa meitä tässä kysymyksessä. Alun perin kysymys oli tarkoitus esittää sekä neuvostolle että komissiolle, koska jo parlamentin ensimmäisessä käsittelyssä hyväksytyn ehdotuksen käsittely on ollut aivan liian pitkään pysähdyksissä neuvostossa. Kysymyksen ja keskustelun tavoitteena oli saada neuvosto selittämään, miksi käsittely on pysähdyksissä sekä mitä neuvosto tekee käsittelyn edistämiseksi ja ehdotuksen saamiseksi takaisin parlamentin käsittelyyn ja kansalaisten hyödyksi. Valitettavasti puheenjohtajakokous on viisaudessaan mukauttanut tätä ehdotusta tätä keskustelua varten, ja esitämme sen nyt ainoastaan komissiolle. Neuvostosta ei ole ketään paikalla, mutta kaipa puoli keskustelua on parempi kuin ei mitään! Ehdotus koskee myynninedistämistä. Jokaisessa 25 jäsenvaltiosta on erilaiset kansalliset lait siitä, mikä on sallittua – houkuttimet, kolme kahden hinnalla, ilmaisten näytteiden jakaminen. Yhtenäismarkkinat eivät toteudu sellaisten vähittäiskauppiaiden oikeuksien suhteen, jotka ylittävät rajoja ja haluaisivat käyttää samoja tarjouksia ja kaupankäynnin välineitä koko Euroopan unionin alueella. Komission alkuperäisessä ehdotuksessa – joka oli kaikilta osin hyvä – tavoitteena oli luoda myynninedistämismenetelmien yhtenäismarkkinat. Kaikki alkoi vuoden 1992 yhtenäismarkkinoita koskevasta ehdotuksesta. Sikäli kuin tiedän, asiaa ehdotettiin ensimmäisen kerran vuonna 1996 julkaistussa vihreässä kirjassa – kahdeksan vuotta sitten. Ehdotus hyväksyttiin ensimmäisessä käsittelyssä vuonna 2002 – kaksi ja puoli vuotta sitten – mutta siitä lähtien on odoteltu neuvoston toimia. Ehdotuksen hyväksymisellä on selviä etuja. Se merkitsisi enemmän kilpailua ja vaihtoehtoja kuluttajille, alhaisempia hintoja ja entistä enemmän avoimuutta. Vähittäiskauppiaille ehdotus merkitsisi suurempaa joustavuutta koko yhtenäismarkkinoilla sekä uutta välinettä markkinointiin ja kaupankäyntiin, hyvinvoinnin ja työpaikkojen luomiseen. Niin kauan kuin ei luoda edellytyksiä rajatylittävään toimintaan, kustannukset ovat suuremmat, koska vähittäismyyjien on käytettävä erilaisia ratkaisuja jokaisessa 25 jäsenvaltiosta. Äskettäisessä Lissabonin strategiaa koskevassa kertomuksessa korostettiin, että yhtenäismarkkinoiden toteutuminen on yksi ensisijaisista tavoitteista. Tämä kysymys on osa yhtenäismarkkinoita. Lasten ja pienyritysten kohtelusta ollaan huolissaan. Tämäkin kysymys olisi osa ehdotusta, jota haluaisimme välttämättä käsiteltävän. Minun on esitettävä komission jäsenelle kaksin verroin kysymyksiä – neuvoston kokoukset ovat suljettuja tilaisuuksia eikä parlamentti voi olla paikalla, mutta ainakin komission jäsen saa osallistua neuvoston kokouksiin, joten hän voi kertoa meille, mitä siellä tapahtuu. Ensinnäkin miten saamme tämän asian edistymään neuvostossa ja eteenpäin kansalaisten hyödyksi? Toiseksi koska ehdotus on laadittu jo muutamia vuosia sitten, minkä jälkeen euro on ollut menestys ja sähköinen kaupankäynti – kaupankäynti Internetin välityksellä – on kehittynyt valtavasti, valiokunta haluaisi tietää, onko komission alun perin esittämä ehdotus vielä ajan tasalla vai onko kehitys jo ohittanut sen. Entä vaikuttavatko palveluja koskeva direktiiviehdotus ja sopimattomia kaupallisia menettelyitä koskeva direktiiviehdotus myynninedistämistä koskevaan alkuperäiseen ehdotukseen? Haluaisimme tietää, mikä myynninedistämistä koskevan direktiivin tilanne on nyt. Onko sitä tarkasteltava uudelleen vai onko meidän ainoastaan painostettava neuvostoa toimimaan mahdollisimman nopeasti?"@fi⁷ ". Madame la Présidente, je suis très reconnaissant à M. le commissaire d’être présent ici pour nous aider à résoudre cette question. Initialement, celle-ci devait être portée en même temps devant le Conseil et la Commission, la proposition déjà passée en première lecture au Parlement étant bloquée au niveau du Conseil depuis beaucoup trop longtemps. L’objectif de la question et du débat consistait à faire en sorte que le Conseil explique pourquoi celle-ci est bloquée et ce qu’il entreprend pour faire avancer le dossier et pour que la question retourne devant le Parlement afin de bénéficier au population. Malheureusement, faisant montre de prudence, la Conférence des présidents, a reformulé cette proposition en vue de ce débat et nous ne portons maintenant la question que devant la seule Commission. Le Conseil est complètement absent aujourd’hui, mais je suppose qu’un débat à moitié engagé est toujours préférable à aucun débat du tout! Il s’agit d’une proposition relative aux promotions des ventes. Dans chacun des 25 États membres, il y a des législations nationales différentes qui déterminent ce qui est permis: produits d’attraction, «trois pour le prix de deux», distribution d’échantillons gratuits. Il n’existe pas de marché intérieur des droits des détaillants qui traversent les frontières pour opérer avec les mêmes offres et les mêmes outils commerciaux dans toute l’Union. La proposition initiale de la Commission - qui était foncièrement bonne - consistait à disposer d’un marché unique en matière de techniques de promotion des ventes. Cela remonte initialement à la proposition de marché unique de 1992. Pour autant que je sache, cela a été initialement proposé dans un livre vert datant de 1996, c’est-à-dire il y a huit ans. La proposition est passée en première lecture en 2002 - il y a deux ans et demi - mais, depuis lors, nous attendons toujours que le Conseil se décide à bouger. Elle apporterait des avantages évidents si nous arrivons à la faire passer. Davantage de concurrence et de choix pour le public, des prix plus bas et plus de transparence. Pour les détaillants, il y aurait davantage de flexibilité dans l’ensemble du marché unique et un autre outil de commercialisation et pour faire des affaires, qui créerait de la prospérité et des emplois. Mais tant que nous ne bénéficierons pas de facilités transfrontalières, les coûts seront plus élevés, car les détaillants devront élaborer différents plans adaptés au marché de chacun des 25 États membres. Le récent rapport sur la stratégie de Lisbonne a fait ressortir le marché intérieur comme l’une de ses priorités, or cet aspect fait partie du marché intérieur. Il existe des préoccupations concernant le traitement des enfants et les petites entreprises, qui feraient partie de la proposition que nous tenons beaucoup à aborder. Les questions que je me dois de poser à M. le commissaire sont de deux ordres: le Conseil se réunit en secret et le Parlement ne peut assister à ces réunions, mais le commissaire, lui, au moins, est autorisé à siéger au Conseil et peut donc nous expliquer ce qui se passe. Premièrement, comment pouvons-nous faire franchir à cette question l’étape du Conseil et la faire avancer à nouveau pour le profit de tous les citoyens? Deuxièmement, depuis l’élaboration de la proposition il y a quelques années, l’euro a évolué et le commerce électronique - c’est-à-dire le commerce par l’internet - a connu un énorme développement, et notre commission souhaiterait savoir si la proposition, telle qu’elle avait été initialement avancée par la Commission, reste encore valable aujourd’hui ou si elle a entre-temps été dépassée par les événements. De même, la proposition de directive sur les services et la proposition de directive sur les pratiques commerciales déloyales interfèrent-elles avec la proposition initiale sur les promotions des ventes? Nous aimerions entendre un nouveau point de vue sur la situation actuelle de la directive relative aux promotions des ventes. Doit-elle être revue ou bien suffit-il que nous poussions le Conseil à agir le plus rapidement possible?"@fr⁸ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@hu¹¹ "Signora Presidente, sono molto grato al Commissario che è presente tra noi e intende apportare il suo contributo al dibattito su quest’interrogazione. Inizialmente l’interrogazione avrebbe dovuto essere presentata al Consiglio e alla Commissione congiuntamente, perché la proposta – che ha superato la fase di prima lettura in Parlamento – è stata bloccata in Consiglio troppo a lungo. L’obiettivo dell’interrogazione e della discussione era quello di avere una spiegazione dal Consiglio sul motivo per cui si fosse bloccata e che cosa il Consiglio stesse facendo per farla procedere e riportarla in Parlamento a tutto vantaggio dell’opinione pubblica. Purtroppo, la Conferenza dei presidenti, nella sua saggezza, ha modificato la proposta ai fini di questa discussione e adesso presentiamo l’interrogazione soltanto alla Commissione. Il Consiglio non è presente, ma credo comunque che mezza discussione sia meglio di niente. Questa è una proposta sulla promozione delle vendite. In ognuno dei 25 Stati membri esistono leggi nazionali diverse che consentono diverse pratiche promozionali – vendita di articoli sottocosto a fini propagandistici, tre al prezzo di due, distribuzione di campioni gratuiti. Non esiste un mercato interno unico quanto ai diritti dei dettaglianti che attraversano le frontiere per esercitare la propria attività con le stesse offerte e gli stessi strumenti commerciali in tutta l’Unione. La prima proposta della Commissione – una proposta estremamente valida – era di realizzare un mercato unico per le tecniche di promozione di vendita. Si risale così alla proposta del 1992, che prevedeva l’istituzione del mercato unico. A quanto mi risulta, questa proposta è stata avanzata per la prima volta in un Libro verde nel 1996 – otto anni fa. Ha superato la fase della prima lettura nel 2002 – due anni e mezzo fa –, ma da allora aspettiamo che il Consiglio si muova. I vantaggi che potremmo ottenere se riusciremo a farla passare sono ovvi: maggiore concorrenza e scelta per il pubblico, prezzi più bassi e maggiore trasparenza. I dettaglianti godrebbero di maggiore flessibilità in tutto il mercato unico e di un altro strumento per commercializzare i propri prodotti e svolgere la propria attività, creando benessere e posti di lavoro. Tuttavia, finché non disponiamo di servizi transfrontalieri, i costi saranno più alti perché i dettaglianti devono operare secondo piani di commercializzazione diversi in ognuno dei 25 Stati membri. Il recente rapporto sulla strategia di Lisbona ha sottolineato che il mercato interno è una delle nostre priorità e questo problema fa parte del mercato interno. Sussistono preoccupazioni in merito al trattamento riservato ai bambini e alle piccole imprese e ciò rientra nella proposta che desideriamo discutere. Le domande che intendo sottoporre al Commissario hanno un doppio destinatario – il Consiglio si riunisce in segreto e il Parlamento non può essere presente, ma se non altro il Commissario può partecipare al Consiglio e quindi può dirci che cosa sta succedendo. In primo luogo, come possiamo sbloccare la proposta in sede di Consiglio e riavviarne la procedura a vantaggio dei cittadini? In secondo luogo, dal momento che la proposta è stata elaborata alcuni anni fa, l’euro ha prosperato e il commercio elettronico – ossia via si è sviluppato enormemente, la commissione parlamentare vorrebbe sapere se la proposta inizialmente avanzata dalla Commissione è ancora valida oggi o è stata superata dagli eventi. Inoltre, le due direttive che sono state proposte, quella sui servizi e quella sulle pratiche commerciali disoneste, interferiscono con la proposta originale sulla promozione delle vendite? Vorremmo nuove informazioni in merito all’attuale situazione della direttiva sulla promozione delle vendite; dev’essere soggetta a revisione o dobbiamo soltanto sollecitare il Consiglio affinché agisca nel più breve tempo possibile?"@it¹² "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@lt¹⁴ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@lv¹³ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@mt¹⁵ ". Mevrouw de Voorzitter, ik ben de commissaris bijzonder erkentelijk dat hij hier aanwezig is om ons met deze vraag te helpen. Het was oorspronkelijk de bedoeling de vraag te stellen aan de Raad en de Commissie tezamen, aangezien het voorstel, dat in de eerste lezing door het Parlement is behandeld, in de Raad al veel te lang wordt tegengehouden. Het doel van de vraag en het debat was de Raad te laten uitleggen waarom het voorstel wordt tegengehouden en wat hij doet om vooruitgang te boeken zodat het ten behoeve van het publiek opnieuw door het Parlement kan worden behandeld. Helaas heeft de Conferentie van voorzitters in haar wijsheid ons voorstel voor dit debat aangepast en dus stellen we de vraag nu alleen aan de Commissie. De Raad is helemaal niet aanwezig, maar een half debat is tenslotte nog altijd beter dan helemaal geen debat! Het gaat om een voorstel voor een verordening betreffende verkoopbevordering. In elk van de 25 lidstaten gelden weer andere nationale wetten met betrekking tot wat er op dit vlak is toegestaan – reclameartikelen, drie halen twee betalen, het uitdelen van gratis proefproducten. Er is geen gemeenschappelijke interne markt voor de rechten van detailhandelaars die de grens over gaan om met dezelfde aanbiedingen en commerciële middelen overal in de Unie te opereren. Het oorspronkelijke voorstel van de Commissie – een degelijk stuk – voorzag in een interne markt voor verkoopbevorderingstechnieken. De oorsprong hiervan ligt in het voorstel over de interne markt van 1992. Voor zover ik weet, werd dit voor het eerst voorgesteld in een groenboek in 1996 – acht jaar geleden. Het voorstel is in de eerste lezing behandeld in 2002 – tweeënhalf jaar geleden – maar sindsdien zijn we nog steeds aan het wachten tot de Raad actie onderneemt. Als we dit voorstel erdoor kunnen krijgen, zal dit duidelijke voordelen opleveren: meer concurrentie en keuze voor het publiek, lagere prijzen en meer transparantie. Voor detailhandelaars zou er binnen de gehele interne markt meer flexibiliteit ontstaan en zij zouden een extra instrument in handen krijgen op het gebied van marketing en zakendoen, waardoor welvaart en banen worden gecreëerd. Zolang we op dit terrein echter niet over grensoverschrijdende faciliteiten beschikken, zijn de kosten hoger, omdat detailhandelaars verschillende marketingplannen moeten hebben voor elk van de 25 lidstaten. In het onlangs verschenen verslag over de Lissabon-strategie werd de interne markt aangewezen als een van de prioriteiten, en dit is een onderdeel van die interne markt. Er bestaat bezorgdheid over de behandeling van kinderen en kleine bedrijven, en ook dat zou deel uitmaken van het voorstel dat we graag willen behandelen. De vraag die ik aan de commissaris moet stellen is tweeledig – de Raad vergadert achter gesloten deuren en het Parlement mag daarbij niet aanwezig zijn, maar de commissaris heeft wel zitting in de Raad, en hij kan ons derhalve vertellen wat er gebeurt. Ten eerste, hoe kunnen we dit voorstel ten behoeve van de burgers door de Raad loodsen en de zaak weer in beweging krijgen? Ten tweede, sinds het voorstel enkele jaren geleden werd opgesteld, is de euro tot bloei gekomen en heeft e-commerce – de handel via internet – zich enorm ontwikkeld, en de commissie wil dan ook graag weten of het voorstel zoals dat oorspronkelijk door de Commissie is ingediend thans nog waardevol is of dat het inmiddels is achterhaald? Verder willen we weten of de voorstellen voor de dienstenrichtlijn en voor de richtlijn oneerlijke handelspraktijken verenigbaar zijn met het oorspronkelijke voorstel voor een verordening betreffende verkoopbevordering. We zouden graag een beoordeling krijgen van de actuele stand van zaken met betrekking tot de verordening betreffende verkoopbevordering. Moet het voorstel worden herzien of moeten we de Raad alleen zo snel mogelijk tot actie zien te bewegen?"@nl³ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@pl¹⁶ "Senhora Presidente, estou extremamente grato ao Senhor Comissário por estar presente e responder a esta pergunta. Inicialmente, era para ser colocada ao Conselho e à Comissão em conjunto, porque a proposta, que passou já a sua fase de primeira leitura no Parlamento, ficou bloqueada no Conselho por demasiado tempo. O objectivo da pergunta e do debate era fazer com que o Conselho explicasse as razões que o levaram a bloqueá-la e o que estará a fazer para a avançar e fazê-la regressar ao Parlamento, para benefício da população. Infelizmente, a Conferência dos Presidentes, na sua sabedoria, reajustou a apresentação esta proposta para este debate e apresentamos, desta feita, a pergunta apenas à Comissão. O Conselho não está presente, mas suponho que metade de um debate é melhor do que debate nenhum! Trata-se de uma proposta sobre as promoções das vendas. Em cada um dos 25 Estados-Membros existem leis nacionais sobre o que é permitido – saldos, três pelo preço de dois, distribuição de amostras gratuitas. Não existe um mercado interno único no que respeita aos direitos dos retalhistas que atravessam as fronteiras para operar, com as mesmas ofertas e instrumentos comerciais, em toda a União. A proposta original da Comissão – uma proposta bastante positiva – era a da criação de um mercado único em matéria de técnicas de promoção de vendas. Isto remete-nos para a proposta inicial relativa ao mercado único de 1992. Tanto quanto sei, a proposta aparece pela primeira vez num livro verde em 1996 – há oito anos. Teve a sua primeira leitura em 2002 – há dois anos e meio – mas, desde então, temos estado à espera que o Conselho actue. Serão óbvios os benefícios se conseguirmos levar esta questão a bom porto. Mais concorrência e mais escolha para o público, preços mais baixos e maior transparência. Para os retalhistas, haverá maior flexibilidade em todo o mercado único e mais um instrumento para a comercialização e as vendas, criando riqueza e gerando emprego. Contudo, enquanto não dispusermos, nesta matéria, de facilidades transfronteiriças, os custos serão mais elevados, pois os retalhistas terão de comercializar planos diferentes para cada um dos 25 Estados-Membros. O relatório recente sobre a Estratégia de Lisboa identificou o mercado interno como uma das prioridades, e esta questão insere-se no mercado interno. Existem preocupações sobre o tratamento das crianças e sobre as pequenas empresas, questões que farão parte da proposta que aguardamos ansiosamente poder debater. As perguntas que pretendo apresentar ao Senhor Comissário possuem duas vertentes – o Conselho reúne com secretismo e o Parlamento não pode estar presente, mas pelo menos o Senhor Comissário tem a possibilidade de se sentar no Conselho, pelo que poderá dizer-nos o que lá se passa. Em primeiro lugar, como poderemos fazer com que a questão avance no Conselho e levá-lo a actuar, para benefício dos nossos cidadãos? Em segundo lugar, desde que a proposta foi aprovada, há uns anos, o euro floresceu e o comércio electrónico – o comércio via Internet – sofreu um enorme desenvolvimento, pelo que a comissão gostaria de saber se a proposta, tal como apresentada originalmente pela Comissão, se mantém válida hoje, ou se terá sido ultrapassada pelos acontecimentos? Mais, será que a proposta de directiva relativa aos serviços e a proposta de directiva relativa às práticas comerciais desleais interferirão com a proposta original relativa às promoções de vendas? Gostaríamos de obter uma nova visão sobre o estado actual da directiva relativa às promoções de vendas. Será preciso revê-la, ou bastará pressionar o Conselho para que actue o mais rapidamente possível?"@pt¹⁷ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@sk¹⁸ "Madam President, I am very grateful to the Commissioner for being here to help us with this question. Originally, it was to be put to the Council and the Commission together, because the proposal, which has passed its first reading in Parliament, has been blocked in the Council for far too long. The purpose of the question and debate was to get the Council to explain why it is blocked and what it is doing to move it forwards and get it back to Parliament to benefit the public. Unfortunately, the Conference of Presidents, in its wisdom, has readjusted this proposal for this debate and we are now putting the question to the Commission only. The Council is not here at all, but I suppose that half a debate is better than none! This is a proposal on sales promotions. In each of the 25 Member States there are different national laws about what is permitted – loss leaders, three for two, giving away free samples. There is no single internal market in the rights of retailers who cross frontiers to operate with the same offers and commercial tools right across the Union. The original Commission proposal – a thoroughly good one – was to have a single market in sales promotion techniques. This goes back originally to the 1992 Single Market proposal. As far as I know, this was first proposed in a Green Paper in 1996 – eight years ago. It passed its first reading in 2002 – two-and-a-half years ago – but, since then, we have been waiting for the Council to move. There are obvious benefits if we can get this through. More competition and choice for the public, lower prices and more transparency. For retailers, there would be more flexibility across the whole single market, and another tool for marketing and doing business, creating wealth and generating jobs. But so long as we do not have cross-border facilities here, costs are higher because retailers have to market different plans for each of the 25 Member States. The recent report on the Lisbon Strategy highlighted the internal market as one of the priorities, and this is part of the internal market. There are concerns about the treatment of children and small businesses, and that would be part of the proposal that we are anxious to deal with. The questions I must put to the Commissioner are twofold – the Council meets in secret and Parliament cannot be there, but at least the Commissioner gets to sit in the Council, so he can tell us what is going on. Firstly, how can we move this through the Council and get it moving again for the benefit of the citizens? Secondly, since the proposal was drawn up some years ago, the euro has flourished and e-commerce – trading via the Internet – has developed enormously, the committee would like to know whether the proposal as originally put forward by the Commission is still valid today or has been overtaken by events? Also, do the proposed directive on services and the proposed directive on unfair commercial practices interfere with the original proposal on sales promotions? We would like a new view on where the Sales Promotion Directive now stands. Does it need revision or do we just need to push the Council into action as fast as possible?"@sl¹⁹ ". Fru talman! Jag är mycket tacksam för att kommissionsledamoten är här för att hjälpa oss med denna fråga. Från början var den tänkt att ställas till rådet och kommissionen tillsammans, eftersom det förslag som gått igenom första behandlingen i parlamentet har blockerats i rådet alldeles för länge. Syftet med frågan och debatten var att få rådet att förklara varför förslaget har blockerats och vad rådet gör för att föra ärendet framåt och se till att det åter hamnar hos parlamentet, till nytta för allmänheten. Tyvärr har talmanskonferensen i sin vishet ändrat om förslaget till denna debatt, och vi ställer nu frågan endast till kommissionen. Rådet är inte här över huvud taget, men jag antar att en halv debatt är bättre än ingen alls! Det rör sig om ett förslag om säljfrämjande åtgärder. Alla 25 medlemsstater har olika nationella lagar för vad som är tillåtet: lockvaror, tre för två eller gratisprov. Det finns ingen inre marknad när det gäller rättigheterna för återförsäljare med gränsöverskridande verksamhet att använda samma erbjudanden och marknadsföringsverktyg över hela unionen. Kommissionens ursprungliga förslag, som är mycket bra, gick ut på att skapa en inre marknad för säljfrämjande åtgärder. Ärendet går ursprungligen tillbaka till förslaget om den inre marknaden från 1992. Såvitt jag vet lades ett förslag fram för första gången för åtta år sedan, i en grönbok 1996. Detta gick igenom i första behandlingen 2002, för två och ett halvt år sedan, men sedan dess har vi väntat på att rådet skall handla. Det finns uppenbara fördelar om vi kan få igenom detta, till exempel ökad konkurrens och fler alternativ för allmänheten samt lägre priser och bättre överskådlighet. Återförsäljarna skulle få större flexibilitet på hela den inre marknaden och ytterligare ett instrument för marknadsföring och affärer, vilket skapar välstånd och arbetstillfällen. Men så länge det saknas gränsöverskridande möjligheter på området kommer kostnaderna att vara högre, eftersom återförsäljarna måste marknadsföra med olika metoder i var och en av de 25 medlemsstaterna. I den senaste rapporten om Lissabonstrategin prioriterades den inre marknaden högt, och detta är en del av den inre marknaden. Det finns farhågor om behandlingen av barn och småföretag, och detta skulle ingå i det förslag som vi är angelägna om att behandla. De frågor jag måste ställa till kommissionsledamoten är två. Rådet träffas i hemlighet och parlamentet kan inte vara där, men kommissionsledamoten får åtminstone sitta med i rådet, så han kan berätta för oss vad som pågår. För det första: Hur kan vi få frågan genom rådet och aktualisera den igen till förmån för allmänheten? För det andra: Förslaget utarbetades för några år sedan. Sedan dess har euron blomstrat, och den elektroniska handeln – handeln via Internet – har utvecklats oerhört. Utskottet skulle vilja veta om det förslag som kommissionen lade fram från början fortfarande gäller eller om händelseutvecklingen har gjort det inaktuellt? Är det dessutom så att det föreslagna direktivet om tjänster och det föreslagna direktivet om otillbörliga affärsmetoder inkräktar på det ursprungliga förslaget om säljfrämjande åtgärder? Vi skulle vilja få en uppfattning om hur det i dagsläget förhåller sig med direktivet om säljfrämjande åtgärder. Behöver det ses över eller måste vi helt enkelt få rådet att agera så fort som möjligt?"@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(ΕΝ)"¹⁰ "Author"^{5,19,15,1,18,18,14,14,16,16,11,13,4} "Internet"¹² "Newton Dunn (ALDE ),"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,10,13,4} "συντάκτης"¹⁰