Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-03-13-Speech-2-206"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070313.21.2-206"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"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."@en4
|
| lpv:translated text |
"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."@cs1
"Tak, hr. formand. Jeg ved ikke, om De alle vil blive skuffede eller ej, men min fødselsdag er den 22. juni. I dag er det kommissær Frattinis fødselsdag. Hvis De vil tillade mig det, vil jeg viderebringe alle disse gode ønsker og lykønskninger til ham. Jeg kan forsikre Dem om, at han fuldt ud fortjener det. Men under alle omstændigheder tak, og jeg håber, at jeg den 22. juni igen kan være her i Parlamentet, så jeg også får min del!
Lad os begynde med spørgsmålene. Fru Plestinská, det er virkelig meget vigtigt, at alle vores politikker har økonomisk støtte, og vi vil gøre vores bedste for at tilgodese dem inden for budgettets rammer. Jeg tror, at det vigtigste for Dem er, hvordan De ser politikken, og hvordan vi kan maksimere de ressourcer, vi har, over hele budgettet. Det drejer sig om uddannelse, oplysning, europæiske forbrugercentre og styrkelse af håndhævelsen. Vi kan forestille os mange andre måder at bruge pengene på, men disse er de vigtigste. I denne forbindelse er jeg mere end tilfreds med, at De nævnte EU's kalender
. Så sent som i dag har jeg fordelt adskillige eksemplarer under mødet i Kommissionen som en påmindelse om, hvor vigtigt et redskab den er. Det vil forblive en af de bedste måder, hvorpå vi kan holde os i kontakt med den yngre generation.
Når vi taler om den yngre generation, mener jeg, at det, vi har i sinde med hensyn til digitale rettigheder, i høj grad ligger på linje med det, de efterlyser. I overmorgen har jeg et møde i Berlin om digitale rettigheder, og jeg vil særlig henvende mig til de yngre medlemmer af forsamlingen. På denne måde kunne de blive mere interesserede i, hvad det indebærer at være forbruger i denne verden under udvikling, Europa.
Og nu kommer jeg til fru Gebhardts spørgsmål. Det er altid meget vigtigt at have en præcis politik og en præcis vision for, hvordan vi kan anvende rammedirektivet, hvad slags det bør være - for der kan kun være et - og hvilken inflydelse sektorerne skal have. Jeg går ind for denne blandede tilgang. Jeg er sikker på, at disse horisontale regler, der i lige høj grad anvendes på typiske forbrugerkontrakter og typiske forbrugerrettigheder, hvad enten det drejer sig om håndhævelse, eller hvad det nu kan være - det er måske ikke sjælen, men det er kernen i forbrugerbeskyttelse - er meget vigtige.
Men vi kan ikke udtømme alle problemer med sektorerne. Derfor mener jeg, at vi også i høj grad bør koncentrere vores opmærksomhed om at få en fornuftig gennemførelse af forbrugerbeskyttelse, og i særdeleshed når det drejer sig om energi, transport og telekommunikation. Det er derfor, jeg mener, at det er meget vigtigt at indgå i Rådet (konkurrenceevne). Desuden er kommissæren for konkurrenceevne en naturlig allieret for forbrugerpolitikken.
Så med hensyn til fru Thyssens spørgsmål om erstatning, tænker jeg ikke på kollektive søgsmål som i USA. Det er ikke en John Grisham-historie. Vi har en anden europæisk fortælling, og den drejer sig meget mere om kollektiv erstatning. Vi har denne kollektive erstatning i mindst 10 lande, og i et land, Holland, er den tættere på kollektive søgsmål, men er stadig ikke det samme. Det er ikke den eneste form for kollektiv erstatning. Vi kan bruge alternative måder at løse konflikter på, der er vigtige, afprøve enkeltsager og meget andet. Det drejer sig ikke om maksimal harmonisering, men om flaskehalse - hvornår og hvordan vi kan finde frem til dem - og om at fokusere opmærksomheden på dette, når det gælder det højest mulige niveau af harmonisering.
Så hr. Harbour, tak fordi De har sagt, at jeg prøver at forsvare forbrugerne. Jeg vil meget gerne dele denne rolle med enhver af mine medkommissærer, for jeg drømmer om at få en beskytter af forbrugerne fra de andre sektorer.
Med hensyn til Rom-konventionen mener jeg, at vi gennem fuld harmonisering i det mindste kan overvinde nogle af manglerne ved Rom I. Lige nu bør virksomheder, når det gælder Rom I, rette sig efter reglerne i det land, hvor problemet har sit udspring, hvilket ikke forøger byrden for erhvervslivet i væsentlig grad.
Jeg tror, jeg næsten har besvaret hr. Schwabs spørgsmål om, hvilken form for harmonisering vi sigter imod, og om kollektive søgsmål. Jeg vil ikke belaste formandens tålmodighed ved at give lange svar, men jeg vil gerne fortsætte denne samtale med Dem alle."@da2
".
Danke, Herr Präsident! Ich weiß ja nicht, ob Sie jetzt alle enttäuscht sein werden, aber mein Geburtstag ist erst am 22. Juni. Heute hat Kommissar Frattini Geburtstag. Wenn Sie gestatten, werden ich ihm all die guten Wünsche und Glückwünsche übermitteln. Ich kann Ihnen versichern, dass er sie voll und ganz verdient. Ich danke Ihnen jedenfalls und hoffe, dass ich am 22. Juni wieder hier im Parlament sein kann, um dann Ihre Glückwünsche entgegenzunehmen!
Fangen wir nun mit den Fragen an. Frau Pleštinská, finanzielle Unterstützung ist für alle unsere Politiken von größter Bedeutung, und wir werden alles daran setzen, diese Politiken in unserem Etat unterzubringen. Meines Erachtens kommt es aber vor allem darauf an, was Sie von der jeweiligen Politik halten und wie wir die vorhandenen Mittel optimaler in unserem Haushaltsplan einsetzen können. Dies gilt für Bildung, Information, die Europäischen Verbraucherzentren und eine bessere Rechtsdurchsetzung. Natürlich kommen für diese Mittel noch viele andere Bereiche in Frage, aber das sind nun einmal unsere Prioritäten. Insofern freue ich mich außerordentlich, dass Sie auf den Europäischen Verbraucherkalender zu sprechen kamen. Erst heute habe ich auf der Sitzung des Kommissionskollegiums verschiedene Exemplare davon verteilt, um an dieses wichtige Instrument zu erinnern. Dies wird auch künftig einer der besten Wege sein, um die junge Generation zu erreichen.
Da wir gerade von der jungen Generation sprechen, möchte ich darauf hinweisen, dass sich meiner Meinung nach unsere Vorstellungen über digitale Rechte größtenteils mit den Erwartungen der jungen Menschen decken. Übermorgen nehme ich an einer Sitzung über digitale Rechte in Berlin teil und werde insbesondere die jungen Zuhörer ansprechen. So möchte ich bei ihnen mehr Interesse dafür wecken, was es eigentlich heißt, Verbraucher in dieser sich stark verändernden Welt – in Europa – zu sein.
Und nun komme ich zur Frage von Frau Gebhardt. Es ist stets ganz wichtig, eine präzise Politik zu verfolgen und eine genaue Vorstellung davon zu haben, wie wir die Rahmenrichtlinie einsetzen können, welche Gestalt sie annehmen sollte – denn es kann nur eine geben – und welchen Einfluss wir auf die jeweilige Branche nehmen können. Mir gefällt dieses Mischkonzept. Ich bin mir sicher, dass solche horizontalen Vorschriften von ausschlaggebender Bedeutung sind, denn sie finden auf typische Verbraucherverträge und typische Verbraucherrechte gleichermaßen Anwendung und beziehen sich auf die Umsetzung bzw. jegliche andere Bereiche – dies ist vielleicht nicht der herkömmliche Ansatz, dafür aber das Herzstück des Verbraucherschutzes.
Wir können uns jedoch nicht mit sämtlichen branchenspezifischen Problemen beschäftigen. Daher vertrete ich die Ansicht, dass wir unsere Aufmerksamkeit auch ganz gezielt auf die ordnungsgemäße Einhaltung der Verbraucherschutzvorschriften richten sollten, vor allem was die Bereiche Energie, Verkehr und Telekommunikation betrifft. Deshalb ist meiner Ansicht nach die Mitwirkung im Rat „Wettbewerbsfähigkeit“ von großer Bedeutung. Auch die Wettbewerbskommissarin ist eine echte Verbündete der Verbraucherschützer.
Nun möchte ich auf die Frage von Frau Thyssen zu den Rechtsmitteln eingehen. Ich habe jetzt nicht im Kopf, wie die Gemeinschaftsklage – die so genannte „class action“ – in den USA aussieht. Das hier ist kein Roman von John Grisham. Wir schreiben einen anderen, einen europäischen Roman, und der dreht sich vielmehr um Sammelklagen. Die gibt es in mindestens zehn Ländern, wobei diese Art der Klage in einem Land – den Niederlanden – eher an eine Gemeinschaftsklage erinnert, aber nicht mit ihr identisch ist. Das A und O sind aber nicht nur Sammelklagen. Wir können auch das wichtige Instrument der alternativen Streitbeilegungsverfahren, Testfälle und viele andere Rechtsmittel einsetzen. Es geht ja nicht um eine Vollharmonisierung, sondern um Flaschenhälse – wann und wie wir diese erkennen können – und die Schwerpunktsetzung auf diesen Bereich, um eine weitestgehende Harmonisierung zu erreichen.
Also Herr Harbour, vielen Dank für Ihre Äußerung, dass ich versuchen würde, eine Vorreiterin der Verbraucherpolitik zu werden. Ich würde diese Rolle auch gern mit anderen Kommissionskollegen teilen, denn ich träume davon, auch in anderen Ressorts auf Vorreiter der Verbraucherpolitik zu treffen.
Was das Übereinkommen von Rom betrifft, vertrete ich die Ansicht, dass wir durch eine vollständige Harmonisierung zumindest einige Schwachstellen von Rom I ausbessern können. Nach Maßgabe von Rom I haben sich Unternehmen derzeit an die Bestimmungen des Landes zu halten, in denen das Problem aufgetreten ist, wodurch den Unternehmen keine größere Last auferlegt wurde.
Meiner Ansicht nach habe ich die Frage von Herrn Schwab, welche Art der Harmonisierung wir anstreben und wie das Instrument der Sammelklage eingesetzt werden soll, im Wesentlichen beantwortet. Ich möchte nicht die Geduld des Präsidenten überstrapazieren, indem ich hier ausschweifende Antworten gebe. Aber ich werde diese Diskussion gerne mit Ihnen allen fortsetzen."@de9
"Σας ευχαριστώ, κύριε Πρόεδρε. Δεν ξέρω αν θα απογοητευθείτε ή όχι, αλλά τα γενέθλιά μου είναι στις 22 Ιουνίου. Σήμερα είναι τα γενέθλια του Επιτρόπου Frattini. Αν μου επιτρέπετε, θα μεταβιβάσω όλες αυτές τις καλές ευχές και τα συγχαρητήρια σ’ εκείνον. Σας βεβαιώνω ότι τα δικαιούται πλήρως. Εν πάση περιπτώσει, σας ευχαριστώ και ελπίζω ότι στις 22 Ιουνίου θα μπορέσω να παραβρεθώ εδώ στο Κοινοβούλιο ξανά για να δεχθώ το δικό μου μερίδιο ευχών!
Ας ξεκινήσουμε με τις ερωτήσεις. Κυρία Pleštinská, είναι πραγματικά πολύ σημαντικό να υποστηριχθούν οικονομικά όλες οι πολιτικές μας και θα κάνουμε ό,τι μπορούμε για να τις καλύψουμε στο πλαίσιο του προϋπολογισμού μας. Πιστεύω ότι το πιο σημαντικό για εσάς είναι το πώς βλέπετε την πολιτική και πώς μπορούμε να μεγιστοποιήσουμε αυτά που έχουμε όσον αφορά τους πόρους μέσω του προϋπολογισμού μας. Αυτό αφορά την εκπαίδευση, την πληροφόρηση, τα ευρωπαϊκά κέντρα καταναλωτών και την ενίσχυση της επιβολής. Μπορούμε να σκεφτούμε πολλούς άλλους τρόπους για να δαπανήσουμε τα χρήματα, αλλά αυτές είναι οι προτεραιότητες. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο, χαίρομαι ιδιαίτερα που αναφέρατε το ημερολόγιο της ΕΕ. Μόλις σήμερα, διένειμα πολλά αντίγραφα κατά τη διάρκεια της συνεδρίασης του Σώματος των Επιτρόπων για να θυμίσουμε πόσο σημαντικό εργαλείο είναι. Αυτός θα παραμείνει ένας από τους καλύτερους τρόπους για να μπορέσουμε να μείνουμε σε επαφή με τη νεότερη γενιά.
Μιλώντας για τη νεότερη γενιά, πιστεύω ότι αυτό που θέλουμε να κάνουμε για τα ψηφιακά δικαιώματα ευθυγραμμίζεται σε μεγάλο βαθμό με αυτό που η νέα γενιά αναζητά. Μεθαύριο, έχω μια σύσκεψη στο Βερολίνο για τα ψηφιακά δικαιώματα και θα απευθυνθώ ειδικά στα νεότερα μέλη του ακροατηρίου. Με αυτόν τον τρόπο θα ενδιαφερθούν περισσότερο για το τι σημαίνει να είναι καταναλωτές σε αυτόν τον επαναστατικό κόσμο μας – την Ευρώπη.
Και τώρα έρχομαι στην ερώτηση της κ. Gebhardt. Είναι πάντα πολύ σημαντικό να έχουμε μια συγκεκριμένη πολιτική και ένα συγκεκριμένο όραμα για το πώς μπορούμε να χρησιμοποιήσουμε την οδηγία-πλαίσιο, τι είδους οδηγία πρέπει να είναι –διότι μόνο ένα είδος μπορεί να είναι– και τι τομεακή επιρροή θα μπορούσαμε να επιδιώξουμε. Είμαι υπέρ αυτής της μικτής προσέγγισης. Είμαι βέβαιη ότι αυτό το οριζόντιο σύνολο κανόνων που ισχύει εξίσου για τις τυπικές συμβάσεις καταναλωτών και τα τυπικά δικαιώματα των καταναλωτών, σε σχέση με την επιβολή ή οτιδήποτε άλλο –μπορεί να μην βρίσκεται στην ψυχή αλλά στον πυρήνα της προστασίας των καταναλωτών– είναι πολύ σημαντικό.
Ωστόσο, δεν μπορούμε να εξαντλήσουμε όλα τα τομεακά προβλήματα. Γι’ αυτό πιστεύω ότι πρέπει επίσης να επικεντρώσουμε την προσοχή μας ιδιαίτερα στην επίτευξη καλών επιδόσεων στην προστασία των καταναλωτών, κυρίως στην ενέργεια, στις μεταφορές και στις τηλεπικοινωνίες. Γι’ αυτό πιστεύω ότι η συμμετοχή στο Συμβούλιο Ανταγωνισμού είναι πολύ σημαντική. Επίσης, η Επίτροπος ανταγωνισμού είναι φυσικός σύμμαχος για την πολιτική των καταναλωτών.
Συνεπώς, όσον αφορά την ερώτηση της κ. Thyssen για την αποζημίωση, δεν έχω στο μυαλό μου το είδος της άσκησης συλλογικής αγωγής που συνηθίζεται στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες. Δεν πρόκειται για μια ιστορία του John Grisham. Εμείς έχουμε μια άλλη, ευρωπαϊκή αφήγηση και σχετίζεται πολύ περισσότερο με τη συλλογική αποζημίωση. Έχουμε αυτή τη συλλογική αποζημίωση σε τουλάχιστον δέκα χώρες και, σε μία χώρα, την Ολλανδία, πλησιάζει περισσότερο σε συλλογική αγωγή, αλλά και πάλι δεν είναι το ίδιο. Αυτή δεν είναι η μόνη συλλογική αποζημίωση. Μπορούμε να χρησιμοποιήσουμε εναλλακτικούς τρόπους επίλυσης των διαφορών, όπως σημαντικές υποθέσεις που δημιουργούν προηγούμενο και πολλές άλλες λύσεις. Το θέμα αυτό δεν αφορά τη μέγιστη εναρμόνιση, αλλά τις καθυστερήσεις –το πότε και πώς μπορούμε να τις εντοπίσουμε – και την εστίαση της προσοχής μας σε αυτό ως προς το υψηλότερο δυνατόν επίπεδο εναρμόνισης.
Συνεπώς, κύριε Harbour, σας ευχαριστώ που είπατε ότι προσπαθώ να γίνω υπέρμαχος των καταναλωτών. Θα μοιραζόμουν ευχαρίστως αυτόν τον ρόλο με οποιονδήποτε από τους συναδέλφους μου Επιτρόπους, διότι ονειρεύομαι να έχω έναν υπέρμαχο των καταναλωτών από τους άλλους τομείς.
Όσον αφορά τη Σύμβαση της Ρώμης, εκτιμώ ότι μέσω της πλήρους εναρμόνισης μπορούμε τουλάχιστον να ξεπεράσουμε κάποιες από τις ελλείψεις της Ρώμης Ι. Αυτή τη στιγμή, όσον αφορά τη Ρώμη Ι, οι επιχειρήσεις πρέπει να συμμορφώνονται με τους κανόνες της χώρας από την οποία προέρχεται το πρόβλημα, κάτι που δεν αυξάνει σημαντικά το βάρος από την πλευρά των επιχειρήσεων.
Νομίζω ότι έχω απαντήσει ουσιαστικά στην ερώτηση του κ. Schwab για το είδος της εναρμόνισης στο οποίο αποσκοπούμε και για τη συλλογική αγωγή. Δεν θέλω να προκαλέσω την υπομονή του Προέδρου δίνοντας μακροσκελείς απαντήσεις, αλλά θα χαρώ να συνεχίσω αυτή τη συζήτηση με όλους σας."@el10
".
Gracias, señor Presidente. No sé si voy a decepcionarles a todos o no, pero mi aniversario es el 22 de junio. Hoy tiene cumpleaños el Comisario Frattini. Si me lo permiten, le pasaré a él todos los buenos deseos y felicitaciones. Les puedo asegurar que los merece plenamente. De cualquier forma, gracias y espero que el 22 de junio pueda estar nuevamente aquí en el Parlamento de alguna manera para recibir la parte que me corresponde.
Empecemos por las preguntas. Señora Pleštinská, es realmente muy importante que todas nuestras políticas cuenten con apoyo financiero y haremos todo lo posible por acomodarlas dentro de los límites de nuestro presupuesto. Creo que lo más importante para su Señoría es cómo ve la política y cómo podemos maximizar los recursos que tenemos a través de nuestro presupuesto. Esto se refiere a la educación, la información, los Centros de Consumidores Europeos y el refuerzo del cumplimiento de las normas. Podemos pensar en muchas otras formas de gastar el dinero, pero estas son las prioridades. A este respecto, me complace sobremanera que mencionara usted la agenda de la UE. Precisamente hoy he distribuido varios ejemplares durante la reunión de la Comisión para recordarles la importancia de este instrumento. Seguirá siendo una de las mejores vías de contacto que tenemos con la generación más joven.
Hablando de la generación más joven, me parece que lo que pensamos sobre los derechos digitales está muy en consonancia con lo que buscan. Pasado mañana tengo una reunión en Berlín sobre derechos digitales y me dirigiré especialmente al público más joven. De esta manera pueden interesarse más por lo que significa ser un consumidor en este nuestro mundo en evolución que es Europa.
Con esto paso a la pregunta de la señora Gebhardt. Es siempre muy importante tener una política precisa y una visión clara de cómo podemos utilizar la directiva marco, de qué clase debería ser –porque solo puede haber una– y a qué tipo de influencia sectorial podemos aspirar. Estoy a favor de este enfoque mixto. Estoy segura de que este conjunto horizontal de normas, aplicadas igualmente a los típicos contratos y derechos del consumidor, relativas al cumplimiento de la normativa o a cualquier otra cosa –esto puede que no esté en el alma, pero sí en el corazón de la protección de los consumidores–, es muy importante.
Pero no podemos abarcar todos los problemas sectoriales. Por eso creo que también deberíamos centrar nuestra atención muy especialmente en asegurar perfectamente la protección al consumidor, sobre todo en los ámbitos de la energía, el transporte y las telecomunicaciones. Por eso creo que formar parte del Consejo de Competitividad es muy importante. Asimismo, el Comisario de la Competencia es un aliado natural en la política de los consumidores.
Así que, volviendo a la pregunta de la señora Thyssen sobre la reclamación, no estoy pensando en el tipo de acción colectiva de los Estados Unidos. Esto no es una novela de John Grisham. Tenemos una narrativa europea distinta, mucho más relacionada con la reclamación colectiva. Tenemos esta reclamación colectiva en diez países por lo menos; en los Países Bajos se parece más a la acción colectiva, pero sigue sin ser lo mismo. Esta no es la única reclamación colectiva. Podemos recurrir a resoluciones de conflictos alternativas, que son importantes, precedentes judiciales y muchas otras cosas. No se trata armonizar al máximo, sino de los cuellos de botella –cuándo y cómo podemos detectarlos– y de centrar nuestra atención al respecto en el nivel de armonización más alto posible.
De manera que gracias, señor Harbour, por decir que intento ser un paladín de los consumidores. Compartiría con gusto este papel con cualquiera de mis colegas Comisarios, porque sueño con tener un paladín de los consumidores de los demás sectores.
Con respecto a la Convención de Roma, creo que a través de la plena armonización podemos superar por lo menos algunos de los defectos de Roma I. Ahora mismo, en lo que se refiere a Roma I, las empresas deberían cumplir las normas del país de origen del problema, lo que no aumenta significativamente la carga que soportan.
Creo que he respondido prácticamente a la pregunta del señor Schwab sobre el tipo de armonización que queremos y sobre la acción colectiva. No quiero poner a prueba la paciencia del Presidente dando respuestas largas, pero me encantará continuar esta conversación con todos ustedes."@es21
"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."@et5
"Arvoisa puhemies, saatan aiheuttaa teille kaikille pettymyksen, mutta syntymäpäiväni on 22. kesäkuuta. Tänään on komission jäsenen Frattinin syntymäpäivä. Luvallanne välitän kaikki nämä onnentoivotukset hänelle. Voin vakuuttaa teille, että hän on ne taatusti ansainnut. Kiitos joka tapauksessa, ja toivon, että pystyn tavalla tai toisella olemaan 22. kesäkuuta paikalla parlamentissa vastaanottamassa minulle kuuluvat onnittelut.
Aloitan kysymyksistä. Hyvä jäsen Pleštinská, on todella tärkeää, että kaikki politiikan alat saavat rahoitustukea, ja teemme parhaamme järjestääksemme niille sitä talousarvion rajoissa. Uskoakseni teille on kaikkein tärkeintä se, millaisen käsityksen saatte tästä politiikan alasta ja miten pystymme saamaan täyden hyödyn talousarviovaroista. Tämä liittyy koulutukseen, tietoon, Euroopan kuluttajaneuvontakeskuksiin ja täytäntöönpanon tehostamiseen. Varoille voidaan löytää monia muitakin käyttötapoja, mutta nämä ovat etusijalla. Tässä suhteessa olen sitäkin tyytyväisempi, että mainitsitte Eurooppa-kalenterin. Juuri tänään jaoin useita kappaleita komission jäsenten kollegion kokouksessa muistutuksena siitä, miten tärkeä väline se on. Tämä on edelleen yksi parhaista tavoista luoda yhteyksiä nuoriin.
Nuorista puheen ollen digitaalisia oikeuksia koskevat suunnitelmamme käyvät luullakseni todella hyvin yksiin heidän odotustensa kanssa. Ylihuomenna osallistun Berliinissä digitaalisia oikeuksia koskevaan kokoukseen ja kiinnitän huomiota erityisesti nuoriin kuulijoihin. Tämä saattaa lisätä heidän kiinnostustaan siihen, mitä merkitsee olla kuluttaja kehittyvässä maailmassamme – Euroopassa.
Käsittelen nyt jäsen Gebhardtin kysymystä. On aina erittäin tärkeää, että meillä on täsmällinen toimintamalli ja tarkka näkemys puitedirektiivin soveltamisesta sekä siitä, millainen sen pitäisi olla – koska niitä voi olla vain yksi – ja siitä, millaisia alakohtaisia vaikutuksia voimme tavoitella. Kannatan tätä yhdistettyä lähestymistapaa. Olen varma siitä, että tällä laaja-alaisella säännöstöllä on suuri merkitys, kun sitä sovelletaan yhtäläisesti tavanomaisiin kuluttajasopimuksiin ja kuluttajien perusoikeuksiin täytäntöönpanon tai muiden asioiden yhteydessä. Tämä ei ehkä ole kuluttajansuojan menettelytapojen mutta kylläkin sen perusajatuksen mukaista.
Emme voi kuitenkaan käsitellä kaikkia alakohtaisia ongelmia. Siksi meidän olisi mielestäni kiinnitettävä erittäin paljon huomiota kuluttajansuojan konkreettisiin saavutuksiin erityisesti energian, liikenteen ja tietoliikenteen alalla. Siksi on mielestäni erittäin tärkeää osallistua kilpailukykyneuvoston toimintaan. Luonnollisesti myös kilpailusta vastaava komission jäsen toimii kuluttajapolitiikan hyväksi.
Käsittelen seuraavaksi jäsen Thyssenin kysymystä oikeussuojasta. En suunnittele ryhmäkanteen käyttöä Yhdysvaltojen tapaan. Tämä ei ole John Grishamin kirjoittama tarina. Euroopassa on toisenlainen kerrontatyyli, jolle ovat paljon tyypillisempiä kollektiiviset oikeussuojakeinot. Kollektiiviset oikeussuojakeinot ovat käytössä ainakin kymmenessä maassa, ja vain Alankomaissa ne muistuttavat enemmän ryhmäkannetta, mutta eivät kuitenkaan ole sama asia. Tämä ei ole ainoa kollektiivinen oikeussuojakeino. Voimme käyttää tärkeitä vaihtoehtoisia riidanratkaisumenettelyjä, ennakkotapauksia ja monia muita välineitä. Kyse ei ole mahdollisimman kattavasta yhdenmukaistamisesta vaan pullonkauloista – milloin ja miten voimme tunnistaa ne – sekä siitä, että korostamme tätä näkökulmaa mahdollisimman kattavassa yhdenmukaistamisessa.
Hyvä jäsen Harbour, kiitos siitä, että totesitte minun yrittävän puolustaa kuluttajia. Jakaisin ilomielin tämän tehtävän muiden kollegojeni kanssa, koska toiveeni on, että muillekin toiminta-aloille saataisiin kuluttajien puolestapuhujia.
Rooman yleissopimuksesta totean, että täysimääräisen yhdenmukaistamisen avulla pystymme korjaamaan ainakin jotkut Rooma I -yleissopimuksen puutteista. Toistaiseksi yritysten pitäisi Rooma I -yleissopimuksen suhteen noudattaa ongelman aiheuttaneen jäsenvaltion sääntöjä, mikä ei merkittävästi lisää yritysten velvoitteita.
Luullakseni olen käytännössä vastannut jäsen Schwabin kysymykseen, joka koskee yhdenmukaistamistavoitteita ja ryhmäkannetta. En halua koetella puhemiehen kärsivällisyyttä pitkillä vastauksilla, mutta jatkan ilomielin tätä keskustelua teidän kaikkien kanssa."@fi7
".
Monsieur le Président, je vous remercie. Je ne sais pas si vous serez déçus ou non, mais mon anniversaire tombe le 22 juin. Aujourd’hui, c’est l’anniversaire du commissaire Frattini. Avec votre permission, je lui transmettrai vos vœux et félicitations. Je peux vous assurer qu’il les mérite entièrement. Quoi qu’il en soit, je vous remercie et j’espère que je serai ici au Parlement le 22 juin pour avoir la part qui me revient!
Commençons par les questions. Madame Pleštinská, il est vraiment très important que toutes nos politiques soient soutenues financièrement, et nous ferons tout ce qui est en notre pouvoir pour satisfaire à leurs besoins dans le cadre de notre budget. Je crois que ce qui importe le plus pour vous, c’est la manière dont vous percevez la politique et dont nous pouvons maximiser ce dont nous disposons en termes de ressources budgétaires. Sont concernés l’éducation, l’information, les centres européens de consommateurs. Nous pouvons envisager bien d’autres manières de dépenser nos fonds, mais ce sont-là nos priorités. À ce titre, je suis on ne peut plus heureuse que vous ayez fait référence à l’agenda de l’UE. Aujourd’hui même, j’en ai distribué plusieurs exemplaires lors de la réunion du collège des commissaires, pour rappeler à quel point c’est un outil important. Cela restera l’un des meilleurs moyens qui nous permettront de rester en contact avec les plus jeunes.
En parlant des plus jeunes, je crois que ce que nous avons à l’esprit concernant la protection des droits numériques correspond très largement à ce qu’ils veulent. Après-demain, je prendrai part à une réunion sur les droits numériques à Berlin et je m’adresserai plus particulièrement aux jeunes de l’assistance. De cette manière, ils pourraient s’intéresser davantage à ce que cela signifie d’être un consommateur dans cette Europe, un monde en pleine évolution.
J’en viens à présent à la question de Mme Gebhardt. Il importe toujours d’avoir une politique précise et une vision précise de la manière dont nous pouvons nous servir de la directive-cadre, de la forme qu’elle devrait revêtir- puisqu’il ne peut y en avoir qu’une - et du type d’influence sectorielle que nous pouvons exercer. Je suis favorable à cette approche mixte. Je suis sûre que cet ensemble horizontal de règles appliqué de la même manière aux contrats conventionnels conclus par le consommateur et à ses droits traditionnels en matière d’exécution ou autre - ce n’est peut-être pas l’essence de la protection des consommateurs, mais cela joue un rôle central - est très important.
Nous ne pouvons toutefois pas résoudre tous les problèmes sectoriels. C’est pourquoi je crois que nous devons nous concentrer sur le fait de réaliser de bonnes performances en matière de protection des consommateurs, principalement dans les secteurs de l’énergie, des transports et des télécommunications. Je crois donc qu’il est très important de faire partie du Conseil Compétitivité. Par ailleurs, la commissaire chargée de la concurrence est une alliée naturelle de la politique des consommateurs.
Pour en venir à la question de Mme Thyssen sur les recours, je n’envisage pas le type de recours existant aux États-Unis. Nous ne sommes pas dans un roman de John Grisham. Nous avons un autre scénario européen, bien plus lié aux recours collectifs. Ce mécanisme existe dans au moins dix pays et dans un pays, aux Pays-Bas, il est plus proche de la
(recours collectif), mais n’est pas identique à celle-ci. Il n’existe pas un seul type de recours collectif. Nous pouvons recourir aux règlements extrajudiciaires des litiges, qui sont importants, aux conflits-tests (qui font jurisprudence) et à bien d’autres mécanismes. Il ne s’agit pas de parvenir à une harmonisation maximale; il s’agit de savoir quand et comment nous pouvons identifier les goulots d’étranglement et d’attirer l’attention sur ce point dans l’optique d’un niveau d’harmonisation le plus élevé possible.
Monsieur Harbour, je vous remercie de dire que je m’efforce d’être le défenseur des consommateurs. Je partagerai volontiers ce rôle avec n’importe quel collègue commissaire, parce que je rêve d’avoir à mes côtés un défenseur des consommateurs dans d’autres secteurs.
Concernant la Convention de Rome, je crois qu’une pleine harmonisation nous permettra au moins de surmonter certaines des lacunes de Rome I. Pour l’heure, s’agissant de Rome I, les entreprises doivent se conformer aux règles du pays dans lequel se pose le problème, ce qui n’accroît pas de manière significative la charge des entreprises.
Je pense avoir pratiquement répondu à la question de M. Schwab sur le type d’harmonisation que nous voulons et sur les
. Je ne tiens pas à mettre la patience du président à l’épreuve en répondant trop longuement, mais je serai heureuse de poursuivre cette discussion avec vous"@fr8
"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."@hu11
"La ringrazio, signor Presidente, non so se rimarrete tutti delusi, ma il mio compleanno è il 22 giugno. Oggi è il compleanno del Commissario Frattini. Se me lo consentite gli trasmetterò i vostri auguri e congratulazioni. Posso garantirvi che se li merita davvero. In ogni modo, grazie e spero che il 22 giugno, in qualche maniera, potrò essere di nuovo qui al Parlamento per ricevere la mia degna parte.
Cominciamo con le domande. Onorevole Pleštinská, è davvero importante che tutte le nostre politiche ricevano un sostegno finanziario e faremo del nostro meglio per integrarle nel quadro di bilancio. Credo che la cosa più significativa per voi sia come considerate la politica e come possiamo massimizzare le risorse disponibili tramite il nostro bilancio. Ciò riguarda l’istruzione, l’informazione, i centri europei dei consumatori e il rafforzamento dell’applicazione normativa. Si possono immaginare innumerevoli altri modi per spendere il denaro, ma queste sono le priorità. In tal senso sono più che contenta che lei abbia citato il diario UE. Proprio oggi ne ho distribuite diverse copie alla riunione del Collegio dei Commissari per ricordare quanto sia importante questo strumento, che rimarrà uno dei modi migliori per rimanere in contatto con la generazione più giovane.
Parlando di giovani, le nostre riflessioni in materia di diritti digitali sono molto in linea con le loro aspettative. Dopo domani avrò una riunione a Berlino sui diritti digitali e mi rivolgerò particolarmente ai membri più giovani del pubblico. In questo modo potrebbero interessarsi di più a cosa significa essere un consumatore in questo mondo in evoluzione, l’Europa.
Passo ora alla domanda dell’onorevole Gebhardt. E’ sempre molto importante avere una politica precisa e una visione precisa di come possiamo utilizzare la direttiva quadro, di che tipo essa dovrebbe essere – perché ce ne può essere solo una – e che tipo di influenza settoriale possiamo perseguire. Sono favorevole a questo approccio misto. Sono certa che una normativa orizzontale applicata uniformemente ai contratti di consumo tipici e ai diritti tipici dei consumatori, riguardo all’applicazione o a quant’altro, sia molto importante, e questo costituisce, se non l’anima, il fulcro della tutela dei consumatori.
Tuttavia non è possibile trattare in modo esaustivo tutti i problemi settoriali. Ecco perché penso che dovremmo anche concentrare la nostra attenzione su una protezione dei consumatori che sia molto efficace, particolarmente nel settore dell’energia, dei trasporti e delle telecomunicazioni. Per tale motivo ritengo di grande interesse fare parte del Consiglio “Competitività”. Anche il Commissario per la concorrenza è un alleato naturale per la politica dei consumatori.
Per venire alla domanda dell’onorevole Thyssen sul risarcimento, non ho in mente il modello statunitense di
. Non siamo in un libro di John Grisham. Abbiamo un’altra casistica, quella europea, che è molto più legata al risarcimento collettivo, che esiste in almeno dieci paesi e in un paese, l’Olanda, è più simile alla
ma non è la stessa cosa. Non è l’unica forma di ricorso collettivo. Si possono utilizzare sistemi di risoluzione alternativa delle controversie, che sono importanti, casi
e molte altre tipologie. Il punto non è l’armonizzazione massima, bensì eliminare le strozzature – quando e come possiamo identificarle – e focalizzare la nostra attenzione su questo elemento per arrivare al livello più elevato possibile di armonizzazione.
Onorevole Harbour, grazie per aver detto che sto cercando di essere un campione dei consumatori. Condividerei volentieri questo ruolo con qualunque dei miei colleghi Commissari, perché sogno di avere un campione dei consumatori negli altri settori.
In merito alla Convenzione di Roma, ritengo che tramite l’armonizzazione totale potremo quanto meno superare alcuni dei limiti della Convenzione di Roma I. In questa fase, riguardo a Roma I, le aziende dovrebbero rispettare tutte le norme del paese da cui il problema origina, il che non aumenta in modo significativo l’onere per le imprese.
Penso di aver praticamente risposto alla domanda dell’onorevole Schwab sul tipo di armonizzazione cui miriamo e sulla
. Non voglio sfidare la pazienza del Presidente fornendo risposte molto lunghe, ma sarò lieta di proseguire questa conversazione con tutti voi."@it12
"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."@lt14
"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."@lv13
"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."@mt15
".
Dank u mijnheer de Voorzitter, ik heb geen idee of het u allen teleur zal stellen, maar mijn verjaardag is op 22 juni. Vandaag is het de verjaardag van commissaris Frattini. Als u mij toestaat, zal ik al uw goede wensen en felicitaties aan hem overbrengen. Ik kan u verzekeren dat hij die ten volle verdient. In ieder geval, dank u en ik hoop dat ik op de een of andere manier hier op 22 juni in het Parlement aanwezig kan zijn om mijn deel te ontvangen.
Laten we beginnen met de vragen. Mevrouw Pleštinská, het is echt heel belangrijk dat al ons beleid financieel ondersteund wordt en we zullen ons best doen daarvoor ruimte te vinden binnen onze begroting. Ik geloof dat het voor u het belangrijkste is om een standpunt te vormen ten aanzien van het beleid, en inzicht te krijgen in hoe we via onze begroting maximaal gebruik kunnen maken van onze middelen. Het gaat daarbij om onderwijs, informatie, Europese bureaus voor consumentenvoorlichting en het versterken van de handhaving. We kunnen nog veel andere manieren bedenken om geld uit te geven, maar dit zijn de prioriteiten. In dat opzicht ben ik meer dan gelukkig dat u de EU-agenda hebt genoemd. Ik heb net vandaag een aantal exemplaren uitgedeeld tijdens de vergadering van het college van commissarissen om er nog eens op te wijzen hoe belangrijk de agenda is als hulpmiddel. Dat blijft een van de beste manieren om in contact te blijven met de jongere generatie.
Als we het over de jongere generatie hebben, denk ik dat wat wij van plan zijn met digitale rechten, heel goed strookt met wat zij willen. Overmorgen ga ik naar een bijeenkomst over digitale rechten in Berlijn en ik zal mij daar met name tot het jongere deel van de aanwezigen richten. Op die manier zouden zij meer geïnteresseerd kunnen raken in wat het betekent om consument te zijn in deze zich ontwikkelende wereld – Europa.
Dat brengt mij bij de vraag van mevrouw Gebhardt. Het is altijd van groot belang om een nauwkeurig omschreven beleid te hebben en een precieze visie op de manier waarop we de kaderrichtlijn kunnen gebruiken, van welke soort die moet zijn – want er kan er slechts één zijn – en wat voor soort invloed op de sector we kunnen nastreven. Ik ben voorstander van deze gemengde aanpak. Ik ben ervan overtuigd dat het heel belangrijk is dat dit horizontale pakket regels evenzeer van toepassing is op typische consumentencontracten als op typische consumentenrechten, in relatie tot handhaving of wat dan ook – dit raakt misschien wel niet het hart, maar toch de kern van consumentenbescherming.
Maar we kunnen ons niet uitputtend bezighouden met alle sectorale problemen. Dat is de reden waarom ik denk dat we ons ook nadrukkelijk moeten richten op een goede consumentenbescherming, met name op de terreinen energie, transport en telecommunicatie. Dat is de reden waarom ik denk dat het erg belangrijk is om deel uit te maken van de Mededingingsraad. Bovendien is de commissaris voor mededingingsbeleid een natuurlijke bondgenoot voor consumentenbeleid.
In antwoord op de vraag van mevrouw Thyssen over het verhaalrecht wil ik zeggen dat ik niet denk aan het Amerikaanse systeem van class action. Dit is geen verhaal van John Grisham. Wij leven in een ander, Europees verhaal, dat veel meer gaat over collectief verhaal. We hebben dit collectieve verhaal al in minstens tien landen en in één land, Nederland, lijkt het weliswaar meer op class action, maar het is nog steeds niet hetzelfde. Dit is niet de enige vorm van collectief verhaal. We kunnen gebruikmaken van alternatieve geschillenregelingen, die erg belangrijk zijn, proefprocessen en veel andere zaken. Dit gaat niet over maximumharmonisatie, maar over knelpunten – over wanneer en hoe we die kunnen herkennen – en over het richten van onze aandacht hierop met inachtneming van de grootst mogelijke vorm van harmonisatie.
Dus, meneer Harbour, dank u omdat u mij een kampioen voor de consument hebt genoemd. Ik zou die rol graag delen met om het even welke van mijn collega-commissarissen, want ik droom van een consumentenkampioen uit de andere sectoren.
Met betrekking tot het Verdrag van Rome denk ik dat we met volledige harmonisatie op zijn minst een paar van de tekortkomingen van Rome I kunnen verhelpen. Op dit moment moeten bedrijven, als het gaat om Rome I, de regels naleven van het land waarin het probleem is ontstaan, wat voor het bedrijfsleven niet significant tot zwaardere lasten leidt.
Ik denk dat ik de vraag van de heer Schwab over het soort harmonisatie dat we nastreven en over class action al heb beantwoord. Ik wil het geduld van de Voorzitter niet op de proef stellen met ellenlange antwoorden, maar zal graag deze discussie met u allen voortzetten."@nl3
"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."@pl16
"Muito agradecida, Senhor Presidente. Provavelmente ficarão decepcionados, mas o meu aniversário é no dia 22 de Junho. Hoje é o aniversário do Comissário Frattini. Se me permitem, transmitir-lhe-ei todos os desejos de felicidades e parabéns. Posso garantir-lhes que os merece plenamente. De qualquer forma, muito obrigada, e espero no dia 22 de Junho poder estar de novo aqui, no Parlamento, para receber o meu quinhão!
Passemos às perguntas. Senhora Deputada Zita Pleštinská, é muito importante que todas as nossas políticas recebam apoio financeiro e faremos o melhor para as acolher no nosso quadro orçamental. Parece-me que o que mais interessa é a forma como vemos a política e como podemos optimizar os nossos recursos através do orçamento. Estão aqui implicadas a educação, a informação, os centros europeus de consumidores e o reforço da aplicação. Podemos pensar em muitas outras formas de gastar o dinheiro, mas são estas as prioridades. E, a propósito, ainda bem que referiu a Agenda Europeia. Ainda hoje distribuí diversos exemplares na reunião do Colégio de Comissários, para que não esqueçamos a sua importância como instrumento. Será uma das melhores formas de nos mantermos em contacto com a geração mais nova.
E, já que falamos da geração mais nova, creio que aquilo que estamos a pensar quanto a direitos digitais vem ao encontro das suas expectativas. Depois de amanhã terei, em Berlim, uma reunião sobre direitos digitais e dirigir-me-ei em especial aos membros mais jovens do público. Será, talvez, uma maneira de os levar a interessarem-se por saber o que significa ser consumidor neste nosso mundo em evolução - a Europa.
Quanto à pergunta da senhora deputada Evelyne Gebhardt, é sempre da maior relevância dispor de uma política precisa e de uma visão precisa sobre como usar a directiva-quadro, qual o modelo que deve assumir – pois tem de haver uma única directiva-quadro – e que tipo de influência sectorial podemos visar. Defendo uma abordagem mista. Estou certa de que este conjunto de regras horizontais aplicadas aos contratos habituais celebrados pelos consumidores e aos direitos habituais dos consumidores, relativos a aplicação ou a qualquer outro tema – talvez não faça parte do espírito mas certamente se situa no centro da defesa do consumidor – é muito importante.
Não podemos, porém, abranger todos os problemas sectoriais. Por isso entendo que devíamos centrar a nossa atenção num bom desempenho da defesa do consumidor, sobretudo nos sectores da energia, transportes e telecomunicações. Por isso entendo que é fundamental estar presente no Conselho "Concorrência". Além disso, a Comissária responsável pela Concorrência é aliada natural da política dos consumidores.
Passando agora à pergunta da senhora deputada Marianne Thyssen sobre reparação, não estava a pensar numa acção judicial colectiva como as que são interpostas nos Estados Unidos. Não estamos num livro de John Grisham (autor de histórias passadas em tribunais
). Estamos antes perante uma história europeia que tem muito mais a ver com reparação colectiva. A reparação colectiva está prevista em, pelo menos, dez países e num deles, a Holanda, aproxima-se da acção judicial colectiva, mas não é a mesma coisa. Não é a única forma de reparação colectiva. Podemos recorrer à resolução alternativa de litígios, a não menosprezar, a situações de teste
ou a muitos outros instrumentos. Não estamos a falar de harmonização máxima mas de obstruções – de quando e como identificá-las – e de centrar a nossa atenção neste pontos, visando o nível máximo possível de harmonização.
Agradeço-lhe, Senhor Deputado Malcolm Harbour, ter dito que tento ser a defensora dos consumidores. É uma tarefa que de bom grado partilharia com algum dos meus colegas Comissários, pois o meu sonho é ter um defensor dos consumidores proveniente dos outros sectores.
Quanto à Convenção de Roma, julgo que a plena harmonização nos permitirá, no mínimo, ultrapassar algumas das falhas de Roma I. Neste momento, segundo Roma I, as empresas são obrigadas a cumprir as regras do país onde surgiu o problema, o que não aumenta significativamente o ónus por parte da empresa.
Creio já ter respondido implicitamente à pergunta do senhor deputado Andreas Schwab sobre que tipo de harmonização visamos e sobre acções judiciais colectivas. Não quero agora abusar da paciência do Senhor Presidente dando respostas exaustivas, mas terei todo o prazer em continuar esta conversa com cada um dos senhores deputados."@pt17
"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."@ro18
"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."@sk19
"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."@sl20
"Tack, herr talman! Jag vet inte om ni alla kommer att bli besvikna, men min födelsedag är den 22 juni. I dag är det kommissionsledamot Franco Frattinis födelsedag. Om ni tillåter, ska jag vidarebefordra alla lyckönskningar och gratulationer till honom. Jag försäkrar er att han verkligen förtjänar dem. I vilket fall som helst, tack, och jag hoppas att jag på något sätt kan vara i parlamentet den 22 juni och få min rättmätiga del!
Låt oss börja med frågorna. Fru Pleštinská! Det är verkligen mycket viktigt att all vår politik får ekonomiskt stöd, och vi kommer att göra vårt bästa för att passa in den i vår budgetram. Jag tror att det viktigaste för er är hur ni uppfattar denna politik och hur vi kan maximera tillgångarna som tilldelas via budgeten. Detta gäller utbildning, information, de europeiska informationscentrumen för konsumenter samt ett stärkande av genomförandet. Vi kan tänka ut många andra sätt att spendera medlen på, men prioriteringarna är dessa. När det gäller detta är jag glad att ni nämnde EU-kalendern. Just i dag delade jag ut flera kopior under kommissionens sammanträde som en påminnelse om hur viktig den är som verktyg. Den kommer att fortsätta att vara ett av de bästa sätten som vi kan hålla kontakten med den yngre generationen på.
På tal om den yngre generationen tror jag att vad vi tänker på när det gäller digitala rättigheter stämmer bra överens med vad de söker. I övermorgon har jag ett möte i Berlin om digitala rättigheter, och jag kommer särskilt att rikta mig till den yngre publiken. På så vis kan de bli mer intresserade av vad det innebär att vara konsument i EU, vår värld i utveckling.
Nu har jag kommit fram till Evelyne Gebhardts fråga. Det är alltid viktigt med en detaljerad politik som innehåller en detaljerad vision om hur ramdirektivet ska användas och vilken typ det ska vara eftersom det bara kan vara en samt vilken typ av branschpåverkan som vi ska sträva efter. Jag är för detta blandade tillvägagångssätt. Jag är säker på att denna horisontella uppsättning regler, som ska tillämpas enhetligt för typiska konsumentkontrakt och konsumenträttigheter som har att göra med genomförande eller vad det nu kan vara, är mycket viktig. Detta kanske inte når själen, men i alla fall hjärtat, av konsumentskyddet.
Men vi kan inte omfatta alla branschproblem. Därför anser jag att vi även måste rikta vår uppmärksamhet till stor del på en solid insats när det gäller konsumentskydd, och de viktigaste områdena är energi, transport och telekommunikation. Därför anser jag att det är mycket viktigt att vara en del av rådet (konkurrenskraft). Dessutom är kommissionsledamoten för konkurrenskraft en naturlig bundsförvant till konsumentpolitiken.
Nu till Marianne Thyssens fråga om gottgörelse. Jag har inte tänkt mig den amerikanska formen av kollektiv talan. Det här är inte en John Grisham-historia. Vi har en annan berättelse, en EU-historia, och den har betydligt mer att göra med kollektiv prövning. Vi har denna kollektiva prövning i minst tio länder, och i ett av dem, Nederländerna, är den närmare kollektiv talan, men det är ändå inte detsamma. Detta är inte den enda kollektiva prövningen. Vi kan använda viktiga alternativa system för tvistlösning som testfall och mycket annat. Detta handlar inte om att maximera harmoniseringen utan om flaskhalsar. När och hur kan de identifieras? Det handlar också om att vi i detta avseende riktar vår uppmärksamhet mot den högsta möjliga nivån av harmonisering.
Tack, Malcolm Harbour, för att ni säger att jag försöker vara konsumenternas försvarare. Jag skulle gärna dela min roll med någon av mina kolleger i kommissionen, för jag drömmer om att ha en konsumentförsvarare från de andra sektorerna.
När det gäller Romkonventionen anser jag att vi med hjälp av full harmonisering i alla fall kan överkomma en del av bristerna i Rom I. När det gäller Rom I bör företagen i nuläget rätta sig efter reglerna i det land där problemet uppstod, vilket inte lägger någon betydande börda på företagssidan.
Jag tror att jag praktiskt taget har besvarat Andreas Schwabs fråga om vilken typ av harmonisering som vi riktar in oss på samt om kollektiv talan. Jag vill inte utmana talmannens tålamod genom att ge långa svar, men jag skulle gärna fortsätta denna konversation med er alla."@sv22
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(test cases)"17
"EU Diary"2
"Meglena Kuneva,"18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,13,4
"Member of the Commission"18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,11,13,4
"class action"12,8
"n. t."17
"test"12
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples