Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-20-Speech-3-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000920.13.3-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"About 18 months ago the Council of the European Union nodded through a draft of the new Brussels regulation which essentially rubber-stamped old principles supposedly in order to apply them to modern conditions, but without thought, without real discussion and without consultation, I hope, whatever the result of the vote tomorrow, that both the Commission and Council will take note of the very extensive discussions and debate which we have had in this Parliament, which have taken account of the concerns both of business and consumers.
I disagree with Mrs Wallis’ suggestion that, because of some criticism from David Byrne of the result reached in the Legal Affairs Committee, we should give way now. I would say it is our democratic duty to stand up for what we believe is the right solution for consumers and for e-commerce in the European Union regardless of whether that gives distress to Mr Byrne or not.
I would give my wholehearted support to the conclusion reached in the Legal Affairs Committee. It is a common-sense balance between, on the one hand, protecting consumers and, on the other hand, ensuring that those same consumers have access to the low prices and wide choices that are available with the truly competitive market. We have to decide, in a new era where physical location has become almost meaningless, where a dispute is eventually litigated, where a dispute is eventually solved. To allow consumers and businesses the freedom to make that choice themselves is the most pragmatic and the most common-sense solution and this gives the maximum certainty both to business and to consumers. It does not strip consumers of their pre-existing rights. It gives them choices and it reflects their enhanced status in a new Internet world, which gives them more power and more choices than ever before.
If small businesses are driven out of the market because of the proposals from the Commission or if we adopt Mrs Wallis’ amendments tomorrow then it will be consumers who suffer because it will leave them at the mercy of the large global players and it will deprive them of the low prices that they deserve under the new Internet economy. Even more importantly, it will also threaten the new economy and the e-economy in the European Union.
We are sadly far behind the United States and, if tomorrow we support the amendments proposed by Mrs Wallis, we will stay far behind the United States. With the Commission’s proposals, we certainly have the worst of both worlds. We have uncertainty and legal risk for business without genuine consumer protection, because in many cases the right to sue in your own home court may be illusory if you cannot enforce the judgment without going overseas and incurring the same inconvenience as if you had to go overseas in any event to litigate this issue.
The Legal Affairs Committee has come up with a pragmatic solution. It is a common sense balance to a difficult issue and I would appeal to the House to support the resolution as put forward by the Legal Affairs Committee."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples