Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-02-21-Speech-4-129"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080221.15.4-129"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
". −
The European Commission’s argument for proposing this Regulation is that ‘the “principle of mutual recognition” … is hampered by several problems’ (in other words, products marketed in one Member State may be prevented from being marketed in another). It believes that the possibility of national technical rules creating unlawful obstacles to the free movement of goods between Member States should be minimised. It therefore lays down requirements which authorities must meet when implementing a national technical rule and imposes on them the burden of proof. In other words, it is imposing conditions with the clear aim of restricting the possibility of each State applying its own rules.
For its part, the European Parliament report actually adds further obstacles to the action that each State may take, for example: ‘The aim of this Regulation is to strengthen the functioning of the internal market, with free and undistorted competition, by improving the free movement of products whilst ensuring a high level of consumer protection and product safety’.
In practice, the Member States will be prohibited from restricting the sale in their territory of products where these are manufactured and marketed in another Member State, even though they may not fully comply with the rules of the Member State of destination."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples