Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-06-Speech-3-230"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20101006.16.3-230"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, I have now heard all the arguments and requests and I will report them carefully to my colleague, Mr Almunia, who has told you, through me, that he sees no reason now to propose brand new legislation on fines, since the current Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, which I have already mentioned, may be of great use to us in the foreseeable future. Lastly, Mrs in ’t Veld and Mrs Stihler brought up the issue of more sophisticated programmes and more sophisticated instruments. We can raise this issue through the compliance programmes. They are very welcome. I am well aware, in our view, that companies take these compliance programmes seriously and that can help prevention which, in fact, Mr Gauzès, is still cheaper than compensation or punishment. Finally, Mr Skinner and Mr Kelly talked about the companies that sometimes suffer as a result of these punishments and the social problems that that can cause. It is with keen interest that we follow developments in Member States, in particular, in small and medium-sized enterprises. That is why we are keen to propose, as indicated in our White Paper, that we will act on damages actions to check how effective they are and to assess their impact. For this reason, the Commission will soon be launching a public consultation on this matter. As for the guidelines, the Commission constantly monitors their application and it is open to any suggestions for improvement and, from this point of view, what has been said by some would be extremely helpful. Mr Lehne, Mr Gauzès, Mr Skinner, we have nothing against a certain degree of flexibility in our practices controlling the application of regulations, within the limits set by the guidelines of case-law, in order to take into account an economic situation that is still challenging. However, for the time being, I repeat, Mr Almunia sees no need to revise the 2006 guidelines. He is satisfied with the way that these guidelines are working. They have proved adequately flexible during the current crisis, enabling us to take into account the difficult financial situation faced by some companies, as mentioned by some of you. The Commission is bound by these guidelines on the method of setting fines. This means that they provide companies with legal certainty as the Commission cannot depart from them without good grounds. If the Commission does depart from the guidelines, it runs the risk of having the courts annul its decisions. Mrs in ’t Veld, regarding different sanctions other than fines, we should assess to what extent it would be possible, if necessary, to integrate them into our current legal framework. Although alternative sanctions are in place in Member States, they only seem to be used in a minority of cases and fines remain the primary form of sanction. This debate should be steered by two principles. Firstly, individual sanctions must not call into question our current system for controlling infringements, in particular, the leniency programme. Secondly, the fact that directors or employees of a company have been individually penalised, which is therefore possible, does not in any way diminish the company’s responsibility where it has broken the rules of competition. Lastly, the Commission believes that the current level of fines and uniform application of the European Union’s competition law are a good deterrent against anti-competitive behaviour within the internal market. One point, Mr Lehne. We have an administrative system for ensuring the proper implementation of competition rules. What is more, this system has many advantages. We also have the case-law of the Court which supports this system. Mr Sánchez Presedo mentioned transparency, and this does not surprise me considering the other debates with him regarding supervision. There are possible improvements. We have flexible guidelines, as I have just mentioned, and, in particular, this year has seen the introduction of best practices."@en1
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph