Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-17-Speech-1-130"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031117.9.1-130"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Madam President, on 27 October 2003, after more than six years of negotiation, the Council adopted the energy tax directive. That directive includes some aspects of the commercial diesel proposal and notably it gives Member States the possibility to apply differential tax rates to commercial diesel and non-commercial diesel.
For the reasons I have given, the Commission is still convinced of the merits of this proposal. I would invite Members of Parliament to consider their position on this issue very carefully before the vote on it this week.
However, the energy tax directive is still based on the principle of minimum rates only. Hence, it does not remedy the problem of distortion of competition on road haulage markets, which stems from the significant differences in diesel taxation in the Member States. Only harmonisation, or at least a greater approximation, of commercial diesel taxation will put an end to those distortions of competition.
Three parliamentary committees, the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, and the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism have broadly supported the Commission's proposals for that reason.
However, the debates in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs have also shown that there is wide recognition of the existence of such distortions. However, that committee does not share the views of the Commission on the need and the means to reduce those distortions of competition.
I recall that, according to Article 93 of the Treaty, provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning excise duties must be adopted to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and proper functioning of the internal market. It is clear that the distortions of competition resulting from the very significant differences in excise duties applied to diesel by the Member States are a threat to the functioning of the internal market.
I would like to point out that the Commission reacted positively to many amendments contemplated by the rapporteur of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and other Members of Parliament. In particular, the Commission could in principle have accepted the following three items. Firstly, the creation of an indexed fluctuation band for excise duties applicable to commercial diesel. Such a fluctuation band could be considered a 'second best' if a harmonised rate for commercial diesel cannot be achieved.
The second item is the alignment of the present proposal with the terms of the energy tax directive, in particular as far as the definition of commercial diesel and tax rates are concerned. Third, there is the issue of the implementation of a refund system, as a practical tool for differentiating duties for commercial and non-commercial diesel.
To my surprise, it appeared that these amendments were subsequently not considered by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs to be sufficient to allow support for the Commission's proposal.
Finally, the Council, according to the minutes concerning the adoption of the energy tax directive, is clearly committed to pursuing its work on the commercial diesel proposal."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples