----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on services in the internal market

(COM(2004) 2 final — 2004/0001 (COD))

(2005/C 221/20)

On 20 February 2004, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 11 January 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Metzler. The co-rapporteur was Mr Ehnmark.

At its 414th plenary session of 9 and 10 February 2005 (meeting of 10 February), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 145 votes to 69, with 9 abstentions:

1.   Preliminary remarks

2.   General comments

3.   The proposal for a Directive point-by-point

3.2   Empirical basis

3.3   Scope: definitions — rules on conflict of laws — distinctions

3.4   Single points of contact (one-stop shopping)

3.5   Country-of-origin principle

3.6   Posting of workers

3.7   Consumer protection through compulsory insurance

3.8   Quality assurance through certification

3.9   Transparency in pricing

3.10   Use of electronic media

3.11   Inter-disciplinary cooperation

3.12   Codes of conduct

3.13   Social security

3.14   The authorisation system

3.15   Taxation

4.   Overview of the Committee's proposals

Brussels, 10 February 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)OJ C 48, 21.2.2002

----

APPENDIX I

to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee

The following amendments were rejected in the course of the debate but received at least a quarter of the votes cast:

Point 2.1.1

Amend as follows:

‘Whilst an effective internal market does require the removal of barriers, it also requires adequate regulation. In order to make Europe more competitive, national and EU-wide rules and consequently harmonised standards are essentialadministrative procedures and formalities for access to services and their provision need to be simplified.’

Voting:

For: 48

Against: 113

Abstentions:6

Point 3.3.3

Delete.

Voting:

For: 52

Against: 130

Abstentions:6

Point 3.5

Delete the entire point and replace as follows:

Voting:

For: 68

Against: 127

Abstentions:5

Delete points 3.5.1, 3.5.2 and 3.5.3 and replace by a new point (3.5.1):

The blanket application of the country-of-origin principle provided for in Article 16, together with the derogations stated in Article 17, form the basis of the draft directive. This is the only way to make a successful start on opening up the market for services, without further delays. Cross-border competition between service providers will benefit consumers and may also create new jobs. However, the Committee feels that application of the country-of-origin principle is only likely to succeed if there is legal clarity and legal certainty as to its scope. The application of the country-of-origin principle should therefore be accompanied by an examination of which services might benefit from further harmonisation of the legal bases. At the same time, it is important to ensure that the freedom to provide services is not detrimental to workers' and consumers' rights or to the protection of the environment. Compared to the rest of the world, the EU is already setting high standards in these areas, and these standards must be safeguarded.

Voting:

For: 83

Against: 122

Abstentions: 5

Point 3.5.1

Delete.

Voting:

For: 73

Against: 141

Abstentions: 7

Point 3.5.2

Amend as follows:

‘The blanket application of the country-of-origin principle provided for in Article 16, together with the derogations listed in Article 17, form the basis of the draft directive. The country-of-origin principle, which currently applies to goods, is being applied across the board to services. However, it is only appropriate for the type of services whichis particularly appropriate where those services lend themselves, like goods, to standardisation or to cases where harmonisation of legislation has progressed sufficiently to leave no scope for conflict. It should be acknowledged that there are areas where standards have not yet been laid down or where indeed it would be impossible to do so (so-called non-specifiable services).’

Voting:

For: 76

Against: 134

Abstentions: 6

Point 3.5.3

Amend as follows:

‘The Committee therefore believes the blanket application of the country-of-origin principle in the cross-border provision of services is premature. This principle assumes a comparable environment — both de facto and in law. The Committee feels that it will only be possible to apply the country-of-origin principle effectively if there is legal certainty and clarity regarding its scope. Applying this principle without an appropriate transition period would therefore give rise to problems, especially in view of the fact that the Committee believes not all the available options for sector-by-sector harmonisation have yet been made use of. It involves the risk of systems competing with one another, weakening employment, environmental, and consumer protection standards, given that differing legal, welfare and healthcare systems continue to exist within the EU. Rather than prematurely introducing measures of a purely horizontal nature, the needs of the single market could be best met by harmonisation on a sector-by-sector basis, particularly in sensitive areas. This process would involve examining — as part of a comprehensive impact assessment, also including social and environmental aspects — the suitability of each sector for introduction of the country-of-origin principle. As harmonisation measures are, together with the country-of-origin principle, complementaryat least as important a means of completing the single market, there should be legislative harmonisation within an appropriate time frame in areas where Member States have responsibilities in respect of health care, welfare and professional activity At an intermediate stage, if the European Commission, Parliament and Council considers them necessary. should assess whether harmonisation in these areas has made sufficient progress. If necessary, and depending on the stage which harmonisation of legislation has reached, an additional transition period could be granted to bring national legislation into line. The Committee feels that this approach, together with an exact definition of services which qualify for special treatment (e.g. those provided by the liberal professions), would enable gradual adjustment in the areas concerned; on completion of the transition period the country-of-origin period could then come into force, enabling completion of the single market. The same applies to co-regulatory and self-regulatory mechanisms.’

Voting:

For: 79

Against: 139

Abstentions: 7

Point 3.5.4

Delete.

Voting:

For: 65

Against: 150

Abstentions: 4

Point 3.6.2

Delete.

Voting:

For: 74

Against: 140

Abstentions: 3

Point 3.9

Delete.

Voting:

For: 73

Against: 134

Abstentions:5

Point 3.15

Delete.

Voting:

For: 90

Against: 135

Abstentions:2

Replace point 4.2.1.:

The Commission's approach in applying the country-of-origin principle across the board, apart from the derogations mentioned in the draft directive, is correct. This is the only way to make a successful start on opening up the market for services, without further delays. Care should also be taken to ensure legal clarity and legal certainty in the application of the country-of-origin principle. The application of the country-of-origin principle should be accompanied by an examination of which services might benefit from further harmonisation of the legal basis. It is important to ensure that the freedom to provide services is not detrimental to workers' and consumers' rights or to the protection of the environment. The new provisions must be as easy to apply and as clearly structured as possible in order to ensure that they are implemented smoothly and without complication. The same applies to co-regulatory and self-regulatory mechanisms.

Voting:

For: 66

Against: 146

Abstentions: 4

Point 4.2.1

Delete and replace as follows:

‘The country-of-origin principle and harmonisation are both key tools for securing the free movement of services. This principle can also be seen as a catalyst for bringing Member States' legislation closer into line, possibly followed at a later stage by harmonisation in the requisite fields. In itself, the country-of-origin principle can help secure much greater transparency for businesses embarking on cross-border service provision, but without establishing themselves in the host country. It will be a key lever for the further development of the single market in services, benefiting both consumers and workers and boosting European competitiveness. It is, however, important to clear up any outstanding legal issues before the country-of-origin principle can be expected to operate effectively.’

Voting:

For: 75

Against: 135

Abstentions:3

Point 4.2.2

Amend as follows:

Issues connected with the social dimension: The draft directive should not lead to any watering down of existing social protection, wage, and safety standards in the workplace, particularly those laid down in the Directive on the posting of workers. National arrangements for collective negotiations and agreements, including the national implementation of the associated Directive on the posting of workers (Directive 96/71/EC), should not be adversely affected.

Voting:

For: 84

Against: 132

Abstentions: 1

Point 4.2.4

Delete and replace as follows:

‘The proposals to simplify procedures and establish a single point of contact for service providers are to be welcomed. Missing from the draft, however, are more specific details about the procedures involved. Particular attention should be paid here to cutting red tape and reducing administrative burdens.’

Voting:

For: 74

Against: 141

Abstentions: 3

Point 4.2.6

Delete.

Voting:

For: 76

Against: 140

Abstentions: 1

----