No C 339/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
Opinion on Consumer Protection and Completion of the Internal Market 
(91/C 339/08) 
On 29 January 1991 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the fourth paragraph 
of Article 20 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an Opinion on Consumer 
Protection and Completion of the Internal Market. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the matter, adopted its Opinion 
on 6 September 1991. The Rapporteur was Mr Ataide Ferreira and the Co-Rapporteur 
Mr Proumens. 
At its 289th plenary session (meeting of 26 September 1991) the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following Opinion, by 44 votes to 2 with 10 abstentions. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The present Opinion considers how far con­
sumer interests can be genuinely promoted by the single 
market. 
1.2. The specific character of the problems encoun­
tered by consumers on the market was recognized sev­
eral years ago by the national governments, by the 
Community institutions I1) and by other international 
organizations such as the Council of Europe, the Organ­
ization for Economic Co-operation and Development 
(OECD) and the United Nations (UN)(2). Five cat­
egories of basic consumers' rights have been recognized: 
right to information and education; right to protection 
of health and safety; right to protection of financial 
interests; right to protection of legal interests; and rights 
to representation and participation. 
1.2.1. Consumers must be able to assert these rights 
in their dealings with all sectors. Accordingly this 
Opinion covers not only the problems encountered by 
(!) Cf. in particular the first official recognition of these rights by 
the resolution of the Council of Ministers of 14 April 1975 on 
a consumer protection and information policy. 
(2) Cf. in particular the work of the OECD Consumer Policy Com­
mittee, set up in 1969, and the numerous recommendations 
which it has adopted; Council of Europe Recommendation 705 
(1973) on consumer protection; the Council of Europe's report 
on the protection of the economic and social interests of con­
sumers (Doc. 4920 of 3 June 1982); the guidelines for consumer 
protection adopted by the General Assembly of the United 
Nations on 9 April 1985 (resolution No 39/248). the consumer vis-a-vis the private sector, but also those 
encountered in the public sector, even if traditionally 
most of the problems identified arise in dealings with 
private-sector enterprises. 
1.2.2. Only recently have the public-service problems 
encountered by consumers attracted the attention they 
deserve. 
1.2.2.1. In general terms, however, it is fair to say 
that Community consumers experience a number of 
difficulties with public services. The most important 
problems in this sector include the virtually obligatory 
contracts between users and suppliers of public services 
under which the users, if they wish to obtain certain—in 
some cases basic—goods or services, have no choice 
but to accept the standard clauses imposed unilaterally 
by the public services, whether the services are provided 
directly or via public enterprises or distributors (3). 
1.2.2.2. These utilities and services (water, gas, elec­
tricity, public transport, etc.) are usually provided by 
the State or contracted out nationally, regionally or 
locally to semi-public or private-sector firms (generally 
monopolies). In neither case can competition operate 
to resolve infrastructure and other problems. Free from 
the pressure of competition, these enterprises need take 
less account of the expectations and requirements of 
users than private-sector firms. 
(3) The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Directive on 
unfair terms in consumer contracts [Doc. COM (90) 322 final] 
which would apply to public enterprises too. From the nego­
tiations, however, it would appear that several Member States 
oppose such a broad field of application. 
31. 12. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/17 
1.2.2.3. Public-sector enterprises are rarely covered 
by the legal instruments adopted by the Community in 
the consumer interest. For this reason the Committee, 
alive to the inequalities which can be caused by the 
special status of public-sector enterprises, urges the 
Commission to make an immediate start on work and 
research to identify consumers' protection needs in this 
area and examine the steps to be taken to provide 
adequate remedies at Community level. A study is 
needed to ascertain whether and to what extent effective 
representation is provided for on the monitoring or 
supervisory boards of public-sector enterprises, and 
how such representation should be extended. The Com­
mittee will make its own specific proposals and obser­
vations on this matter. 
1.2.2.4. The consumer wants access to efficient, 
clearly-priced public services. For their part the Member 
States must apply, at national, regional and local level, 
the same rules of consumer protection as are applied 
to private operators, whether the services are supplied 
direct or through public enterprises or distributors. 
1.2.3. In addition, mention must be made of the 
difficulties which the consumer may encounter in deal­
ing with the professions, in particular access to infor­
mation, liability of providers of services and recognition 
of jurisdiction in the event of disputes. 
2. Consumer policy action by Community institutions 
—conspectus and outlook 
2.1. Prior to the entry into force of the Single Act 
2.1.1. Although consumer protection and the pro­
motion of consumer interests is not numbered explicitly 
among the Treaty's objectives, from the seventies 
onwards the Community institutions took a number 
of timid steps towards recognition of the Community 
dimension of consumer policy. The Commission was 
required to promote consumer interests by the Council, 
which adopted a number of resolutions (:) charting the 
route for a Community consumer protection policy, 
(x) Preliminary programme for a consumer protection and infor­
mation policy, 14 April 1975; second programme for a con­
sumer protection and information programme, 19 May 1981; 
Commission communication to the Council on a new impetus 
for consumer protection policy, 23 July 1985; Council resol­
ution on the future orientation of a Community consumer pol­
icy, 23 June 1986; Council resolution on the integration of con­
sumer policy in the other Community common policies, 
15 December 1986. and by the European Parliament (2) and the Economic 
and Social Committee (3), which clearly showed their 
awareness of consumer problems in resolutions and 
own-initiative Opinions. 
2.1.2. As in other areas of Community action, the 
aforementioned initiatives have generated only a few 
legal instruments, several of which have fallen well 
short of the expectations of consumer representa­
tives^), mainly due to the unanimity rule and the lack 
of a legal basis (5) for Community action in this area. 
The absence of explicit powers in the consumer sector 
is a serious deficit in a Europe which wants to achieve 
not illusory but genuine integration and is aware that 
decisions can no longer be taken at national level; this 
is a deficit not only from the point of view of the 
single market, where the Community might find itself 
confined to a supply-side economic policy, but also 
(2) Cf. for instance the resolution on consumer protection policy 
in the European Community, OJ No C 10 of 1984; the resol­
ution on access of consumers to justice, OJ No C 99 of 1987. 
(3) Study on harmonization of judicial means of consumer protec­
tion, Doc. ESC 93/79; own-initiative Opinion on the producer-
consumer dialogue, OJ No C 206 of 1984; own-initiative Opin­
ion on general safety requirements for products, OJ No C 175 
of 1988; own-initiative Opinion on consumer advice and infor­
mation in the context of completion of the internal market, 
OJ No C 298 of 1989; Opinion on basic social rights in the 
Community, OJ No C 126 of 1989. 
(4) Cf. Directives on textiles (Directive on textile names, 71/307/ 
EEC, amended by Directives 75/36/EEC, 83/623/EEC and 87/ 
140/EEC; Directive on textile analysis methods, 72/276/EEC, 
amended by Directives 79/76/EEC, 81/75/EEC and 87/184/ 
EEC, Directive on the quantitative analysis of textile fibres, 73/ 
44/EEC), Directives on cosmetic products (Directive 76/768/ 
EEC, amended by Directives 79/661/EEC, 82/368/EEC, 83/ 
574/EEC, 88/667/EEC, 89/679/EEC), Directive 79/112/EEC 
on the labelling and advertising of foodstuffs, amended by 
Directives 86/197/EEC and 89/395/EEC, Directives on the indi­
cation of the prices of foodstuffs and non-food products (79/ 
581/EEC, amended by 88/315/EEC; 88/314/EEC), Directive 
84/450/EEC on misleading advertising, Directive 85/374/EEC 
on product liability, Directive 85/577/EEC on contracts nego­
tiated away from business premises, Directive 87/102/EEC on 
consumer credit, amended by Directive 90/88/EEC, Directive 
87/357/EEC on products which, appearing to be other than 
they are, endanger the health and safety of consumers, Direc­
tive 88/378/EEC on toy safety, Directive 87/344/EEC on legal 
protection insurance. 
(5) Cf. the discussions surrounding the adoption of the product 
liability Directive, which lasted 13 years, or again the long his­
tory of the proposed Directive on unfair terms which has been 
under discussion for 15 years. 
No C 339/18 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
from the point of view of a People's Europe, which 
needs to have a social consumer policy on the same 
footing as a workers' protection policy and an environ­
ment policy. 
2.1.3. It is unrealistic to want to construct an internal 
market and, beyond that, a European Social Area 
without a specific policy to take account of the legiti­
mate expectations of one of the partners necessary to 
its success: the consumer. Furthermore, against the 
background of a European Community keen to estab­
lish economic and social cohesion among its members, 
it is important to give the institutions the legal powers 
they need to create equal opportunities for everyone 
and to restore balance through measures to protect the 
weakest sections of the community. It is difficult to 
understand why consumers do not enjoy at Community 
level the same protection which they enjoy under 
national laws in some Member States. 
2.1.4. It must be noted that the construction put by 
the Court of Justice on the provisions of the Rome 
Treaty, more specifically Articles 30 and 36, has con­
tributed in some measure to the dismantling of national 
protectionist measures, in that it prevents the Member 
States from using the pretext of consumer protection 
to block imports and thus limit consumer choice (1); 
nevertheless, these provisions have also prevented the 
Member States from adopting or retaining certain pro­
visions aimed at protecting the consumer unless these 
can be justified by objective criteria. This has resulted 
in 'negative integration'^). 
(*) Cf. in particular the Dassonville ruling of 11 July 1974, case 8/ 
74, and the Cassis de Dijon ruling of 20 February 1979, case 
120/78, which form the basis of the copious case law on this 
subject, and also the Buy Irish ruling of 24 November 1982, 
case 249/81, the Schloh ruling of 12 June 1986, case 50/85, the 
Reinheitsgebot ruling of 12 March 1987, case 178/84. 
(2) Principle that for measures impeding free trade, Member States 
must show objectively that these measures are necessary to 
protect the consumer and cannot be achieved by measures of 
equivalent effect: examples may be found above all in the field 
of consumer information and product composition: generally 
the Court seems to think that the rules on product composition 
may be easily replaced by rules on information and, especially, 
labelling. Cf also the GB-Inno-BM ruling of 7 March 1990, 
case C-362/88; German Beer case—Judgement of the Court 
of 12 March 1987, case 179/84 (Commission vs. Germany). 
However, where there are genuine concerns of public health, 
the Court has ruled that national barriers may be maintained, 
e.g. Nisin case, Judgement of 5 February 1981, case 53/80 and 
Kampfmeyer case, 6 May 1986, case 304/84. 2.2. Changes resulting from the entry into force of the 
Single Act 
2.2.1. The changes made to the Rome Treaty by the 
Single European Act—and more specifically Article 
100 A—seem to have opened the way for a more active 
Community policy on consumers, thanks in particular 
to the abandonment of the unanimity requirement. More 
initiatives have been taken on consumer issues in the run 
up to 1992 (3). And a number of Community measures 
have obliged the Member States—sometimes including 
those which have made the most progress in adopting 
legislation in the field of consumer protection—to adopt 
consumer protection measures which they would not 
otherwise have enacted (4). In building a united Europe, 
the free movement of goods and services must not be an 
end in itself, but only a means of helping to raise the 
standard of living, which is one of the objectives of the 
Treaty listed in Article 2. 
2.2.2. However, Article 100 A only refers to con­
sumer protection in connection with the establishment 
and functioning of the single market, which has to be 
based on a high level of protection for consumers. In 
other words, the Community institutions can only inter­
vene to help consumers in cases where there is a link 
with completion of the single market; consumer policy 
remains subsidiary, secondary and indirect. There are 
many constraints on the approach set out in Article 
100 A, and some of them are fundamental. 
2.2.2.1. The 'high level of protection' for consumers 
prescribed by Article 100 A only applies to Commission 
proposals and is not explicitly binding on the 
Council (5), the Court of Justice or the Member States. 
And as defined, the criterion means weakening con-
(3) For instance, cf. the Directives and draft Directives submitted 
since 1990: Directive 90/314/EEC on package travel, draft 
Directive on unfair terms in consumer contracts, draft Direc­
tive on the liability of providers of services, the Commission's 
work on consumer protection in connection with distance sell­
ing, ... 
(4) In the case of product liability, for instance, several Member 
States would not have contemplated enacting specific rules if 
the Community had not taken the initiative. 
(5) Cf. more recently the Directive on package travel where 
the Council has in several instances reduced the protection 
accorded to the consumer by the Commission's revised pro­
posal (price increases, means of redress and settlement of 
disputes, guarantee funds); see also the work on general 
product safety where the Council intends to reduce the Direc­
tive's scope to consumer products, thus opening up the pros­
pect of numerous borderline cases. 
31. 12. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/19 
sumer protection in Member States where protection 
exceeds that specified by Community legislation (1). 
2.2.2.2. Article 100 A does not provide a legal basis 
for consumer measures unconnected with completion 
of the single market, e.g. measures concerned with 
access to goods and services, access to the courts, certain 
aspects of public services, certain aspects of nutrition 
and food policy, housing and certain aspects of health 
policy. More generally, the single-market policy is an 
economic policy and cannot take sufficient account of 
the social aspects of consumer policy. 
2.2.2.3. Besides integration through harmonization, 
it should not be forgotten that one of the integration 
mechanisms provided for in the Rome Treaty is mutual 
recognition: failing Community harmonization, a prod­
uct or service legally marketed in one Member State 
may in principle, subject to the exemptions provided 
for under Community law, be marketed in all the 
other Member States. While legally nothing prevents a 
Member State from practising reverse discrimi­
nation (2), economically, in the long term, such a policy 
cannot survive the pressure exerted by the enterprises 
adversely affected. 
2.3. Towards a Treaty chapter for consumers 
2.3.1. It can be seen from the above that the Com­
munity does not have an adequate legal basis for a 
fully-fledged consumer policy. Experience has shown 
that this absence of a legal basis provides certain Mem­
ber States and pressure groups with an ideal pretext for 
systematically criticizing Community consumer protec­
tion proposals. Many proposals have been killed, weak­
ened or delayed because they fell outside the remit of 
(*) The best criterion for the consumer would be the highest 
degree of protection; this would enable the Commission to 
take as its starting-point the legislation of that Member State 
which had made the most progress in adopting consumer 
protection legislation in a particular area. 
(2) Reverse discrimination consists of applying stricter rules to 
national products and services than to imported products. the Community institutions, not because they were 
faulty in themselves (3). 
2.3.2. The question of the explicit recognition of the 
Community's powers to protect and promote consumer 
interests is very much a live issue in the context of 
the negotiations and discussions on European political 
union, which are geared to even closer alignment of 
Member State policies. 
2.3.3. As a result of the current, frequently criticized 
limits on Community action to help consumers, there 
have been calls in several quarters for the grant of 
explicit consumer-protection powers (4) to the Com­
munities. In connection with the Treaty review laun­
ched by the intergovernmental conference on political 
union, some national delegations, supported by most 
Member States, have proposed mentioning consumer 
protection explicitly among the objectives of political 
union (5). The institutions would be equipped with the 
powers needed to pursue a specific, active consumer 
protection policy and to take account of consumer 
interests in other policies of concern to them. The 
Committee regrets that the Commission has not taken 
any definite initiatives in this area (6), but is pleased that 
it is now moving towards acceptance of the principle of 
a specific provision on consumer protection. 
2.3.4. Against the background of political union, 
it is important to foster a dynamic, forward-looking 
consumer policy. Hence it is essential that the relevant 
Treaty provision lay down a procedure for adopting 
measures by qualified majority voting and make it 
(?) Cf. for instance the Directive on contracts concluded away 
from business premises, where the proposal was submitted 
in 1977 but not adopted until 1985; cf. for instance the 
proposed Directive on unfair terms, pending since 1977 but 
still not adopted; cf. the proposal on general product safety; 
cf. also the work on the harmonization of insurance contracts, 
unanimously called for by the consumer movement, and 
replaced in Community Directives by complicated provisions 
regarding the law applicable to insurance contracts. 
(4) Cf. the press releases of several consumer organizations; 
cf. the resolution of the Consumers' Consultative Council, 
adopted at its meeting on 12 March 1991. 
(5) Cf. also the opinion adopted by the Consumers' Consultative 
Commitee at its meeting on 12 March 1991, which calls for the 
new treaty on political union to include a specific provision on 
the Community's powers to protect and promote consumer 
interests. 
(6) Cf. the gaps in the discussion paper containing its initial 
contribution to the intergovernmental conference on political 
union [Doc. ESQ91) 500]. 
No C 339/20 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
possible for the Member States to lay down a greater 
degree of consumer protection than the Community 
(minimum harmonization principle). In addition, recog­
nition of the need to give a Community dimension to 
consumer protection policy would pave the way for a 
useful redefinition of the scope of Treaty Articles 30 
and 36 under which the Member States can maintain, 
primarily for reasons of consumer safety, barriers to 
the free movement of goods, which in the last analysis 
runs counter to the construction of Europe. 
2.3.5. The Committee fully endorses the explicit 
inclusion of the protection and promotion of consumer 
interests among the Treaty's objectives. It would also 
like to see the rights accorded to consumers in inter­
national instruments(*) cited in the Treaty: allocation 
by the new Treaty to the Community of powers in the 
consumer protection field is the only effective, long-
term way for the Community to equip itself with an 
overall, specific consumer policy. 
2.3.6. Given its composition and its consumer rep­
resentation role in the Community, the Committee con­
siders that it should be mandatory for it to be consulted 
on proposals adopted by the Commission in pursuance 
of the new powers. 
3. Consumer representation in Europe 
3.1. Community machinery for taking consumer inter­
ests into account 
3.1.1. The Commission 
3.1.1.1. The Commission Consumer Policy Service 
3.1.1.1.1. The Community institutions are structured 
to cover the consumer dimension of Europe. But the 
Commission is the only institution to have recently set 
up a unit specifically catering for consumer interests: 
the Consumer Policy Service (CPS). While it is regret­
table that the Commission did not see fit to create 
a separate Directorate-General with responsibility for 
consumer problems (2), this is a major step forward, 
enabling specific, independent analysis of consumer 
issues; it should be wholeheartedly endorsed (3). 
(!) Cf. footnotes 1 and 2, p. 16. 
(2) It should, however, be pointed out that the Service is headed 
by a Director-General who ranks equally with the heads of 
the other Directorates-General. 
(3) To this it should be added that other Directorates-General 
are frequently involved in the protection and promotion 
of consumer interests, as in the case of denied boarding 
compensation, which falls under the remit of the Transport 
Directorate-General. 3.1.1.1.2. The funding and staffing (4) levels of this 
independent Commission unit are however insufficient 
in comparison with the work which it is called upon 
to do, either on its own initiative or in response to 
inquiries and consultations by other departments. It is 
regrettable that the Commission should not allocate 
itself the resources to carry out the policy it has drawn 
up. The lack of resources assigned to EC consumer 
policy (and there are 340 million consumers in the 
Community) is clearly illustrated by the appropriation 
allocated to this matter in 1991: ECU 7 690 000 i.e. 
0,018 % of the total budget (5). Even worse, the Council 
decision approving the draft 1992 budget cuts the con­
sumer budget to ECU 4 300 000, which would rep­
resent, if agreed by the Parliament, 0,007% of the 
Community budget. The cuts particularly jeopardize 
the survival of the Consumers' Consultative Council 
(CCC) (see below), as well as the development of the 
consumer movement in the South of Europe and in 
Ireland. The Committee therefore urges the Com­
mission, in its budget proposals, and the European 
Parliament, when considering these budget proposals, 
to take account of the need for the CPS to function 
effectively. 
3.1.1.2. The Consumers' Consultative Council (CCC) 
3.1.1.2.1. The Commission has also set up a Con­
sumers' Consultative Council which brings together 
representatives of the four major European organiza­
tions concerned with consumer affairs [European 
Bureau of Consumers' Unions (BEUC), Committee of 
Family Organizations in the European Communities 
(Coface), European Trade Union Confederation 
(ETUC), European Community of Consumer Co-oper­
atives (Euro Coop)] and representatives of national 
consumer organizations. This body is extremely valu­
able since the Commission can use it to sound out the 
views of consumers on its work and plans. With the 
extension of the membership of the CCC to national 
consumer organizations, it is now possible to appreciate 
the regional and cultural diversity of consumer pro­
cesses and gauge the profound differences between con­
sumer protection systems in Europe. National systems 
will necessarily be the starting point for any Community 
action in the field of consumer affairs. 
3.1.1.2.2. The Commission must be criticized for not 
(4) Although the number of staff has been increased over recent 
years, many are not established, i.e. the posts are filled by 
temporary staff, agency staff or national civil servants on 
secondment. 
(5) By way of comparison, subsidies to Community tobacco 
growers account for 2,5 % of the total budget. 
31. 12. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/21 
consulting the CCC (*) systematically and in some cases 
for not referring proposals until it has adopted them. 
The Consumer Policy Service forwards—sometimes 
late, but mostly at the discussion paper stage—a dossier 
to the CCC for its opinion; the other Directorates-
General, however, do not do this and some are not 
even aware of the existence of this advisory body. The 
Committee recommends that the Commission consult 
the CCC no later than the preliminary draft proposal 
stage, even in the case of proposals not emanating from 
the Consumer Policy Service, and that it forward the 
CCC's opinion, together with the text of the proposal, 
to the other Community bodies and institutions so as 
to assist them in the preparation of their opinions and 
decisions. 
3.1.1.2.3. The work of the CCC is hampered in 
practice by a lack of resources and logistical support; 
accordingly the Committee recommends that the Com­
mission, and more particularly the Consumer Policy 
Service, do everything in their power to enable the CCC 
and its members to fulfil their duties efficiently. 
3.1.1.2.4. In addition, in order to promote the role 
of the consumer as a fully-fledged economic agent, the 
Commission should organize liaison meetings between 
the CCC and other advisory bodies, especially the Com­
mittee on Commerce and Distribution (CCD), and the 
corresponding EC industry and service committees. Pro­
vision of the secretariat of such meetings should be the 
responsibility of the Consumer Policy Service. This 
should help to promote a dialogue between consumers 
and other economic interest groups within society; such 
a dialogue is strongly recommended by the Economic 
and Social Committee. 
3.1.2. The European Parliament 
3.1.2.1. The initiative of the European Parliament, 
namely to organize, independently of its established 
machinery, the setting-up in 1990 of a parliamentary 
intergroup specifically for consumer problems, is to be 
welcomed. 
3.1.2.2. In addition, the European Parliament is 
organizing public hearings devoted wholly or in part 
to the problems encountered by consumers in the EC (2). 
(J) For instance, the CCC has not been consulted on the 3-year 
consumer action plan. 
(2) Cf. for instance the public hearing organized on 7 and 
8 November 1990 on 1992 and the consumer, by the Commit­
tee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protec­
tion. 3.1.2.3. The European Parliament's Committee on 
the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protec­
tion deals with matters of special interest to the con­
sumer. The Economic and Social Committee welcomes 
the efforts made by the EP Committee to also consider 
the many questions which, whilst not primarily con­
sumer issues, are nevertheless obviously relevant to 
the consumers. Such topics include agricultural and 
competition policies. 
3.1.2.4. Past experience has shown that the adminis­
trative and procedural effort put into examining con­
sumer problems is frequently out of proportion to the 
results obtained, and that perhaps in the future a less 
formal approach might be adopted. 
3.1.2.5. The Committee thinks that it should con­
tinue to hold discussions with the European Parliament 
on all important consumer issues, especially if the rel­
evant EP Committee is in need of information. 
3.1.3. The Economic and Social Com­
mittee 
3.1.3.1. Within the Economic and Social Committee, 
the Section for Protection of the Environment, Public 
Health and Consumer Affairs is responsible for con­
sumer issues. Over the years, it has developed into a 
body on which consumer and business representatives 
hold regular discussions. Although consumer represen­
tatives are in a minority, both on the Committee and 
the Section, the dialogue has proved useful and results 
have been achieved in a number of consumer policy 
areas. 
3.1.3.2. The ESC numbers among its bodies a con­
sumer sub-group and thus recognizes that this category 
of economic agent has its own distinct identity. The 
Committee has also adopted several own-initiative 
Opinions on the problems of protecting and promoting 
consumer interests. One can only regret that the Com­
mission and the other Community institutions have so 
far failed to take these Opinions into consideration (3). 
3.1.3.3. It is also regrettable that the consumer 
associations of some Member States still do not appreci­
ate the importance of the Economic and Social Com­
mittee. Some Member States have not even appointed 
to the ESC anyone professionally engaged in the defence 
of consumer interests; this is also true of other interest 
groups. The Committee urges the Member States which 
have so far failed to appoint such a person to the ESC 
(3) Cf. footnote 3, p. 17. 
No C 339/22 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
to do so, if at all possible, when the Committee is 
renewed next time round (1). 
3.1.4. The Council of Ministers 
3.1.4.1. The Committee wholeheartedly endorses the 
practice of certain presidencies of holding meetings 
specifically to deal with consumer affairs. But in the 
Council of Ministers matters of interest to consumers 
are frequently discussed at 'Single Market' or even 
'Economic and Financial Affairs' meetings. As a result 
they are discussed by politicians from national minis­
tries whose remit does not cover these subjects (2). The 
Committee therefore calls on the Council to continue 
holding meetings specifically devoted to consumer 
interests. 
3.2. Consumer organizations in Europe 
3.2.1. The Commission and the other Community 
institutions must continue to acknowledge that, along­
side the official representative machinery, both Euro­
pean and national consumer organizations have an 
important consultative role to play in the necessary 
dialogue on Community policies. The CCC, however, 
must not be recognized as the exclusive representative, 
all the more so as its composition is such that it does 
not fully cover the whole range of interests within the 
consumer movement. 
3.2.2. Even more basic, because of the process of 
deregulation which goes hand-in-hand with European 
integration, in connection with standards especially, 
consumers are entitled to participate in the drawing-up 
of safety and quality standards for consumer products 
and services. They must be able to appoint experts 
to represent them in the machinery for formulating 
products standards. The Community must allocate con­
sumer representatives the resources necessary to fulfil 
these new responsibilities stemming from the privatiza­
tion of standards procedures. In its own-initiative Opin­
ion on the social dimension of the internal market the 
Committee stated that the right of consumers and users 
(J) Cf. also the recommendation put forward by the CCC in its 
opinion of 9 December 1986 on the integration of consumer 
policy in other common policies. 
(2) Furthermore, on the exceptional occasions when a Council 
meeting is given over to consumer protection, we have to 
resign ourselves to the fact that the majority of politicians 
present come from ministerial departments (economic affairs, 
social questions, public health, etc.) not specifically concerned 
with consumer affairs, depending on the structure of each 
government. to help define product safety and quality standards (3) 
must be recognized finally and clearly; this means that 
experts can be appointed by organizations whose sole 
aime or one of whose aims is to protect the consumer. 
For this, the organizations must, of course, be able to 
show that they really represent the consumer. 
3.2.3. At the same time, one of the principal precon­
ditions for the success of the single European market is 
that consumers be fully informed so they can make 
their choice from amongst products from all over the 
Community. The consumer organizations have a key 
role in providing this information. Here too it is essen­
tial, especially in those Member States where the con­
sumer movement is still in its infancy, to equip these 
organizations with the resources to carry out their new 
duties effectively. The Committee therefore calls on the 
Commission to continue providing consumer organiza­
tions with means to inform consumers so that the latter 
can play their part in the single European market and 
reap the benefits. 
3.2.4. The consumer movement in Europe is vari­
egated. In the North the organizations have existed for 
several decades and have the funds to carry out their 
tasks of representation, information and defence. In the 
South, however, the organizations are in their infancy 
and have scant funding. Consumer interests must be 
represented and defended equally fiercely throughout 
all the regions of Europe. The Committee therefore 
calls on the Commission to continue attaching special 
importance to supporting the emergence of the con­
sumer movement in the southern countries and Ireland. 
It therefore also urgently calls upon the governments 
of the Member States to revise the decision on the 
cuts in the budget which fundamentally endanger the 
development of this movement. 
3.2.5. One of the principal objectives of consumer 
organizations is to provide consumer information. 
However, for this information to be efficiently addres­
sed to the consumer, there is a need for consumer 
education, primarily through existing pedagogic struc­
tures—i.e. primary and secondary schools. Consumer 
(3) Cf. also ESC Opinion on Environment policy, a fundamental 
aspect of economic and social development, OJ No C 56, 
7. 3. 1990 and ESC Opinion on the Commission Green Paper 
on the development of European standardization: action for 
faster technological integration in Europe (Rapporteur: 
Mr de Knegt, OJ No C 120, 6. 5. 1991). 
31. 12. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/23 
education programmes should be given sufficient atten­
tion by the relevant authorities in the Member States. 
3.3. Finally, the Committee would point out that 
European consumer policy must be shaped more effec­
tively and given support—and especially financial sup­
port—at all levels and in all institutions. 
4. Integration of consumer policy in other Community 
policies 
4.1. Leaving aside the initiatives which tend to 
specifically promote consumer interests at Community 
level, it is essential, as the Council recognized in its 
resolution of 15 December 1986 (1), that the 'consumer' 
dimension be taken into account whenever new measur­
es are proposed under other Community policies. Pay­
ing due attention to consumer interests, however, will 
only be possible if there is a global, horizontal approach 
and if all Commission departments are aware of their 
obligations when taking initiatives. Consumers are 
directly or indirectly affected by all Community poli­
cies, but particularly competition policy, the common 
agricultural policy, transport policy, etc. Particular 
attention must be focused on the interactions between 
consumer policy on the one hand and policies with 
respect to standards (2), the environment (3) and exter­
nal relations on the other (4). 
4.2. At the present time however the Commission's 
approach to consumer interests is fragmented. In the 
case of individual initiatives the extent to which con­
sumer interests are taken into consideration depends to 
a large extent on the Directorate-General with overall 
responsibility for the area in question. It should also be 
noted that the way in which dossiers are shared out 
among Commission departments sometimes seems 
illogical to outsiders. 
(') Resolution on integration of consumer policy in other Com­
munity policies, OJ No C 3 of 1987. 
(2) At the current time the consumer movement has a major 
stake in the transfer of competence initiated by the new 
approach policy, whereby the European legislator delegates 
the power to draw up technical standards to the relevant 
private sector; the consumer organizations are calling on the 
politicians and experts to recognize their right to participate 
in standards procedures, along with the allocation of the 
necessary funds to carry out these new responsibilities. 
(3) Environmental policy may have a major impact on consumer 
interests (prices, taxes, diversity of choice, health and safety); 
consumer policy may also, through the choices it makes, 
influence the environment for the good or for the bad. Once 
this is realized, an integrated approach to these two policies 
is inevitable. 
(4) Any policy of subsidizing European industry, whether by 
anti-dumping measures or direct production aids, will ulti­
mately be paid for by the European consumer. This is why 
the latter insist on taking part in the negotiations on these 
matters. The same applies to agricultural protection. 4.3. It should, however, be pointed out that changes 
in the Commission's organizational chart have led to 
the creation of the Consumer Policy Service with a right 
to monitor proposals emanating from other Com­
mission departments. Nevertheless such an improve­
ment must be kept in its proper perspective, given the 
limited scope for action of the CPS (5). The Committee 
awaits impatiently the publication of the communi­
cation to the Council which the Commission is drawing 
up on the integration of consumer protection in Com­
munity policies. 
4.4. More generally, it is important to note that 
whereas implementation of the single-market policy 
was preceded by a number of studies, of which the best 
known is the Cecchini report on the cost of non-Europe, 
no specific studies were devoted to the possible impact 
on consumers of the changes expected to result from 
the opening up of frontiers in 1993. The impact on 
consumers was considered to flow automatically from 
the impact on the economy and on the Member States. 
Early trends nevertheless would seem to indicate that 
these assumptions of automatic knock-on effects do not 
necessarily correspond to reality. 
4.5. These comments show the need for a genuine 
horizontal policy, under which consideration is given 
to the consumer dimension of every single Community 
initiative. By way of illustration, the Committee sug­
gests that draft Commission legislation should be 
accompanied by statements assessing the impact on 
consumers (6). 
4.6. Consumer research 
4.6.1. The Committee recognizes that there is a 
strong need to promote research into consumer affairs. 
Although such research is already carried out to some 
extent by existing bodies in the Member States and by 
the Community Institutions themselves, the Committee 
feels that a more specialized approach is necessary at 
Community level. 
5. Single-market policy and consumer protection in 
Europe 
5.1. Limits to the harmonization procedure in the con­
text of consumer protection 
5.1.1. Harmonization of the conditions for placing 
goods and services on the market is the principal objec-
(5) While the CPS is actually consulted, sometimes tardily, by 
other departments, it is not always able to respond because 
of a shortage of specialized staff. For further details see point 
3.1.1.1 above. 
(6) Cf. also the recommendations adopted by the CCC in its 
Opinion of 9 December 1986 on the integration of consumer 
policy in other Community policies. 
No C 339/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
tive of the Community's single-market policy. At the 
stage reached today, however, legislative harmonization 
has several important limitations. 
5.1.2. Consumers do not expect the internal market 
to reduce the protection to which they are entitled 
under national law. This has been well understood by 
EC policymakers who on several occasions have applied 
the principle of 'minimum harmonization'; this denotes, 
in Community jargon, that a Community text allows a 
Member State to opt out if it wishes to adopt or retain 
stricter consumer protection provisions^), within the 
limits laid down by Community law. 
5.1.3. Whilst application of the principle of mini­
mum harmonization, as advocated by the consumer 
movement, has its limitations, legislative harmonization 
is also faced with restrictions inherent in the Com­
munity's method of functioning. Criticisms of the way 
the Community operates could, more generally, be lev­
elled at all the sectors covered by the EC. 
5.1.3.1. Legislative harmonization does not in any 
way mean that the conditions under which goods and 
services are put on the market will in reality be harmoni­
zed (2), especially in non-technical areas. One and the 
same set of provisions may and does give rise to varying 
legislative interpretations in the different Member 
States, depending on legal and cultural traditions. A 
partial solution can be found to this problem. The 
Committee would suggest, in the interests of helping 
to achieve an acceptable level of harmonization of 
Community legislation, that the Community insti­
tutions should make extra efforts to provide clear defi­
nitions of rights and obligations, use precise terms and 
check in detail the concordance of language versions. 
5.1.3.2. An important factor in the wayward 
implementation of European legislation is the delay in 
transposition into national law. It is also regrettable 
that those Member States which push hardest for Com­
munity legislation are among the slowest to transpose 
it into national law. Several pieces of legislation of 
importance to consumers have not yet been transposed 
by all Member States even though the deadline for 
incorporation into national legislation has long passed 
and in some cases the Member States concerned have 
(*) Cf. for instance the Directives on misleading advertising and 
package travel. 
(2) See also the principle of optional harmonization whereby 
Member States may choose between several options set out in 
a Directive, implying recognition that conditions for placing 
goods and services on the market may differ, e.g. the Directive 
of 25 July 1985 on liability for defective products, which may 
in fact give rise to eight different combinations. been condemned by the Court of Justice of the Euro­
pean Communities (3). It is equally regrettable that the 
Commission adopts a tolerant, laxist approach to the 
failure of certain Member States to meet their commit­
ments, and drags its heels before instituting proceedings 
in the Court of Justice. The Committee appeals to the 
Member States to honour the commitments they have 
entered into at Council of Ministers' level. It rec­
ommends that the Community's political authorities 
draw up sanctions which will actually be imposed on 
Member States failing to meet the obligations stemming 
from the Treaty of Rome. It also suggests that the 
Community institutions should, as far as possible, reco­
gnize the direct applicability of Community consumer 
policy instruments whenever they contain precise, 
detailed rights and obligations. 
5.1.3.3. The authorities responsible for 
implementing legislation need to coordinate their 
efforts if the conditions under which goods and services 
are placed on the market, on the technical side 
especially, are to be harmonized. In reality, however, 
checks and sanctions vary a great deal from one Mem­
ber State to another, depending ultimately on national 
mentalities which themselves cannot be harmonized. 
The Committee therefore suggests that the Commission 
should step up its efforts to secure greater coordination 
and cooperation in the implementation of Community 
legislation, just as it has pursued efforts to ensure the 
official inspection of foodstuffs. 
5.1.4. In accordance with the principles underlying 
the 'new approach', a fundamental pillar of Community 
law (especially in fields where there is no Community 
harmonization) is the mutual recognition of national 
rules and regulations, which means in principle that 
authorization must be given to sell a product or service 
on the territory of an importing Member State if it is 
already legally marketed in another Member State. This 
'negative' integration is likely to pose a large number 
of consumer protection problems. For instance, in the 
insurance field the principle of mutual recognition, 
consolidated by a system of sole licences and monitoring 
of insurance undertakings by supervisory authorities in 
their country of origin, such as will be introduced once 
the proposals for third Directives on life assurance 
and other insurance have been adopted, means that 
insurance undertakings will be subject to divergent 
levels of supervision and supervisory criteria according 
to which supervisory authority they come under. The 
practical implication, particularly for consumers, is that 
their protection will depend on the powers of the super­
visory authority in the state of origin—and at present 
this varies considerably from one Member State to 
(3) Cf. for example in the case of Directive 84/450/EEC on 
misleading advertising or Directive 85/577/EEC on liability 
for defective products. 
31. 12. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/25 
another—and will certainly not be based on harmoni­
zed criteria (1). There is a serious risk that because of 
this principle of mutual recognition of authorizations 
some insurance undertakings will choose to register 
their business in whichever Member State offers them 
the greatest freedom from supervision and to market 
their services from that Member State (control authority 
shopping). 
5.2. The Community institutions and the contribution 
of the single-market policy to consumer protection 
5.2.1. A number of draft legal instruments specifi­
cally designed to improve consumer protection have 
been produced in connection with the single market. 
Several have already been adopted by the Council, for 
instance the Directives on package travel (2) and on 
nutritional labelling (3). 
5.2.2. On the basis of a Council resolution of 
9 November 1989 identifying future consumer protec­
tion priorities, the Commission has laid down its three-
year action plan for consumer protection policy in the 
EC (1990-1992). In addition to this programme, it is 
continuing its work on the integration of consumer 
policy into other common policies. 
5.2.2.1. This action plan contains important con­
sumer measures concerning safety (4), information, rep­
resentation and transactions. Particular attention is 
paid to the need for a dialogue between producers, 
providers of services, intermediaries and consumers; 
such a dialogue is strongly supported by the Committee 
and is of particular importance for consumers in a 
period of liberalization and deregulation (5). In this 
respect the effectiveness of the dialogue procedures 
introduced in the United Kongdom should be acknowl­
edged. From the outset, however, it is necessary to draw 
attention to the practical and theoretical limits of the 
dialogue; although it is undoubtedly a useful tool for 
(*) In fact the supervisory authority in the state of residence of 
the consumer can only intervene in very limit circumstances 
and in conjunction with the supervisory authority in the 
country of origin. 
(2) Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990, OJ No L 158 of 1990. 
(3) Directive 90/496/EEC of 24 September 1990, OJ No L 276 of 
1990. 
(4) Cf. in particular the attention which the three-year pro­
gramme accords to the problems of the liability of providers 
of services. 
(5) Cf. the proposals contained in the ESC's own-initiative 
Opinion of 24 May 1984 on the producer-consumer dialogue, 
OJ No C 206, 6. 8. 1984. the practical implementation of the principles embodied 
in a law, it cannot dispense Community institutions 
from taking the requisite legislative measures. 
5.2.2.2. The plan also recognizes the importance of 
consumer information for the completion of the internal 
market, especially in cross-frontier trade. It stresses 
the importance of coordinating the comparative testing 
carried out by consumer organizations. The coordi­
nation work already carried out by the European Test­
ing Group (recently become International Testing), a 
coordination body set up by the consumer organiza­
tions, should be acknowledged however. For the con­
sumer to truly benefit from cross-frontier trade, an 
effective information policy is needed: in particular, a 
wider choice of products may reduce transparency and 
ultimately work to the disadvantage of the consumer. 
The Committee would reiterate its own-initiative 
Opinion of 12 September 1989 (6) and urge the Com­
mission to conduct an active campaign to inform con­
sumers of the benefits to be derived from the completion 
of the internal market, as well as its drawbacks; at 
present such information is sporadic. For instance, the 
Commission's steps to create European consumer infor­
mation agencies, as pilot schemes, are to be welcomed; 
but it is a pity that they have been established so late, 
and cover such a limited area. The Committee urges 
the Commission to equip itself to pursue a carefully-
targeted, detailed campaign to inform consumers about 
the opportunities and risks of the single market which 
are of concern to them; in this way the principle of 
transparency will apply to all goods and services. 
5.2.2.3. Two general criticisms can be made of the 
Commission's three-year plan. Firstly, there was no 
consultation with the Economic and Social Committee, 
the European Parliament or any other external bodies. 
Secondly, the underlying philosophy behind the plan is 
that its final objective is the achievement of a single 
market. The legal instruments proposed by the Com­
mission are therefore justified by their contribution to 
that objective. Consumer policy is, as it were, con­
sidered a means of achieving the single market while, 
in reality, the reverse would be more justified. The 
action plan does not include consumer measures which 
(6) Cf. Opinion on consumer information and advice (Rappor­
teur Hilkens), OJ No C 298, 27. 11. 1989. 
No C 339/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
do not promote the attainment of a single market. 
Concurrently, there is no reference to the need to inte­
grate consumer policy in other Community policies. 
For instance, the action plan only covers cross-frontier 
consumer transactions, though consumer interests 
require proper protection for all consumer transactions. 
5.3. The benefits and risks which the single market 
entails for consumers 
5.3.1. There are many inherent benefits for con­
sumers in the removal of obstacles to the free movement 
of persons, goods and capital and the creation of a 
single market: in general terms they should benefit from 
the increased competition brought about by the wider 
range of products on the market originating from all 
corners of the Community, with the lower prices which 
such competition implies. 
5.3.2. At the same time, in order to protect the 
potential benefits for consumers of a Europe without 
frontiers, it is important for the Community institutions 
to pay particular attention to the risk of abuse which 
may come with the opening-up of the markets. There 
is no point in removing the regulations which act as 
obstacles if they are replaced by the commercial policies 
pursued by businesses: concentrations and agreements 
could, in the long term, eliminate small and medium-
sized businesses and local production, thus reducing 
consumer choice. Nor is there any point in the Member 
States proclaiming European Union if their public 
authorities continue to apply rules inspired by national 
protectionism. 
5.3.3. Moreover, achievement of the single market 
entails actual or potential risks for consumer interests 
for the following reasons: 
— national monitoring of product conformity and 
quality will be more difficult because of the elimin­
ation of border controls, 
— the harmonization of indirect taxes will be of benefit 
to consumers in some Member States because of the 
reduction of Value Added Tax (VAT) on certain 
goods and services, but it will push up the cost of 
consumer goods for others, 
— the concentration process which the single market 
is liable to generate might reduce consumers' choice, 
eg. through the disappearance of regional and local 
products, 
— the external policy currently pursued by the Com­
munity institutions is liable to hamper access to the Community market of products from non-member 
countries, and thus reduce consumer choice while 
maintaining prices at an artificially high level [cf. 
evolution of anti-dumping policy or of the common 
agricultural policy (CAP)]. 
The Committee thinks that the Community institutions 
can take the requisite measures in due course to elimin­
ate these risks. 
5.3.4. The internal market can only operate effec­
tively if the consumer has confidence in the safety of 
the products on offer. To this end it is important to 
pursue a consistent product safety policy, one aspect of 
which is liability for defective products. The Committee 
therefore asks the Commission to start work on 
extending the scope of the product liability Directive 
to include agricultural food products and development 
risks. The principle of the free movement of products 
further requires the setting-up of a Community fund to 
compensate the victims of defective products. 
5.4. Shortcomings of the single-market policy with 
respect to promotion of consumers'interests 
5.4.1. In a number of cases, official statements do 
not reflect consumer realities. For instance, the idea of 
a frontier-free European area is difficult to reconcile 
with duty-free allowances for travellers, national quotas 
for certain products such as cars, obstacles to the pro­
vision of after-sales services and guarantees for cross-
frontier purchases, or the problems encountered by 
consumers in cross-frontier banking transactions. 
5.4.2. More fundamentally, the problems of access 
to the courts which the creation of a European area 
will pose are far from having been resolved. If there is 
a dispute, the single market will be replaced by twel­
ve—or even more—legal systems, all jealous of their 
independence and sovereignty. European political lead­
ers will have to address the problem of the settlement 
of cross-frontier disputes if they are not to produce an 
imperfect, inconsistent economic system. The Commit­
tee urges the Commission to carry out as a matter of 
urgency the work needed to identfy possible solutions 
to the problem of settling cross-frontier disputes. As a 
first step, the Committee urges the Commission and 
the Member States to press for action to make the 
Rome and Brussels Conventions, which at least provide 
the beginnings of an appropriate solution to this prob­
lem, applicable throughout the Community. Similarly, 
the powers of representation of consumer organizations 
31. 12. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/27 
in both national transfrontier disputes have to be recog­
nized if consumers are to have effective legal protection. 
5.4.3. More particularly, the Committee regrets the 
failure to turn to good account the pilot schemes laun­
ched by the Commission with a view to fostering the 
introduction of simplified settlement and arbitration 
procedures for consumer disputes. The results of all 
these schemes have been promising. The Committee 
therefore urges the Commission to make full use of 
the results of the pilot schemes carried out under its 
supervision, to follow them up and, if approriate, to 
take steps to further their general introduction. 
6. Conclusions 
6.1. The Committee, having regard to the com­
pletion of the internal market and the intergovern­
mental conference on political union, makes the follow­
ing recommendations: 
6.1.1. The Committee calls on the governments of 
the Member States, meeting in the context of the 
intergovernmental conference on political union: 
— to incorporate in the Treaty on Political Union a 
provision devoted specifically to the Community's 
consumer policy and to list basic consumer rights 
therein, 
— to stipulate that the Committee, bearing in mind its 
composition and the role which it plays in the 
Community as consumer representative, must be 
consulted on Commission proposals concerning the 
protection and promotion of consumer interests. 
6.1.2. The ESC calls on the Council of Ministers: 
— to hold regular meetings devoted specifically to 
dossiers concerning the protection and promotion 
of consumer interests, 
— to adopt a Community consumer budget which 
takes effective account of the budgetary require­
ments of a sound consumer protection policy at EC 
level. 
6.1.3. The Committee calls on the Commission, the 
Parliament and the Council: 
— to respectively initiate, prepare and adopt legislative 
instruments which clearly define rights and obli­
gations so as to facilitate the uniform interpretation 
of such instruments and promote the direct applica­
bility of Community legislation. 
6.1.4. The Committee calls on the European Parlia­
ment to take into consideration, in its work on the 
Community budget, the budgetary requirements of the Consumer Policy Service and the other resources made 
available to the Commission in order to support an 
effective consumer information and protection policy. 
6.1.5. The ESC calls on the Commission: 
— to start work immediately on identifying what needs 
to be done to protect consumers in their dealings 
with public services and what should be done by 
the Community. In particular, a thorough study 
should be made of the feasibility of systematic rep­
resentation of users on the monitoring and supervis­
ory boards of public enterprises, 
— to provide in its budget proposals the funds necess­
ary for the Consumer Policy Service to operate 
effectively, for consumers to participate in the stan­
dards process, and for the support of consumer 
organizations in the southern Member States and 
Ireland; 
— to consult the Consumers' Consultative Council 
(CCC) systematically, in the early stages of the 
preparation of proposals, on dossiers of direct or 
indirect concern to consumers, 
to forward the CCC's opinion to the European 
Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee 
for information, 
— to provide the CCC with the requisite funds to carry 
out its duties efficiently and promptly, 
— to organize joint meetings between the CCC and 
the Committee on Commerce and Distribution 
(CCD) as well as other industry and service commit­
tees with a view to improving the integration of 
policies, 
— to submit the results of its work on the integration 
of consumer policy in other common policies, 
— to attach to all its proposals a statement assessing 
the impact on consumers, 
— to continue its efforts to secure greater uniformity 
and coordination in the implementation of Com­
munity legislation, 
— to step up its efforts to provide consumers with 
more effective protection in cross-border disputes 
and to work towards the signing and ratification 
of the Brussels and Rome Conventions by those 
Member States which have not yet done so, 
No C 339/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 91 
— as part of their national policy for protecting and 
promoting consumer interests, to apply the rules 
of consumer/user protection to the products and 
services of public and private sectors alike, 
— to appoint, wherever possible, one or more persons 
professionally engaged in the protection and pro­
motion of consumer interests to the Economic and 
Social Committee when the Committee is next 
renewed, 
— to implement Community laws and initiatives 
within the prescribed deadline and in accordance 
with the principles and provisions contained there­
in, and in particular with the 1986 Resolution on 
consumer education in primary and secondary 
schools. (*) 
(!) OJ No C 184, 23. 7. 1986. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN 
APPENDIX 
to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following amendment, which received at least one quarter of the total votes cast, was rejected in the 
debate: 
Point 5.3.4 
Delete last two sentences ('The Committee therefore ask ... defective products'). 
Reasons 
The Directive on product liability has barely entered into force in some Member States. Hence it is too early 
to know how it is working. Thus there is no justification for extending its scope, certainly not to include 
development risks as this would act as a brake on innovation. Furthermore, the idea of a Community fund 
to compensate victims is not feasible; nor can such a complex idea be proposed just like that in one sentence, 
without any back-up arguments whatsoever. It gives the impression the Committee has its head in the clouds! 
Voting 
For: 20, against: 27, abstentions: 10. — to study the feasibility of introducing, at Com­
munity level, power of representation for consumer 
organizations in consumer disputes, 
— to make full use of the results of the pilot schemes 
on access to the courts which it has funded, 
— to work towards the protection of consumers in 
respect of guarantees and after-sales service in the 
wake of the opening-up of Community frontiers 
and the internationalization of consumer contracts, 
— to start work on extending the scope of the Directive 
on liability for defective products and to study the 
feasibility of setting-up a Community fund to com­
pensate the victims of defective products. 
6.1.6. The Committee calls on the Member States: 
Done at Brussels, 26 September 1991.