WRITTEN QUESTION E-1808/99

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 October 1999)

Subject: Notified bodies

The Commission's intention to promote free trade between the EU and the countries applying for membership and to reduce industry's costs by means of the speedy recognition of notified bodies is supported by the author of this question. There must, however, be no permanent lowering of environmental, social, product and technical standards which may affect consumers either in the EU or in the applicant countries. For this reason it must be ensured that notified bodies in the applicant countries receive professional and financial assistance to enable them to monitor the release of products on to the market, so that the EU's quality standards can be matched. In general terms, however, precautions should also be taken to ensure that the quality standards of technical monitoring in the EU and in the applicant countries are such that consumers are guaranteed a high level of protection and safety. There is no room for any black sheep amongst the ranks of such important institutions as the notified bodies.

1. Why was the question of notified bodies not negotiated as part of the whole accession package?

2. What action is the Commission planning to take in order to bring the notified bodies in the applicant countries up to the EU's quality standards, and will that action be sufficient?

3. What have the Commission's experiences with the protection clause procedures been so far and what form will such procedures take during the transition period?

4. What form does the question of jurisdiction take?

5. How does the Commission intend to carry out regular monitoring of the necessary quality standards both in the EU and in the applicant countries?

6. Is the Commission planning to take any further steps in order to promote liberalisation in the field of testing and standards and thereby to reduce costs borne by producers and hence, indirectly, by consumers?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1999)

The Commission is in broad agreement with the position expressed by the Honourable Member.

However, it would add the following comments in reply to the specific questions:

1. Questions relating to notified bodies are covered by the enlargement negotiations, under the chapter free movement of goods. These negotiations are still in process.

2. The Commission has made it clear to candidate countries that compliance with the acquis in the matter of notified bodies is indispensable for enlargement, a position that is not contested. The PHARE programme and, in particular PRAQ III, provide for technical assistance in this field. PRAQ III also provides for evaluation of progress, as a tool for the effective channelling of assistance. This technical assistance amounts to a transfer of European best practices, helping the beneficiary countries to achieve levels of performance comparable to those found in the Community.

3. and 4. The safeguard procedure provided in Community product legislation only applies within the European economic area (EEA), or in countries with which specific trade arrangements have provided for its application. It is not applicable to candidate countries in the pre-enlargement period, unless a specific agreement provides otherwise. The question of jurisdiction therefore does not arise.

5. Market surveillance in the Community is a responsibility of the Member States. Community law requires Member States to take all necessary measures to ensure compliance with Community law, for example as regards freedom to place compliant products on the market and the obligation to ensure that non-compliant products are not placed on the market. However, in the run-up to their membership, the Community will monitor progress by the candidates to apply the acquis through further screening and sub-committee meetings.

6. Protocols to the Europe agreement on conformity assessment and acceptance of products (PECAs), currently under discussion with a number of candidate countries, would facilitate trade where it is established that the candidate country has already transposed and effectively implemented the requirements of the acquis on industrial products. This would require the candidate country to have implemented relevant legislation, to have ensured that notified bodies were performing at Community levels of competence, to have established effective market surveillance and to have established a safeguard procedure comparable to that provided within the Community. In the envisaged PECA procedure, compliance with the obligations of the safeguard procedure would fall under the jurisdiction of the respective parties, subject to the oversight of the joint committee.