Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Legal framework for consumer policy
Date: 2006-04-20
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, consumer policy, legal basis

8.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/71

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Legal framework for consumer
policy

(2006/C 185/13)

On 10 February 2005, the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules
of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on the Legal framework for consumer policy.

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 28 March 2006. The rapporteur was Mr Pegado
Liz.

At its 426th plenary session, held on 20 and 21 April 2006 (meeting of 20 April), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 45 votes to 26, with two abstentions.

1. Summary

1.1
In any community of law, the policy the community
intends to pursue must be founded on a legal basis which
defines the limits to the community's powers and the para-
meters of its remit. The European Union is a community of law
and, as such, it must meet this requirement.

1.2
For a legal basis to be suitable, workable and effective, it
needs to be clear, precise and independent. It must set out the
objectives, founding principles and implementing criteria for
the policy which the community of law intends to pursue, and
cover all the policy areas for which it was designed.

1.3 With the adoption of
the Maastricht Treaty, Article
129a of the Treaty became the new legal basis for action in the
area of consumer protection policy in the European Union. It
soon became apparent that it was an inadequate basis for devel-
oping a fully-fledged policy in this field.

1.4
The non-application of this legal basis over the years
highlighted its inadequacies as a suitable and effective legal
basis for promoting a genuine policy for the protection of
consumer interests at Community level.

1.5
The changes introduced by the new Article 153 of the
Amsterdam Treaty did not address these shortcomings. Nor did
the texts proposed with a view to the adoption of the European
Constitution.

Consumer policy is clearly one of

1.6
the policy areas
closest to European citizens. It can play a key role in influen-
cing their commitment to the European ideal, insofar as the
latter satisfies their needs and aspirations, which has not always
been the case (1).

(1) As is noted by the EESC in, inter alia, its opinion on Consumer policy
post-enlargement of the European Union (OJ C 221, 8.9.2005), and
also acknowledged by the European Parliament in its report on the
promotion and protection of consumer
in the new
Member States (rapporteur: Dam Kristensen, EP 359.904/02-00).
Moreover, better account could be taken of this aspect by the addi-
tional development of approaches for self-regulation, co-regulation
and alternative dispute-settlement arrangements.

interests

Unfortunately, the Commission's approach to consumer
1.7
protection policy (2) confirms a worrying decline in the promo-
tion and protection of consumer interests, thus underlining the
need and urgency to give careful consideration to the legal
basis of the Treaty in this regard.

1.8
These are the issues addressed in the present opinion. In
it the EESC notes that, in addition to the necessary political will
to further consumer protection policy by promoting increased
consumer involvement and protection of consumer interests in
all Community policy areas, there is a need for an in-depth
study on overhauling the legal framework in order to establish
a firm foundation for consumer protection policy.

1.9
Aided by contributions from a large number of Euro-
pean lawyers with universally recognised expertise in this
subject, the EESC concludes by putting forward a proposal for
a new legal basis for consumer policy. This should significantly
help to improve, simplify and even reduce regulation. It recom-
mends to the Commission, the Council and the Member States
that such a proposal be taken into consideration with a view to
the next revision of the Treaty text.

2. Introduction — purpose of the own-initiative opinion

2.1 When the EESC authorised this own-initiative opinion,
its purpose was to encourage a detailed examination of the
legal basis to be selected for consumer policy at European level
(i.e. Treaty Article 153), bringing it in line with both the consti-
tutional text submitted to the Member States and secondary
law. It also sought to ensure the involvement of stakeholders'
representatives with an interest in this issue and of specialists
in Community consumer law.

(2) This is very evident in the new Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May
2005 (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005) on unfair commercial practices, the
Community action programme in the field of health and consumer
protection 2007-2013 (COM(2005) 115 final) and the withdrawn
proposal for a Regulation on sales promotion in the internal market
(COM(2005) 462 final, 27.9.2005).

C 185/72

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.8.2006

2.1.1
There was widespread feeling that the current short-
comings in the drafting of Article 153 were at the root of why,
in practice,
this article is not used as the legal basis for
secondary legislation in promoting consumer rights and inter-
ests and developing consumer policy in the EU. The latter
would therefore have much to gain from a suitable, workable
and effective legal framework.

2.2
The European institutions as a whole and, in particular,
civil society organisations, consumer bodies and the social
stakeholders would most certainly be the first to benefit from
any improvement in the legal basis of consumer policy in the
Treaty.

2.2.1
As the institutional forum representing organised civil
society, the EESC was felt to be the most appropriate body to
successfully take this task on board, consulting with the social
stakeholders and backed up by university experts in the field.

2.2.2
The EESC feels that consumer policy is clearly a policy
that most closely touches grassroots concerns. It may — and
indeed must — have a major influence on grassroots support
for the European ideal as people see that ideal meet their own
needs and aspirations.

2.2.3
On 14 October 2005, the EESC heard the views of
numerous representatives who had responded to a question-
naire devised for this purpose. The views and suggestions
received provided a more solid basis for the opinion. The EESC
takes this opportunity to warmly thank all those whose contri-
butions made it possible to draw up this opinion (3).

3. The issue at hand: a legal basis for consumer policy

The current legal basis for consumer policy is Article
the Treaty under the

3.1
153, which appears in Title XIV of
heading Consumer protection. The article reads as follows:

‘1. In order to promote the interests of consumers and to
ensure a high level of consumer protection, the Community
safety and
shall contribute to protecting the health,
economic interests of consumers, as well as to promoting

of

Vidonja

Norway),

Mr William

(3) The following persons attended the hearing held on 14 October
2005: Mr Carlos Almaraz (UNICE), Professor Thierry Bourgoignie
(University of Quebec in Montreal ), Ms Nuria Rodríguez (The Euro-
pean Consumers' Organisation), Mr Denis Labatut and Ms Kalliopi
Spyridaki (UGAL - Union of Groups of Independent Retailers of
Europe), Mr Jon-Andreas Lange (Forbrukerradet – The Consumer
Council
(CEA),
Mr Patrick von Braunmühl (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband –
vzbv) and Mr Hubert J.J. van Breemen (VNO NVW).
In addition, written responses to a questionnaire that was sent out
to several dozen lawyers and academics across Europe were received
from the following: Professor Thierry Bourgoignie (University of
Quebec in Montreal), Professeur Jean Calais-Auloy (Faculté de Droit
et des Sciences Economiques de Montpellier), Mr Stephen Crampton
(Which?), Professor Mário Frota (APDC – Associação Portuguesa de
Direito do Consumo), Ms Cornelia Kutterer (The European Consu-
mers' Organisation), Mr Jon-Andreas Lange (Forbrukerradet – The
Consumer Council of Norway), Ms René-Claude Mäder (CLCV –
Consommation, Logement et Cadre de Vie), Professor Stephen
Weatherill (ECLG), Professor Hans Micklitz (Institut für Europäisches
e.V.Universität Bamberg), Ms
Wirtschafts-und Verbraucherrecht
Gaëlle Patetta (UFC–Que Choisir?), Professor Norbert Reich (Univer-
sität Bremen Fachbereich Rechtswissenschaften), UNICE and Euro-
Commerce.

their right to information, education and to organise them-
selves in order to safeguard their interests.

2. Consumer protection requirements

shall be taken into
account in defining and implementing other Community
policies and activities.

3. The Community shall contribute to the attainment of the

objectives referred to in paragraph 1 through:

(a) measures adopted pursuant to Article 95 in the context

of the completion of the internal market;

(b) measures which support, supplement and monitor the

policy pursued by the Member States.

4. The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure
referred to in Article 251 and after consulting the Economic
and Social Committee, shall adopt the measures referred to
in paragraph 3(b).

5. Measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 4 shall not prevent any
Member State from maintaining or introducing more stringent
protective measures. Such measures must be compatible with this
Treaty. The Commission shall be notified of them (4).’

3.2
If consumer protection is to become part of the EU's
remit, then it must be subject to a specific Treaty provision, in
line with Treaty Article 5 which, in its consolidated version,
reads as follows:

‘The European Parliament, the Council, the Commission,
the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors shall exercise
their powers under the conditions and for the purposes
provided for, on the one hand, by the provisions of the
Treaties establishing the European Communities and of the
subsequent Treaties and Acts modifying and supplementing
them and, on the other hand, by the other provisions of
this Treaty.’

3.3
This rule — under which the Member States have the
power to determine their own jurisdiction — is of key impor-
tance, since a text which is deficient, imprecise or contradictory
may invalidate any subsequent provisions adopted by the Euro-
pean institutions under the Treaty.

(4) In addition to this article, consumer policy is underpinned by
various other provisions of the Treaty on European Union, not least
the preamble under which the Member States commit themselves ‘to
promote economic and social progress for their peoples, taking into account
the principle of sustainable development and within the context of the
the internal market’ and ‘to establish a citizenship
accomplishment of
common to nationals of their countries’. Consumer policy is also under-
pinned by Articles 2 and 6 of the same Treaty, and by Articles 2;
3(1)(t); 17(2); 33(1)(e); 34(2) II; 75(3) II; 81(3); and 87(2)(a) of the
Treaty establishing the European Community as amended by the
Treaty of Nice.

8.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/73

3.4
It would be well at this stage to recall the Court of
Justice judgment of 5 October 2000 which states that a
measure adopted on the basis of Article 100a (now Article 95)
of the Treaty must genuinely have as its object the improve-
ment of the conditions for the establishment and functioning
of the internal market. The Court notes that, if a mere finding
of disparities between national rules and of the abstract risk of
obstacles to the exercise of fundamental freedoms or of distor-
tions of competition liable to result therefrom were sufficient
to justify the choice of Article 100a as a legal basis, judicial
review of compliance with the proper legal basis might be
rendered nugatory (5).

to recall

3.5
This requirement for a legal basis that is clear and thus
verifiable at international level must also be placed on the poli-
tical agenda as a fundamental and incontrovertible sign of the
need for consumer protection policy. In this context, it would
the Single European Act of 17 and 28
be well
February 1986, which to some extent filled a gap in the Rome
Treaty by introducing a separate environment title as Articles
130r to 130t (now Articles 174 to 176). The objectives set out
in Article 175 and the criteria laid down in the same article for
Community action on the environment have clearly done
much to foster the emergence of an effective body of standards
in this area.

A comparison between the current Treaty Articles 175
3.5.1
and 153 clearly shows that the quality of the legal basis itself is
a crucial factor in any subsequent action. The environmental
objectives are set out clearly and precisely.

Moreover, Article 175 establishes the principles underpinning
Community action on this front.

broadly agreed, however, that, as it stands, Article 153 falls
short of the mark.

4.3
It has also been noted that Article 153 (or formerly
Article 129a) has been used as the basis for measures to
protect and defend consumer interests in exceptional cases
only.

4.4
As well as voicing the criticism that consumer policy is
a mere adjunct to the rules on the development of the single
market, consideration must also be given to the impact,
Justice judgment of 5
the Court of
mentioned above, of
October 2000 (7). The uncertainty thrown up by this case law
may even result in challenges — inter alia through referrals for
preliminary rulings — to the legal basis of certain consumer
protection directives, such as those on guarantees and doorstep
sales.

4.5 Moreover, the text as it stands establishes the yardstick
of a high level of consumer protection. As defined in Article
153, this high level of consumer protection does not necessa-
rily mean that Member States' legal systems do in fact provide
the optimum safeguards. Indeed, Article 153(5) gives Member
States the right
in such cases to maintain more stringent
protective measures provided they are compatible with the
Treaty.

4.5.1
Furthermore, it is by no means easy to define what is
meant by a high level of protection. Article 153 fails to lay
down any parameters, resulting in potential difficulties of inter-
pretation.

The technical parameters laid down in Article 175(3) also help
secure the rational and effective application of environment
policy.

The legal basis is now in need of review in the light of

4.6
the considerations outlined below.

3.5.2 Where the Community legislator has discretionary
powers as to the appropriateness of any intended measures, the
quality of the legal basis is obviously of critical importance, as
this limits the potential for obvious error, misuse of power, or
any clear overshoot of the discretionary remit (6).

4.6.1
Consumer protection policy should be part of the
Union's own battery of powers rather than an adjunct to the
Member States' own policies. Indeed, it is somewhat paradox-
ical that consumer protection, which is supposedly a tool to
help complete the single market, should fall within the remit of
the Member States.

4. Is Article 153 an acceptable legal basis for Community

policy for European consumers?

4.1
In the light of the lessons that can be drawn from the
above observations, it has to be said that the current Treaty
Article 153 no longer provides a legal basis that affords
adequate safeguards for consumer protection objectives.

4.6.2
The health, safety and economic interests of consu-
mers are cited as areas in which the European Union has a role
to play. Indeed, these interests should more properly be seen as
objectives that most certainly deserve broadening. For instance,
is it only consumers' economic interests that need to be taken
into consideration? There is a clear inconsistency between
promoting these interests and taking steps to help protect
them.

4.2
It should be noted that, in essence, European consumer
law has grown up on the basis of Treaty Article 95 and owes
much to the impetus generated by the development of the
single market. Consumer protection is, of course, supposed to
be a cross-sectoral policy, and explicit mention of the need to
take account of it is also made in other parts of the Treaty. It is

(5) Court of

Justice (CJ), 5 October 2000, Case C-376/98, Federal
Republic of Germany v Parliament and Council, ECR-I/8149, particularly
nos 76 to 89.

(6) On these questions see CJ, 20 October 1977, Case 29/77, Roquette

Frères, ECR 1835.

4.6.3 With regard to consumers'
to information,
education and to organise themselves in order to safeguard
their interests, these are principles that should be recognised as
fundamental yardsticks of Union policy.

right

4.6.4
The criteria for determining what is meant by a high
level of protection are not specified. These ought to be outlined
in the Treaty itself.

(7) Case C-376/98, Germany v Parliament and Council, ECR-I/8498.

C 185/74

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.8.2006

Any discussion of an independent

4.6.5
legal basis for
consumer protection will have to take account of the key
priority that must be given to Community policy in both
is
‘dual
substance and form. The
obviously restrictive and paralyses, at both European and
level, any policy designed to enhance consumer
national
protection. Hence,
the ‘dual subsidiary’ provided for under
Article 153 clearly needs to be abandoned.

subsidiarity’ principle

4.6.6
The legal basis under the Treaty should seek not only
to protect and defend consumers but to give them a pro-active
role as well. Consumers are citizens, who clearly must also
have a right to a say and to be heard on any options society
might propose.

4.6.7
Consideration should also be given to whether the
relevant Treaty provisions should not provide for direct access
to the Court of Justice by consumer associations as representa-
tive groups with a stake in European Union activities.

4.6.8
Also, the idea of consumer protection underpinning
the current text is restrictive in that it focuses virtually exclu-
sively on the benefits of information.

nise themselves to safeguard and represent their interests,
not least through the recognition of individual and collec-
tive rights in this area. This expressly means not only that
in place to facilitate class
the machinery must be put
actions, but also that steps must be taken to involve consu-
mers collectively in drawing up rules in which they have a
stake.

— The protection of consumer health and safety has obviously
long been a live issue that needs to be established as a
Treaty objective.

— Another novelty is the promotion of consumers'

legal,
economic, social and cultural
interests. The consumer is
thereby recognised as an active player in society, rather
than a mere user of products and services. Recognition of
the promotion of these interests is also a conduit for the
development of policies in areas such as sustainable devel-
opment. The same goes for a policy that closely links the
promotion of consumer interests with due respect for the
environment.

5.4.2
when drawing up Article 153:

Expression may be given to the following principles

5. Objectives, principles and yardsticks for establishing a

legal basis for consumer policy

— the principle of preventative action;

— the principle of effective redress;

5.1 What are the broad yardsticks that must determine the
quality of a legal basis in any treaty?

— the principle of developing sustainable consumption;

From the points made above, it is clear that any legal basis
needs to:

— the principle of participation.

— the principle of risk-creator pays;

— be clear and precise;

— set out

the objectives to be pursued under the policy
concerned, the principles underpinning that policy and the
implementing criteria; and

— be independent.

These factors are vital in any attempt to resolve the difficulties
described above.

Attendant issues may also be included to improve the
5.2
legal basis. Consideration must
therefore be given to the
various different options for harmonisation. The Commission,
among others, backs a policy of maximum or full harmonisa-
tion. However, the level of protection selected must be genu-
inely high, otherwise there is a risk that maximum or full
harmonisation will prove detrimental to consumer interests.

5.3
The proposed text seeks to amend Treaty Article 3(1)(t)
by clearly indicating that policies to promote and protect
consumer interests are among the objectives to be pursued by
the institutions.

5.4

The proposed Article 153 is three-pronged:

5.4.1
policy, albeit with certain special features:

lists the customary objectives of EU consumer

It

These five principles are vital for the successful implementation
of the policy described above.

The proposed text states in the usual way that the
5.4.3
requirements underpinned here by an independent legal basis
also cannot be ignored when working out other EU policies.

Certain parameters need to be taken into consideration
5.4.4
when drawing up these measures. The concept of a high level
of protection will reflect, among other things, available social
and economic data which make it possible to accurately iden-
tify the behaviour of consumers when acquiring and using
products and services placed on the market. Explicit recogni-
tion of class actions must be also be included.

5.4.5
pursued by the Council.

The proposal for Article 153a sets out the policy to be

One issue discussed is the direct
impact of directives. The
proposed wording gives priority to regulations as a tool of
harmonisation, obviating the need for the ongoing debate on
the precise impact of directives. The result
is a flexible
approach under which Member States can make their views
known when they intend to maintain or introduce protection
measures.

— One new element is the promotion of the rights of consu-
mers to information, education, participation and to orga-

This approach fosters maximum harmonisation, but subject to
a case-by-case assessment.

8.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/75

5.4.6
Article 153 also introduces a new provision whereby
consumer associations are deemed to be ‘addressees’ within the
meaning of Treaty Article 230. In other words, these associa-
tions may institute proceedings directly before the Court
against any Community acts that infringe the Treaty provisions.

6. Conclusion: proposal for a new legal basis

In the light of the above observations, the following proposal is
made:

‘Article 153

Community consumer policy shall ensure the pursuit of

1.
the following objectives:

— promoting consumers'

to information, education,
participation and to organise themselves in order to safe-
guard and represent their interests, including through the
recognition of individual and collective rights in these areas;

right

— protecting consumers' health and safety;

— promoting consumers' legal, economic, social and cultural

interests.

2.
Community consumer protection policy shall aim at the
highest level of protection. It shall be based on the following
principles:

— the principle of preventive action;

— the principle of effective redress for infringements of consu-

mers' individual and collective rights and interests;

— the principle of risk-creator pays;

— the principle of developing a policy for

sustainable

consumption and protection;

— the principle of consumer participation,

through bodies
representing their interests, in drawing up and applying the
rules.

3.
Consumer protection requirements shall be taken into
account in defining and implementing other Community poli-
cies.

In formulating its consumer protection activities,

4.
Community shall take account of:

the

— high levels of protection afforded to consumers in the

Member States;

— available social and economic data on the acquisition and

use of products and services placed on the market;

Brussels, 20 April 2006.

— effective redress in cases of

infringement of consumers'
rights or interests, including through recognition of collec-
tive actions.

Article 153a

1.
The Council shall, acting in accordance with the proce-
dure referred to in Article 251 and after consulting the
Economic and Social Committee, adopt such measures as are
necessary to attain the objectives referred to in Article 153(1);
these measures shall be subject to regular review in order to
ensure that
they continue to guarantee a high level of
consumer protection.

2.
Harmonisation measures adopted pursuant to paragraph
1 shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or
introducing more stringent protective measures. Such measures
must be compatible with this Treaty and the Commission shall
be notified of them.

3.
The Commission shall, within six months of the notifica-
tion referred to in paragraph 3, decide whether to reject the
national provision on the grounds that, among other things, it
the internal
constitutes an obstacle to the functioning of
market. In the absence of a decision within this period, the
provision shall be deemed to have been approved unless the
complexity of the matter requires that the deadline be extended
for a further period of up to one year,
in which case the
Member State shall be notified of that fact within the first six-
month period.

4.
The Commission, in close cooperation with the Member
States, shall ensure the effective application of the measures
taken to promote consumers' rights and interests. In particular,
the Member States shall be required to take the necessary steps
to:

a) define and apply effective, proportionate and dissuasive
infringements of measures
penalties
imposing obligations or prohibitions designed to protect
consumers;

event of

in the

b) put an end to such infringements;

c) provide for simplified judicial and non-judicial procedures
to prevent and remedy infringements of consumers' rights
and interests and for fair compensation for losses incurred.

5. Measures taken under this article and under Article 153
shall be considered as being addressed, within the meaning of
Treaty Article 230, to the consumer associations duly recog-
nised under Member States' national law or by the European
Commission.’

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

C 185/76

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.8.2006

APPENDIX I

to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee

The following amendments were rejected by the plenary session but received at least one-quarter of the votes cast:

Point 1.3

Delete the entire point.

Reason

Point 1.3 contains a strong statement saying that ‘it soon became apparent that the Maastricht Treaty, Article 129a of the
Treaty was an inadequate basis for developing a fully-fledged policy in this field.’ This serious criticism is not supported by any
evidence.

Outcome of the vote

For: 23

Against: 39

Abstentions: 5.

Point 1.4

Delete the entire point.

Reason

Point 1.4 contains a strong statement saying that ‘the non-application of this legal basis over the years highlighted its inadequa-
cies as a suitable and effective legal basis for promoting a genuine policy for the protection of consumer interests at Community level.’
This serious criticism is not supported by any evidence.

Outcome of the vote

For: 23

Against: 39

Abstentions: 5.

Point 1.5

Delete the entire point.

Reason

Point 1.5 contains a strong statement saying that ‘the changes introduced by the new Article 153 of the Amsterdam Treaty did
not address these shortcomings. Nor did the texts proposed with a view to the adoption of the European Constitution’. This serious
criticism is not supported by any evidence.

Outcome of the vote

For: 23

Against: 39

Abstentions: 5.

Point 4.6.1

Delete the entire point.

8.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/77

Reason

This point making consumer policy a competence for the EU would make it impossible to have better rules for consu-
mers in the Member States.

Outcome of the vote

For: 26

Against: 35

Abstentions: 8.

Point 4.6.7

Delete the entire point.

Reason

It is not appropriate to give consumer associations direct access to the Court of Justice, as any interest group could then
make a similar demand on behalf of its members. Granting such a right could give rise to unacceptable situations (class
actions in the USA being a case in point).

Outcome of the vote

For: 30

Against: 38

Abstentions: 4.

Point 5.4.1

Delete as follows:

— ‘One new element is the promotion of the rights of consumers to information, education, participation and to organise themselves
to safeguard and represent their interests, not least through the recognition of individual and collective rights in this area. This
expressly means not only that the machinery must be put in place to facilitate class actions, but also that steps must be taken to
involve consumers collectively in drawing up rules in which they have a stake.’

Reason

It is not appropriate to give consumer associations direct access to the Court of Justice, as any interest group could then
make a similar demand on behalf of its members. Granting such a right could give rise to unacceptable situations (class
actions in the USA being a case in point).

Outcome of the vote

For: 30

Against: 40

Abstentions: 3.

Point 5.4.4

Delete the last sentence as follows:

‘5.4.4 Certain parameters need to be taken into consideration when drawing up these measures. The concept of a high level of
protection will reflect, among other things, available social and economic data which make it possible to accurately identify
the behaviour of consumers when acquiring and using products and services placed on the market. Explicit recognition of
class actions must be also be included.’

C 185/78

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.8.2006

Reason

It is not appropriate to give consumer associations direct access to the Court of Justice, as any interest group could then
make a similar demand on behalf of its members. Granting such a right could give rise to unacceptable situations (class
actions in the USA being a case in point).

Outcome of the vote

For: 27

Against: 42

Abstentions: 4.

Point 5.4.6

Delete the entire point.

Reason

It is not appropriate to give consumer associations direct access to the Court of Justice, as any interest group could then
make a similar demand on behalf of its members. Granting such a right could give rise to unacceptable situations (class
actions in the USA being a case in point).

Outcome of the vote

For: 26

Against: 44

Abstentions: 2.

Point 6

Delete the entire point.

Reason

Point 6. contains an ambitious proposal for a new legal basis for consumer protection policy. As it was demonstrated on
previous points 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, the text of the opinion is missing sufficient amount of evidence that such changes are
necessary or needed. Instead of initiating an extensive amendment of the current legal basis for consumer protection
policy the opinion should be much more strengthened in focusing on real arguments why the new legal basis should be
the priority when it will come to the next revision of the Treaty text.

Outcome of the vote

For: 23

Against: 39

Abstentions: 5.

Article 153

Delete the last indent of Article 153(4) as follows:

‘effective redress in cases of infringement of consumers' rights or interests, including through recognition of collective actions.’

Reason

It is not appropriate to give consumer associations direct access to the Court of Justice, as any interest group could then
make a similar demand on behalf of its members. Granting such a right could give rise to unacceptable situations (class
actions in the USA being a case in point).

Outcome of the vote

For: 27

Against: 44

Abstentions: 2.

Article 153a

Delete point 4.

8.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 185/79

Reason

The text would make consumers policy subordinate to the rules of the internal market. This is not according to the
contents of the rest of the opinion.

Outcome of the vote

For: 27

Against: 34

Abstentions: 14.

APPENDIX II

to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee

The following passage from the section opinion was rejected in favour of an amendment adopted by the assembly, but
received at least a quarter of the votes cast:

Point 6, Article 153a

2. Harmonisation measures shall, as a matter of priority, take the form of a regulation.

Outcome of the vote

31 votes in favour of deleting this point

24 against

14 abstentions.