21 November 2007, 17.00 – 18.30
EXCHANGE OF VIEWS with Commissioner McCREEVY: Presentation on the Single Market Review
Commissioner McCreevy outlined the main components of the single market review laying down the priorities for the coming years.
“A key priority will be retail financial services”, McCreevy says. “Consumers and small businesses use financial services every day: bank accounts, credit and debit cards, home loans, insurance, savings and investments.”
Other main areas the Commissioner referred included Services of General Interest, Small Firms, and Defence procurement.
Opening the debate Malcolm Harbour (ALDE/UK) asked for a timetable or work plan that outlines the concrete measures ahead.
Although pleased with the intention of the review, Evelyn Gebhardt (PSE/D) was disappointed about a missing legislative programme. Self regulation of banks is not a legislative act, she said. “It is unclear what the Commission really intends to do.”
Speech McCreevy
22 November 2007, 11:00 – 12:30
Harmonisation of the Members States' legislation on credit for consumers
Rapporteur: Kurt Lechner
Consideration of Amendments
Pointing to the 236 amendments currently made to the draft proposal Rapporteur Kurt Lechner (EPP/D) remained optimistic to find a common solution.
Main issues:
On Article 2 he defended his amendment to limit the scope to a minimum of €500 arguing that Member States still have the possibility to further limit this amount on a national basis.
On Article 3 the definition of “Consumer” shall remain consistent with those of other legislative measures. However, Member States do have possibilities to extend it to other fields.
On Article 4 the proposal with regard to the annual percentage rate should remain untouched as any change would cause difficulties in the discussions with the Council.
On Article 5, pre-contractual information, Mr Lechner proposed a compromise stating shall have the possibility to pass on the information.
Also, on Article 8 a compromise is possible as the rapporteur withdraws his amendment.
Art 14 with regard to the 14 days clause should remain untouched as the Commission and the Council stick to the proposal.
With regard to Art 16 the question on Compensation should remain in the competence of Member States.
Speaking for the Socialst Group, Evelyn Gebhardt (PSE/D) made clear that 95% of the amendments made by Mr Lechner are not acceptable for the PSE. Particularly, this counts for the intention to raise the scope to €500, and the issue on information to the consumer.
Many other issues are still under discussion within the PSE group, she said.
Speaking for the Liberals Diana Wallis (ALDE/UK) said that it is difficult for her group to accept the €500 Scope as proposed by the rapporteur. On information, no amendments have been made. Her group finds it difficult to accept a proposal that “provide information only on demand.”
Discussions within the Liberals Group still continue, she said.
Speaking for the Greens Mrs Rühle (GREENS/D) backed the proposal on the €500 scope by referring to the rising grey market. This rise would give consumer easier access to regular credits and therefore prevents them from dubious credit providers.
Malcolm Harbour (EPP/UK) reminded his colleagues that the proposal is in second reading. He referred to UK surveys showing that too much information has a negative impact. The proposal should concentrate on core information, he said and called for a more balanced view. He also reminded to possible negative effect on the credit card market.
Finally, he accused Council not to follow the better regulation incentive with this directive. The problems to find a compromise in Parliament result in part from the inability to propose a reasonably balanced Common Position in Council based on proper impact assessments and studies.
Speaking for the European Commission Dirk Staudenmayer (DG SANCO) concentrated on pre-contractual information presenting the results of the Focus Group underlining that the Group was very much in favour of the information form.
On the right of withdrawl, Staudenmayer referred to the 14-days-clause within the distance marketing directive. He underlined that there are no economic reasons to depart form this clause.
Finally, with regard to early repayment he outlined that the proposed “limited harmonisation” demonstrates a clear advancement to the former regulation.
Speaking for the Council, Ceu Pereira noted that still a lot of discussion takes place in the European Parliament and assumed that many amendments result from misunderstandings of the proposal. She was worried that Parliament departs from the Common Position in particular with regard to lower the level of consumer protection.
