Despite misgivings displayed by certain member states, such as Germany, European ministers responsible for competition managed to obtain a political agreement of principle on Monday 29 May. This will allow the European Commission to introduce administrative fines on automobile manufacturers subject to certain conditions.
It should be pointed out that the proposal to grant the Commission the right to directly impose fines on manufacturers had been debated at length by the member states at a technical level and was finally endorsed during the most recent meeting of the Committee of Permanent Representatives to the EU (COREPER) earlier in the month (see EUROPE 11787).
As part of the compromise presented by the Maltese Presidency of the Council of the EU, article 90 does include administrative fines, “backed up by corrective and restrictive measures at an EU level”. In this regard, the European Commission proposal granting the right to impose an administrative fine of up to €30,000 per vehicle has been maintained. The Commission will only be able to penalise a manufacturer in cases where there has been no decision made at a national level. Similarly, the Commission will not be able to introduce corrective action with economic operators that have been sanctioned at a national level. Finally, the Commission will now make a decision on calculating and imposing fines through implementing acts and not the delegated acts as originally planned. This excludes the European Parliament from the decision-making process.
Main element in political agreement
The changes made to the initial proposal are multifold and have already been outlined by EUROPE (see EUROPE 11785).
With regard to the obligations incumbent on the authorities in charge of market monitoring, the national authorities in charge of market monitoring will now have to carry out a minimum annual inspection of 1 out of 50,000 vehicles registered during the previous year. The kind of inspections have been clarified and outlined by the member states. Small member states will also be able to request other countries to carry out trials on their behalf.
Another important point involves the Commission being able to carry out its own tests at its own cost on vehicles after having provided prior notification to the member state that granted type approval.
The project for an Information Exchange Forum’s on the implementation of European legislation in areas involving type approval was also retained by the member states. Nonetheless, the latter did agree that the role of this forum should only be advisory. They developed a two-stage approach, where recommendations from the forum will be examined at the Council of the EU’s motor-vehicle technical committee, which would be in charge of adopting binding decisions by qualified majority.
On the fee system for financing the type approval system, the Council made the European Commission’s proposal more flexible by granting greater leeway in the way market monitoring activities are funded.
Similarly, with regard to the validity of type approval certificates, the European Commission’s goal was revised downwards by removing the initial five-year limits set for certificate validation.
With regard to peer assessments by the authorities responsible for type approval and technical services evaluation, this will only be compulsory in cases where these authorities have not appointed their technical services (laboratories) on the “basis of accreditation based on standards recognised at an international level”.
Inter-institutional discussions look like they are going to be tough
The Council supported the Maltese presidency text without going to a vote. During the speech made by Germany, the major automobile producing country expressed its misgivings about the lack of maturity in the current text but ultimately supported the compromise on the table, after having being opposed to it at COREPER. The German Secretary of State, Matthias Machnig, also indicated that the text would certainly evolve during the negotiations with the European Parliament, particularly with regard to the administrative fines.
During the public session debate, many delegations expressed fears that the inter-institutional negotiations would upset the “delicate” balance found at great pains at the Council. In reply to EUROPE, Etienne Schneider, the Luxembourg Vice Prime Minister and minister for the economy explained that almost all the text constituted a redline in the negotiations, which the minister thought were going to be “tough”.
European Parliament taken by surprise
In response to EUROPE, Daniel Dalton (ECR, United Kingdom), the European Parliament rapporteur, welcomed the Council’s position which, he believed, demonstrated that the member states rejected the status quo but added that, “Clearly there are differences between the two positions, as is normal in the legislative process”.
The discussions will certainly focus on the level of market monitoring quotas for the national governments, as well as the role played by the Commission in market monitoring.
It is also possible that the European Parliament is not going to appreciate the member states replacing the delegated acts with implementing acts.
European Commission only half satisfied
The Commissioner for Industry, Elżbieta Bieńkowska, certainly welcomed the principled agreement that had been awaited for so long which maintains the main “pillars”. Nonetheless, she did express a number of regrets, particularly the fact that the Council has got rid of the limitation on the duration of type approval certificate validation.
Depending on the determination of the Maltese Presidency of the Council, negotiations are expected to begin in July.
According to one diplomatic source, the Estonian presidency that will be taking over from its Maltese counterpart has informed the national delegations that it wants to get to grips with the dossier and make swift progress during its mandate and indeed complete the process with an inter-institutional agreement. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)