The compromise on the regulation on mutual recognition of non-harmonised products unveiled by the Bulgarian Presidency of the EU on Monday 28 May at the Competitiveness Council was agreed upon unanimously by national delegations, which adopted a general approach.
Internal Market and Industry Commissioner Elzbieta Bienkowska commented to this newsletter that she was naturally delighted each time progress was made on a proposal from the European Commission, but seemed to regret that it had taken so many years to implement existing internal market rules. The Commissioner, however, welcomed the speed with which the negotiations had advanced under the Bulgarian Presidency, the initiative having been unveiled in December 2017 (see EUROPE 11929).
As reported (see EUROPE 12027), the changes made by the Council aim to clarify the nature of the statement of mutual recognition (Art.4), giving member states the option of not allowing goods to be sold on their home market for legitimate public interest reasons (Art.5, Recital 24) in connection with the Cassis de Dijon ruling (C-120/78), to amend the timeline of the problem-solving procedure (Art.8), clarifying the work of product contact points (Art. 9), and administrative cooperation (Art.10).
The title of the mutual recognition statement has been clarified upon request from the French delegation and has been renamed the ‘Declaration of legal commercialisation for the purposes of mutual recognition’ (our translation) in order to highlight the non-automatic nature of mutual recognition. The Council says that the statement of mutual recognition could be established by an importer or a distributor, since the compulsory information is identical.
For the problem resolution procedures, the procedure timing has been changed to six weeks to leave time for questions to be answered when assessing goods, On the work of product contact points, a paragraph has been added upon request from the German delegation to add an exemption to the obligation to put information online about the competent authorities due to the complexity, organisation and sharing of work among a member state’s competent authorities.
Difficulties ahead
All delegations welcomed the balance struck in the compromise by the Bulgarian Presidency and the speed of the negotiations under its aegis. Several diplomatic sources say that the text presented by the European Commission five months ago, however, was not so problematical, given that it introduced a voluntary mechanism. A source commented sarcastically that the effect would have been the same if the Commission had presented an annex.
This text presents a new facet of the products package of December, which is divided into two initiatives, as Commissioner Bieńkowska highlighted. The second regulation on respect and actual application of the legislation would be more arduous, as the Commissioner admitted at a press conference, concerned about the delay in the negotiations and calling on the member states to ‘speed up’ the talks.
A diplomatic source expressed scepticism, fearing that agreement would not be reached before the European elections. This would delay adoption of this text which is a composite proposal inspired by and including aspects of the product security package of legislation that had been blocked at the Council (see EUROPE 10976).
At the European Parliament, the text (for which the rapporteur is Ivan Štefanec) should be adopted after the summer break on 3 September by the internal market and consumer protection committee (IMCO). (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)