The European Parliament’s rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs on the revision of the European Standardisation Organisations (ESOs) regulation expressed divergent positions in a first debate on the report by Svenja Hahn (Renew Europe, Germany), on Tuesday 17 May, in the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO).
Thus, two groups of MEPs were pitted against each other in the traditional left/right divide. On the one hand, the liberal (Renew Europe), EPP and conservative (ECR) MEPs want to avoid too restrictive rules on the European standardisation organisations. On the other hand, the left-leaning MEPs would like to see exclusionary rules to protect the interests of the EU.
The liberal rapporteur had of course supported the European Commission’s proposal to combat the vamping of the EU standardisation process by third country actors (see EUROPE 12882/3). But “we need safeguards in this regard while keeping the good work on European standardisation with partners from third countries”, she stressed.
“While I agree with the direction of this, I have however amended the Commission’s proposal in my draft report in order to ensure that we do not exclude EEE and EU candidate states”, she said. For her, the inclusion of these third countries is “of the utmost importance”. Therefore, the national offices of these Member States should continue to play an important role, she added, “but without being able to block the majority decisions of the national standardisation organisations of the EU Member States”.
The MEP, Andrea Caroppo (EPP, Italy), said he prefers corrective action to avoid upsetting a well-functioning system and undermining the competitiveness of European companies on international markets.
This line was also defended by the shadow rapporteur of the ECR group, for whom standardisation should remain a bottom-up approach. He warned against the intrusive intentions of the European Commission.
On the other hand, among those in favour of a stronger EU response, Maria Grapini (S&D, Romania) supported the European Commission’s position. She stressed the importance of strengthening the role of civil society actors in the decision-making process and said that the accreditation and certification process should be carried out in any Member State.
Malte Gallée (Greens/EFA, Germany) underlined the importance of taking into account the full range of interest groups and insisted on the need to facilitate access for small entities.
The MEP expressed strong reservations about the rapporteur’s proposal to keep the decision-making process open to non-European actors, which would leave the doors wide open to the Chinese and Americans.
Anne-Sophie Pelletier (The Left, France) had serious concerns about the rapporteur’s position. “Is this not contrary to the spirit of the text and the European Commission’s proposal?”, she questioned. This one wants to reduce the stranglehold of the private sector and interest groups in these various European standardisation organisations.
The rapporteurs have until the end of the week to table their amendments. The vote in committee is scheduled for 12 July.
The EU Council, for its part, took a lead and adopted its position on Friday 13 May (see EUROPE 12953/13). (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)