Luxembourg, 06/06/2005 (Agence Europe) - The Luxembourg Presidency has continued the work of the Irish and Dutch Presidencies concerning the proposal for a directive on internal market services. Its debates focused on the following technical aspects: - freedom of establishment, the quality of services, mutual assistance and control. It did not examine the fundamental elements of the draft directive, namely the scope and the free movement of services. The Commission is expected to make an amended proposal, perhaps end October, after the first reading at the European Parliament.
“We must move forward carefully” on the services directive, Jeannot Krecké told the press on behalf of the Luxembourg Presidency. “Member States that are worried must not be rushed”, he added, showing confidence that a compromise may be reached on the legislative proposal. He pointed out that the work of the Council aims to answer European citizens' “fears, anxiety and questions” and provide companies the “far-reaching internal market” they need. The Luxembourg minister for external trade then gave his assurance that the current text will not get through, that ministers are “aware” that this is a “very sensitive” matter and that it is necessary to “give credibility back to the approach”.
France trusts there will be compliance with the “roadmap” sketched out at the last European Council, Catherine Colonna, French Minister for European Affairs, said, adding: “no more, no less”. In March 2005, the Heads of State and Government defined the principles that are to guide the work on the services directive, namely the opening of the internal services market and the safeguarding of the European social model. Catherine Colonna restated France's position on this issue, namely that there is a need for complete review of the text and for work along the lines of minimal harmonisation. “Otherwise, it is an open door to downward alignment”, she explained. She went on to add that France hopes, among other things, that “health, public services, including services of general economic interest, audiovisual and cinema” will be excluded from the scope of the legislative proposal.
The chapter on the freedom of establishment provides for more flexible rules and procedures relating to access to service activities and their exercise through administrative simplification, modernisation of authorisation regimes and mutual assessment of legal requirements. According to the Luxembourg Presidency's document, all Member States consider modernisation of the administrative environment a “top priority”. The creation of one-stop shops and the setting in place of electronic procedures receive broad support. Many Member States are reticent about the principle of tacit approval being automatically granted if authorities do not respond to requests put forward by the service provider in a given area.
The chapter on service quality provides for obligations pertaining to professional responsibility insurance and defines a framework for dispute settlement. The Luxembourg Presidency notes “major progress” in this field thanks to the constructive suggestions made by Member States. Partial restructuring of the chapter was largely backed, the aim being to find a “golden mean” between the provision of appropriate information for consumers and the need not to impose excessively heavy requirements on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). On the other hand, opinions differ over the harmonisation of the obligation for service providers to subscribe to a professional responsibility insurance. Some Member States doubt that it is appropriate to have such insurance, while others support this principle and consider that the scope and criteria of such an obligation must be specified in greater detail.
The debate on mutual assurance and control confirmed the “essential importance” of effective cooperation between Member States. Improvements suggested by the Luxembourg Presidency received broad support, mainly on two aspects: the situations and the activities relating to mutual assistance as well as the definition of responsibilities and respective tasks. Several mutual assistance obligations, initially provided for in cases of crossborder services, have been extended to the freedom of establishment. A special provision relating to control of the way cooperation works was introduced in order to reduce the risk that the Member States do not fulfil their obligations. The training and exchange of personnel responsible for mutual assistance is also contemplated. Discussions should continue on a system of information exchange on the worthiness of service providers.
The Commission will soon be setting up a specific working group (IMI) that will reflect on the practical modalities for the creation of an electronic cooperation system. The group will take inspiration from the experience of the SOLVIT network which allows practical difficulties connected with the internal market to be resolved. The inauguration of a prototype of the system is foreseen for the end of the year.