Brussels, 14/06/2005 (Agence Europe) - On 13 June, Charlie McCreevy presented to the EP committee on the internal market his vision of discussions underway on the services directive. The Commissioner for the internal market considers it is first and foremost up to MEPs to give their views, and states that he will be “reasonable” if the EP remains “reasonable”. He is somewhat vague, however, about the behaviour of the Commission after the first reading in Parliament. German Social-Democrat Evelyne Gebhardt, rapporteur, reiterated that she will not accept any compromise that does not safeguard “social protection”. British Conservative Malcolm Harbour develops the idea of the “internal market principle”. MEPs submitted nearly 1000 amendments to the proposal: 151 from the PES Group (plus 250 individual amendments, 167 from the EPP-ED (plus 293 individual amendments). The vote in parliamentary committee will take place in September.
“We have been able to go from a very emotional subject to a factual one”, Mc Creevy said referring to the directive on services in the internal market. He welcomes the “major effort” made by the political groups “in proposing constructive solutions”. In his view, without the “will to compromise” there will be do directive, and it would be “irresponsible to come to this”. Mr McCreevy recognises the challenges of this dossier such as the confidence crisis in Europe for which we are all a little responsible. “I am a pragmatic man”, he told MEPs, but it is also necessary to be bold, as one cannot back-pedal on the proposal that could still fall victim to economic difficulties, he said. In response to fears expressed on social dumping, the Commissioner states it is necessary to be “clear” about things: the intention is not to level salaries and social standards downward. During his last speech at the EP on this subject in March this year, Charlie McCreevy had stated his intention to maintain the proposal to exclude health and services of general interest (SGI) financed by public funds from the scope of the directive and to verify application of the principle of country of origin for crossborder service provision (see EUROPE 8905).
Evelyne Gebhardt is pleased the Commission is “ready to take all reasonable proposals into consideration”. “I must say no” to the members of the PES Group that call for the directive to be withdrawn, she added, as “it is not the line” she follows. She considers that her approach is “not maximalist” and could be “a good basis for compromise”. She restates her resolve to replace the principle of country of origin with the principle of mutual recognition (EUROPE 8928 and 8954). A legally established service provider in a Member State may also provide services on a crossborder basis and the Member State of destination may not demand any additional credentials than those guaranteed in the country of origin. The service provider, however, must respect labour and social and environmental law in the host country. It is also necessary to ensure that there is complementary harmonisation, Evelyne Gebhardt continued, stating ”it is not a question of 300 directives but of hardly a dozen” and these directives are said to be sector-specific mainly on services of general interest (SGI), and transversal when they concern the responsibility of service providers or consumer protection. Malcolm Harbour presented the approach of the EPP-ED Group based on the internal market principle (see EUROPE 8967). Answering questions put to him by EUROPE, the shadow rapporteur explains that this principle introduces “automatic recognition” for service providers (unlike the principle of mutual recognition that would only allow individual recognition) and gives the authorities of the host country the possibility to control the services provided, on condition that the administrations cooperate more. “We do not want more harmonisation, as that is too complex (…). We want a solution that is as simple as possible with guarantees for the public”, he said, admitting that there are “imperfections” in the Commission's proposal that require greater “clarity”, mainly on the links with other Community legislative acts. Neither is it a question of decreasing imperatives on social rights, health, consumer protection and the environment, he said. Mr Harbour stressed that: - the directive aims to make life easier for service providers, but the proposal put forward by Ms Gebhardt minimises this impact. In her view, it is necessary to prevent “exemptions that would be restrictions”. Too many services, mainly in the field of SIG, are given on a commercial base and should be opened up to competition, the British Conservative states.