Brussels, 10/10/2006 (Agence Europe) - Members of the parliamentary committee on the internal market held a further exchange of views on Monday 9 October on the 42 amendments put forward at the EP's second reading on the proposal for a directive on services in the internal market. Positions have not changed since the dossier was examined last: the Socialist and Greens Groups consider it possible to improve the text whereas the Christian Democrat and Liberal Groups do not wish to amend the Council common position (see EUROPE 9280). The fact that there are many different kinds of social services makes it particularly difficult to finalise wording that would apply throughout the EU. The vote in parliamentary committee will be held on 23 October before an opinion is given in second reading in November.
German Social Democrat Evelyne Gebhardt gave her opinion on the amendments put forward by her colleagues. She said she had a great deal of “sympathy” for the amendments that seek to bring an explicit reference to the Charter on Fundamental Rights back into the body of the text, albeit in the knowledge that “one Member State is totally opposed” to such a reference. On the exclusion of services of general interest (SGI), Ms Gebhardt approves of the Greens' amendment which excludes SGI “as defined by Member States” - and not non economic SGI according to the Council common position - but she is also aware of the fact that there will not be “a majority at the EP” on this and that it will not get through Council.
Ms Gebhardt expressed “surprise” that the Commission does not accept her wording on social services although it comes from the communication on the social services of general interest. The wording adds to the Council common position exclusion of social services relating to legal and complementary social protection schemes covering the fundamental risks of life. The rapporteur points out that several reactions have come from Member States where organisations wonder what their fate will be if the Council common position is kept as it is. This is the case for organisations in charge of providing meals to the elderly and old and confessional organisations which, in Germany, Austria and Italy, take different legal forms of organisation operating in the general interest. “Something has to be done” for such services, Ms Gebhardt points out.
A large part of the amendments do not improve things as they reduce the scope of the directive or reintroduce problems settled during first reading, British Conservative Malcolm Harbour said. On social services, no amendment is any better than in the Council common position, he added, speaking out in favour of a Commission “declaration”. “Fully in agreement” with Mr Harbour, Ms Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE, Finland) finds it “very difficult to accept these amendments”. “I call for the Council common position to be supported without amendment”, announced Mr Šarunas Birutis (ALDE, Lithuania).
Heide Rühle (Greens/EFA, Germany), whose group supports the rapporteur's amendments, said that the EP is entitled to specify the text of the first reading. Ieke van den Burg (PES, NL) warned against having a hierarchy in legislative texts and especially against the possibility that labour law be “subject” to the rules of free movement contained in the Treaty. (mb)