Brussels, 23/11/2006 (Agence Europe) - A number of business organisations, local authorities and unions gave their reaction after the vote on the directive on services in the internal market EUROPE 8926). By approving the Council's common position of May 2006, the European Parliament gave the go-ahead on Wednesday to the rapid and definitive adoption of the directive, applicable from 2010.
In a press release, Pierre Simon, president of Eurochambres, the European Association of Commerce and Industry indicated that, “While we might disagree with a number of the compromises made, we appreciate the Parliament's success in finding a compromise”. The organisation underlined the importance of administrative cooperation at a national level, “we must ensure that the single points of contact in each Member State are accessible…there appears to be little or no coordination between national administrations.. UNICE, the Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe said that the transposition of the services directive would be the key to a successful completion of the internal services market. In a press release it says, it is now up to Member States “to transpose and implement correctly implement it), avoiding delays and respecting the spirit of the text”.
Eurocommerce, the retail, wholesale and international trade sectors in Europe said that it was “relieved” after years of hard work and political agreements, that the EU had managed to complete the legislative process. UEAPME (European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises) I insisted on implementation of the one stop shops in which economic operators could participate and highlighted the evaluation mechanism for examining national restrictions to cross-border service provision. It was pleased that national rules on “establishing of retail stores” were maintained, as well as the ban on selling at a loss. The European Parliament's EPP-ED group network, SME-UNION interprets adoption of the Council's common position as, “the best legislation possible to enhance opportunities for European businesses while maintaining controlling rights for Member States”. The French SME employers' general confederation (CGPME) welcomed the “decisive action” of MEPs in obtaining a “balanced legislative framework” while avoiding the risk of “social dumping and the country of origin principle”. The British Forum of Private Businesses (FPB) considers that the services directive will “significantly benefit UK small firms” and pointed out that, “Unlike for goods, free trade alone is not sufficient for services as some services can only be delivered locally, and therefore need a local presence”. Service providers also need to navigate their way through the regulatory minefield present in many member states”.
The LGIB, speaking on behalf of the local British authorities is satisfied with the “right balance between protecting consumers and promoting competition and business across Europe”. In outlining its relief at the exclusion of the social services and health from the directive's field of application it stresses that, “foreign traders will continue to be subject to trading regulations in the country of destination”.
The European Federation of Public Services Unions (EPSU) said that, “it is now high time for the European Union, and the European Commission in particular, to give equal weight and consideration to building a modern social Europe”. The organisation considers that the Commission, in its declaration on elements in the directive that posed a problem to the EP (PES, Greens/EFA, GUE/NGL) having submitted amendments in the second reading, “missed a golden opportunity” to promote high quality services of public interest. The European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation and of Enterprises of General Economic Interest welcomed in a press release, the responsible spirit shown by the EP. It also said that the spirit of balance in the services directive and its broad political acceptance at the Council and EP would guarantee effective implementation of the internal services market that respected labour rights and the services of general economic interest. It added that they now considered that they had a new instrument to stimulate growth and jobs. The European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN) declared, “Whilst the compromise text is a vast improvement on the original Bolkestein proposal, and firmly demonstrates Parliament's growing positive influence in the EU decision-making process, we are disappointed that in the end Parliament appeared to back away from a proper debate, particularly on the amendments which proposed a more effective exclusion of all social services of general interest from the Directive”. The organisation said that for its members and the small associations that provided vital services to people experiencing poverty and social exclusion “this compromise text is still going to lead to a lot of legal uncertainty…They won't be clear whether their services fall under the Directive or not”. It is requesting implementation of a Europe-wide legal framework for social services of general interest. (mb)