[lg policy] EU: Member states making slow progress on services rules, including language barriers

[Harold Schiffman]

Member states making slow progress on services rules

By Jim Brunsden
03.12.2009 / 05:18 CET

Business groups say EU could miss deadline; directive could have huge
economic benefits. Companies risk missing out on the full benefits of
EU legislation liberalising Europe's services market, according to
leading business organisations, because of slow and inadequate
implementation of the law in some member states.  The organisations
say that the EU will fail to meet its deadline to have the
legislation, known as the services directive, fully implemented by 28
December. There are even concerns that some member states may be
deliberately clinging to administrative and regulatory requirements
that should be removed under the directive. “Some member states may
have followed a ‘let's try and keep what we have' way of thinking in
their screening,” Carlos Almaraz, deputy-director of the internal
market department at BusinessEurope, said.

Giovanni Campi, senior policy advisor at the Association of European
Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Eurochambres), said that his
association was “very worried by the delay in a number of member
states, particularly with regard to some key operational aspects”.
“For businesses, particularly smaller firms, the consequences of this
patchy anddelayed transposition will be serious,” he said.  Removing
requirements The directive, which was adopted by the Council of
Ministers and the European Parliament on 12 December 2006, is viewed
as one of the most important pieces of EU internal-market law, and is
supposed to stimulate cross-border business in the services sector.

The Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis estimates that its
full implementation would yield economic benefits of €60-140 billion,
representing 0.6%-1.5% of EU gross domestic product. The directive
requires member states to remove requirements (such as economic needs
tests and nationality/residency rules) that prevent or deter people
from setting up shops or offices in other member states.  It also
requires member states to set up ‘points of single contact' where
businesses can complete all the administrative requirements necessary
to operate in that country. Companies will have the right to complete
administrative formalities electronically. The directive also removes
barriers to cross-border shopping and cross-border
business-to-business sales.

Campi says perhaps only 18 of the 27 member states will adopt national
legislation implementing the directive by 28 December. And “the
situation is much more of a mess” when it comes to putting the
provisions of the directive into practice. Problem areas include
setting up the single points of contact and aspects of the electronic
services. Neither BusinessEurope nor Eurochambres would be drawn on
which countries are implementing the directive poorly. It is believed,
however, that Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Greece and Lithuania
are among those about which there are concerns. Both associations hope
that a mutual evaluation process between member states, which will
happen next year, will bring improvements to the way the directive is
implemented.  “Transposition of this directive is a very demanding job
and considerable efforts will be needed also beyond 28 December,”
Almaraz said.

Language barriers

In addition, the associations are concerned that only a minority of
member states will provide information to businesses in multiple
languages. There is no strict obligation for this in the directive,
although it is encouraged by the Commission. “For companies, the use
of multiple languages and electronic tools in single points of contact
is crucial,” Almaraz said.  The Commission circulated a note to member
states in September, expressing “serious concern” about delays to
implementation of the services directive in some countries.

http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/imported/member-states-making-slow-progress-on-services-rules/66619.aspx
-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal.
(H. Schiffman, Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list