19. SINGLE MARKET SCOREBOARD
(24020)
14430/02
SEC(02) 1243
|
Commission Staff Working Paper: Internal Market Scoreboard No. 11.
|
| Legal base: | —
|
| |
| Document originated: | 13 November 2002
|
| Deposited in Parliament: | 26 November 2002
|
| Department: | Trade and Industry
|
| Basis of consideration: | EM of 17 December 2002
|
| Previous Committee Report: | None
|
| Committee's assessment: | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision: | Cleared
|
Background
19.1 As part of the Internal Market Action Plan agreed
in June 1997, the Commission undertook to produce a "Single
Market[55] Scoreboard"
during each Presidency of the European Union. This is the eleventh
edition, which marks the tenth anniversary of the launch of the
single market.
19.2 The purpose of the scoreboard is to monitor the
functioning of the single market and allow Member States to compare
their performance in certain key areas.
The document
19.3 The scoreboard is divided into three parts:
- "Implementing the Internal Market's legal framework";
- "Ten years of Internal Market without frontiers. Views
of European businesses and citizens"; and
- "Internal Market Index 1992-2002".
19.4 The section on implementation reports on "transposition"
(the implementation of directives into national legislation),
on infraction (cases of incompletely or incorrectly transposed
legislation) and on standardisation. On the former, the focus
is on progress in reducing the proportion of Directives overdue
for transposition ("transposition deficit") to a 1.5%
target set originally for March 2002, but extended by the Barcelona
European Council to March 2003. The UK achieved a transposition
deficit of 1.4% in the scoreboard, compared with an EU average
of 2.1%, giving a ranking of fifth, behind the Scandinavian Member
States and the Netherlands. This compares with a score of 1.5%
— EU average 1.8% — and joint fifth place in the May
2002 scoreboard and 1.3% — EU average also 1.8% —
and third place in the report to the Barcelona European Council
in March 2002. So the UK achieved or bettered the 1.5% transposition
deficit target in March, May and November 2002, the only large
Member State to do so. Progress against the 1.5% target will be
reported at the European Council in the Spring of 2003.
19.5 The March 2002 European Council set a target that
all Directives more than two years overdue for transposition should
be implemented by the Spring 2003 European Council. The scoreboard
shows the UK has three Directives with a transposition deadline
of March 2001 or earlier, which should be transposed by March
2003 to meet this target. (The Explanatory Memorandum notes that
two have already been transposed and that the third, which the
Commission has highlighted as being one of ten key Directives,
is now progressing well.)
19.6 On infractions the document notes little change
in either the overall number of open cases, which remains "stubbornly
high", or the ranking of Member States. The UK has marginally
reduced the number of open cases (from 108 for the May scoreboard
to 107 for the current one). The average early resolution performance
is 35%; the UK's rate is 34% and its position eighth — compared
with 24% and second worst position in the May scoreboard. The
Commission's target of a 10% reduction in the number of infringement
proceedings involving the misapplication of EU legislation was
achieved by only one Member State, Denmark. But the UK marginally
decreased the number of such cases.
19.7 The document notes that the recently-launched SOLVIT
problem-solving network, aiming to resolve cross-border problems
arising from the misapplication of single market legislation,
has had a promising start.
19.8 On standardisation the report says the Commission
usually delegates to European standardisation organisations the
task of developing "harmonised standards" (standardisation
initiated by the Commission). But harmonisation only accounts
for 16% of all European standards — and less in the telecommunications
sector. The demand for most European standardisation originates
from industry.
19.9 The scoreboard reports the results of two surveys
of opinion about the single market sponsored by the Commission.
The first, of 5,900 companies across the Community, showed that
46% felt the single market had had a positive impact on their
business, 42% no impact and 11% a negative one. Companies in smaller
Member States tended to be more enthusiastic about the single
market than those in larger ones. Larger companies tended to rate
the impact of the single market more positively than smaller ones.
For companies of all sizes the elimination of customs documents
and the abolition of border controls were the most important single
market measures. The vast majority of businesses of all sizes
said a key priority should be to improve the functioning of the
single market.
19.10 The second survey was of 7,500 individuals and
found they generally viewed the overall impact of the single market
as very positive, particularly for product availability (80%)
and product quality (67%). Views on the impact on prices varied
widely, with 51% of UK citizens saying the single market had had
a positive impact (the second highest percentage), compared with
an EU average of 41%. Some 53% of respondents (66% of UK citizens)
would certainly or probably consider going to another Member State
to buy a product or service. Most respondents — 64% —
were not interested in buying financial services from another
Member State.
19.11 The third part of the scoreboard covers the Internal
Market Index — how it is compiled and what it shows. The
index is a composite indicator designed to measure the functioning
of the single market, especially in regard to the free circulation
of goods, services, capital and workers. The 2002 Index is a weighted
sum of 12 base indicators compiled using the advice of Member
State officials in the Internal Market Advisory Committee. The
indicators and their weightings are shown in an annexe to the
document.
19.12 The index shows steady progress since 1992, with
the overall score for the EU improving by about 40%. But the UK's
is shown at about 15%, largely because price variables are measured
in euros and are heavily affected by strong sterling appreciation.
The Government's view
19.13 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 17 December 2002,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Competition, Consumers
and Markets (Miss Melanie Johnson) tells us:
"The primary aim of the Scoreboard is to monitor a range
of indicators which reflect the health of the Single Market. It
has no direct policy implications, but nonetheless has proved
extremely useful both as a means of evaluating developments in
the Single Market and as a spur towards greater achievement. For
example, the Commission's Internal Market Strategy lists the practical
steps which are necessary to make the Conclusions of the Lisbon
Summit a reality and the Scoreboard is one way of monitoring how
work is progressing and picking up on areas of difficulty. Likewise,
the Scoreboard helps to maintain the pressure on Member States
to implement European legislation on time and enables both the
Commission and Member States to identify problems. This in turn
provides a basis for improving the regulatory environment. The
Government therefore supports the continued use and development
of the Internal Market Scoreboard."
Conclusion
19.14 The Scoreboard continues to provide a useful
source of information on, amongst other things, the relative performance
of Member States in transposing Directives and on reducing infraction
cases. We note that the UK is amongst those recognised as making
good efforts to improve its transposition record and that there
has been some improvement in the UK's record on infringement cases.
We clear the document.
55 The
Commission uses the term "Internal Market", and the
subject of this paragraph is entitled the "Internal Market
Scoreboard". However, the term "Single Market"
is more commonly used in the UK and therefore we use it except
when referring to titles or headings using "Internal Market". Back
| 
