1 Nominal quantities for
pre-packed products
| (a)
(26187)
15570/04
COM(04) 708
|
Draft Directive laying down rules on nominal quantities for pre-packed products, repealing Council Directives 75/106/EEC and 80/232/EEC, and amending Council Directive 76/211/EEC
|
| (b)
(26188)
15614/04
SEC(04) 1298
|
Commission Staff Working Document: draft Directive laying down rules on nominal quantities for pre-packed products, repealing Council Directives 75/106/EEC and 80/232/EEC, and amending Council Directive 76/211/EEC
|
| Legal base | Article 95EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Trade and Industry
|
| Basis of consideration | SEM of 1 April 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | (a) HC 38-v (2004-05), para 3 (26 January 2005)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 6-7 June 2005
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | (Both) for debate in European Standing Committee C
|
Background
1.1 According to the Commission, the different national rules
on nominal quantities of pre-packed products which existed in
the 1960s were a major barrier to the free movement of goods between
the Member States. However, because of concerns about the impact
which new Community rules would have on companies operating only
in their national market, it was decided to adopt an optional
approach, whereby Member States would be allowed to maintain existing
national rules, with only products conforming with the Community
rules benefiting from free circulation. However, there was one
main exception to this approach, in that Council Directive 75/106/EEC
made Community sizes mandatory for products such as wines and
spirits.
1.2 As we noted in our Report of 26 January 2005,
a recent review by the Commission[1]
showed that free (as opposed to fixed) sizes would be the most
favourable option, in that it would allow full competition for
industry and freedom of choice for consumers, and that national
legislation increases confusion in the internal market. It also
pointed out that Community consumer legislation now offers increased
transparency, with the indication of unit pricing and the prohibition
of misleading practices and advertising. At the same time, the
Commission also pointed out that there might be sectors for which
regulation on the basis of total harmonisation should be maintained,
for example, in order to offset disproportionate buyer pressure
from large distributors. It accordingly proposed in October 2004
that all existing optional pack sizes should be repealed, but
that total harmonisation should for the next 20 years be maintained
for wine, spirits, soluble coffee and white sugar.
1.3 In an Explanatory Memorandum of 20 January 2005,
we were told that, with the exception of these four sectors, the
proposal would allow all those products currently subject to specified
quantities in the UK (including milk, bread, cereal, flour, jam,
pasta, potatoes and tea) to be packaged in any size, and that
there would be no scope for Member States to legislate for their
own pack sizes. However, the Government had not yet formed a view,
and was consulting stakeholders. Initial comments had indicated
support from some industry sectors, but others, together with
some consumer groups and the "enforcement community",
preferred to retain specified quantities for a wider range of
products. In addition, a partial Regulatory Impact Assessment
had suggested that, although consumers might derive some benefit
from improved choice of pack sizes, the need in future to rely
on checking quantity statements and unit pricing information could
be particularly detrimental to certain groups, such as the blind
and those who have difficulty reading, and that there was a risk
of packers seeking to maintain price points by marginally reducing
quantity to the detriment of the inattentive consumer.
1.4 We concluded that the document was potentially
of some importance, in that it could have a very real and direct
impact on consumers, and because it illustrated the conflict which
can arise between deregulation and consumer protection. We therefore
said that we would be particularly interested in the outcome of
the Government's consultation exercise, and that we intended to
reserve judgement on the document until that was available.
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 1 April
2005
1.5 We have now received from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State for Science and Innovation at the Department of Trade
and Industry (Lord Sainsbury) a supplementary Explanatory Memorandum
of 1 April 2005, confirming that, after having taken into account
the views of UK businesses and consumers, the Government is broadly
in favour of deregulation for most products covered by the Commission's
proposals. However, it will be seeking to retain specified quantities
for a limited number of staple products of particular importance
in the UK market, namely milk (other than sterilised or speciality
milks), tea, bread, butter and margarine. He adds that the Government
would favour retaining a discretion for individual Member States
to continue to maintain specified quantities for such staple products,
at least for those sectors in which Member States already maintain
such restrictions, and that it would also be in favour of a further
review of the working of the new Directive after a suitable period,
rather than the eventual automatic removal of provision for all
specified quantities.
Conclusion
1.6 We note that, whilst the Government supports
the underlying aim of the Commission's proposal, it would like
to see it amended so as to allow Member States to retain the right
to set specified quantities for at least some of those staple
products where they currently do so. Whether or not such a change
is agreed, we remain of the view that the proposal is important
for the reasons we identified in our Report of 26 January, and
in particular because of its potential impact on certain vulnerable
groups of consumers. We are therefore recommending documents for
debate in European Standing Committee C.
1 Derived partly as a result of a ruling by the European
Court (in Case C-3/99 Ciderie Ruwet SV v Cidre Stassen) that the
"Cassis de Dijon" decision, which requires a Member
State to accept on its market products legally produced and marketed
in another Member State, also applies to national pack sizes. Back
|
