11 Single Market Scoreboard
| (30422)
6136/09
SEC(09) 134
| Commission Staff Working Paper: Internal Market Scoreboard No 18
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 4 February 2009
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 6 February 2009
|
| Department | Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 23 February 2009
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | 4 March 2009
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
11.1 The Commission has produced a "Single Market Scoreboard"
every six months since 1997. Each Scoreboard reports on the extent
to which, during the preceding six months, Member States have
"transposed"[38]
Internal Market Directives into national law without delay or
inaccuracy. It also reports on the number of cases in which the
Commission has initiated action against Member States for the
incorrect application of the legislation.
11.2 The European Council has set Member States targets
for transposing Internal Market Directives.
- In 2001, it decided that the
"transposition deficit" should not exceed 1.5% (that
is, the percentage of Directives not notified to the Commission
as having been transposed as a proportion of the total number
that should have been transposed should not exceed 1.5%).
- In 2002, the European Council agreed that the
transposition of no Directive should be more than two years overdue.
- In March 2007, the European Council decided that
the transposition deficit should be below 1% by 2009 at the latest.
The Commission's staff working paper
11.3 Internal Market Scoreboard 18 describes Member
States' performance in the second half of 2008. It is in two parts.
The first reports on progress towards achieving the transposition
targets; the number of cases where, in the Commission's opinion,
Member States have not transposed internal market legislation
correctly; and the number of cases where the Commission has initiated
infringement proceedings against Member States for incorrect application
of the rules. The second part comments on trends in the trade
in goods and services over the period 2000-07 and flows of foreign
direct investment.
11.4 In the second half of 2008:
- the average transposition deficit
of the EU 27 taken together was 1% (as it was in the previous
half year);
- 17 Member States reduced their transposition
deficits to 1% or less;
- five Member States had transposition deficits
of between 1% and 1.5% (the UK's deficit worsened to 1.1%, having
been 1% in the first half of 2008);
- five Member States — Cyprus, Greece, Portugal,
Poland and Luxembourg — had deficits of more than 1.5%.
11.5 The transposition deficit varied by subject.
The worst deficits related to legislation on financial services,
energy and transport.
11.6 Fourteen Member States met the target for no
Directive to take more than two years to transpose. The UK failed
to achieve the target in the case of two Directives.
11.7 In the Commission's view, no Member State correctly
transposed every Directive. Italy's performance was worst (34
cases); the UK incorrectly transposed 15 Directives.
11.8 The number of infringement cases remained high.
The EU average number of open infringement proceedings was 49
on 1 November 2008. Italy (112 cases) and Spain (103 cases) were
the subjects of the highest numbers of infringement proceedings.
There were 59 cases against the UK.
11.9 In the period between November 2006 and November
2008, it took more than two years to resolve 42% of the infringement
proceedings ("resolve" means close the case or send
it to the European Court of Justice).
11.10 Member States should take immediate action
to comply with the rulings of the European Court of Justice. On
average, it took Member States 18.5 months to bring national law
and practice into compliance with the Court's rulings over the
three years ending on 1 November 2008. The UK's average was 12.5
months.
11.11 The second part of the Scoreboard comments
on trends in trade. It reports, for example, that:
- the value of trade in goods
between Member States was more than twice as large as trade with
the rest of the world;
- trade in goods between Member States accounted
for 16.9% of EU GDP in 2007, whereas trade in services accounted
for only 5%;
- as a proportion of EU GDP, inflows of foreign
direct investment to the EU increased from 2.4% in 2001 to 3%
in 2007;
- since 2000, total EU investment in non-EU countries,
as a proportion of EU GDP, has been larger than the amount of
foreign direct investment in the EU over that period;
- in 2007, investment from non-EU countries in
Hungary and Ireland accounted for more than 11% of those two countries'
GDP;
- foreign investment accounted for between 3% and
4% of the GDP of the UK, Malta, Belgium and Sweden; and
- foreign investment in the rest of the EU was
"negligible".
The Government's view
11.12 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 23 February
2009, the Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Consumer
Affairs at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory
Reform (Mr Gareth Thomas) says that, although Single Market Scoreboards
have no direct policy implications, they have proved to be a useful
means of evaluating developments and a spur to improved performance.
The Government supports the continued use and development of the
Scoreboard.
Conclusion
11.13 We share the Government's view about the
importance of these reports. Accordingly, we draw Scoreboard 18
to the attention of the House and clear it from scrutiny.
38 That is, implemented EC legislation through national
law. Back
|
