john goossen ministry of economic affairs june 2005 notifications under directive 98/34/ec the dutch...
TRANSCRIPT
John GoossenMinistry of Economic Affairs
June 2005
Notifications
under
Directive 98/34/EC
the Dutch experience
Purpose:• EC Court of Justice: “preventive control
of freedom of movement for goods” (Securitel-judgement (para. 40))
• This brings us back to 1997
Scandal!
• After Securitel judgment, it became clear that The Netherlands had not notified hundreds of technical regulations for years
• Problem for the Netherlands
• Resulting in ‘Securitel-scandal’
John Goossen:
NB this image from a quality national newspaper shows ex priminister Kok warning Justice Minister Sorgdrager and Economic Affairs Minister Wijers for the ‘col’ of legislation they’re about to take in the ‘Tour d’Hollande’. (The Securitel scandal took place during the 1997 Tour de France).
John Goossen:
NB this image from a quality national newspaper shows ex priminister Kok warning Justice Minister Sorgdrager and Economic Affairs Minister Wijers for the ‘col’ of legislation they’re about to take in the ‘Tour d’Hollande’. (The Securitel scandal took place during the 1997 Tour de France).
John Goossen:
NB: This article from a quality national newspaper states “Civil servants think Europe is bull-shit” and “we’re a country of pretending” and “Securitel-scandal results from Dutch pigheadedness, ignorance and disinterest”.
John Goossen:
NB: This article from a quality national newspaper states “Civil servants think Europe is bull-shit” and “we’re a country of pretending” and “Securitel-scandal results from Dutch pigheadedness, ignorance and disinterest”.
Then…
• Minister Wijers took the blame and all leaves were revoked
• During the Tour de France, a team of civil servants started screening all legislation for technical regulations
• During 3 months, some 300 texts were notified
Afterwards…
• A new interministerial Committee was set up in order to ensure compliance of Dutch regulations with EC law– Prepare and send notifications– Systematically screen Court of Justice
judgments and organise follow-up– Implement EC directives– Advise Council of Ministers whenever
necessary
Now…
• 1 contact point employing three people
• 11 ministerial “notification co-ordinators”
• On an annual basis, roughly 20% of notifications in EU15 were Dutch
• Junior lawyers learn about “Securitel-defense”
Advantages for industry reacting to other MS notifications!
• Solution to trade barrier before the problem comes into being
• No costs for companies, reaction by state administration instead of lenghty court proceedings
• Efficient because still in draft-phase The alternative is to try and change an implemented law through a
Commission infringement procedure or through national courts, and ultimately, through the EC Court of Justice
Procedure (1)
1. Draft technical regulation from other Member State is notified to Brussels’ authorities
2 The Commission forwards the notification to the ‘CDIU’ agency in Groningen
John Goossen:
The CDIU agency is responsible for the forwarding of notifications to and from all interested parties.
John Goossen:
The CDIU agency is responsible for the forwarding of notifications to and from all interested parties.
Procedure (2)
3. The CDIU agency then distributes the notifcation with
— companies (associations)— Ministry of Economic Affairs responsible
person— Other ministries’ responsible persons
Procedure (3)
4. Only if reaction from one or more companies (associations) is received:
It is transmitted to all these persons and to the European department of the Ministry of Economic Affairs
European department: responsible for interministerial co-ordination of* Content* Form (i.e. comments or detailed opinion)
Procedure (4)
• Economic Affairs sends final reaction to contact point
• Contact point sends reaction to Commission
• Commission translates and distributes reaction and monitors follow-up
Some statistics
Number of notifications sent by Member States
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
B DK D EL ES FI FIR
L ILU
X NLAUT
PORT SV UK
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Number of Detailed Opinions sent by Member States
Number of Comments sent by Member States
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Number of Detailed Opinions received by Member States
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Number of Comments received by Member States
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Number of Comments + Detailed Opinionssent and received by Member States
Reactions sent by Member States Reactions received by Member States
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
B DK D EL ES FI FIR
L ILU
X NLAUT
PORT SV UK
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Conclusion
• The Netherlands notify many technical regulations…… and therefore gets a lot of reactions (comments, detailed opinions)
• The Netherlands may react more often to notifications by other MS…… but will only do so at the request of industry
John GoossenMinistry of Economic Affairs
June 2005
Notifications
under
Directive 98/34/EC
the Dutch experience