BETA


2007/2189(INI) EU consumer policy strategy 2007-2013

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead IMCO LEHTINEN Lasse (icon: PSE PSE)
Committee Opinion ECON MONTORO ROMERO Cristobal (icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE)
Committee Opinion JURI WALLIS Diana (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion FEMM HEDH Anna (icon: PSE PSE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2011/03/25
   EC - Follow-up document
Details

The purpose of this Staff Working Document is to present the conclusions of the evaluation of i) the ex-post evaluation of the 2004-2007 Programme of Community Action in the field of consumer protection; ii) the mid-term evaluation of the 2007-2013 Consumer Policy Strategy (hereafter the "Strategy"); and iii) the mid-term evaluation of the 2007-2013 Programme of Community Action in the field of consumer protection (hereafter the "Programme"). The Programme is the financial framework for funding actions necessary to achieve the objectives set by the Strategy.

Three main sources of data have been used in carrying out these evaluations: i) a literature review, ii) collection of numerical data and iii) consultations with key stakeholders in Parliament, the Commission services, EU and national organisations representing stakeholder interests and Member State authorities.

The evaluation stresses the added value of the Strategy and Programmes and highlights that the actions under the Strategy and Programmes contribute to the Europe 2020 objective of a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.

The Programmes and the Strategy have been increasingly successful in the integration of consumer policy into EU policies. The report suggests pursuing efforts in this field and addressing emerging challenges such as issues linked to digitalisation, moving towards more sustainable patterns of consumption and taking into account the vulnerability caused by the crisis.

Consumer market monitoring, through the Consumer Market Scoreboard and in-depth studies, has played a key role in supporting consumer policy. On product safety, coordination has increased between market surveillance authorities. The report shows the merit of further strengthening surveillance and enforcement through RAPEX, pursuing the efforts aimed at addressing the international dimension of the safety of products and capitalising on the use of new technologies, pursuing the efforts aimed at addressing the international dimension of the safety of products and capitalising on the use of new technologies.

2008/07/17
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2008/06/12
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2008/05/20
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2008/05/20
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 438 votes to 84, with 166 abstentions, a resolution in response to the Commission’s Communication on the EU Consumer Policy strategy 2007-2013.

The own initiative report had been tabled for consideration in plenary by Lasse LEHTINEN (PES, FI) on behalf of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection.

MEPs take the view that a horizontal approach to consumer policy is necessary and that it is vital to take the consumer's interest into account in all relevant policy areas in order to ensure that all EU consumers enjoy a high level of protection. They remind the Commission, in this respect, that consumer policy should be present in all policy areas as early as the stage of the impact assessment.

Regarding the review of the consumer acquis on consumer protection, the parliamentary committee recalls its preference for the adoption of a mixed approach , i.e. a horizontal instrument with the primary goal of ensuring the coherence of existing legislation and enabling loopholes to be closed by grouping together, in consistent law, cross-sectoral issues common to all directives. Therefore, specific questions should continue to be considered separately in the sectoral directives.

MEPs deplore the weak emphasis on the law of contract in consumer protection. They call for the removal of all remaining barriers and obstacles in order to secure consumer confidence in cross-border purchases and contracts, particularly concerning services.

Emphasising the important role played by consumer organisations in improving consumer culture, MEPs call on the Commission and the Member States to provide adequate funding for such organisations. They also encourage the Commission to continue to support consumers' rights in relation to product safety by ensuring the integrity of the CE marking and improving market surveillance at all appropriate national levels, using the RAPEX (Rapid Alert System for non-food consumer products).

Improved knowledge base: MEPs call for an increased focus on genuine consumer behaviour, while taking into account special needs of vulnerable groups such as children and elderly people and people with certain disabilities. Special focus should also be given to equip consumers with the skills and tools needed to increase their confidence in the digital environment. In this respect, data protection and privacy rules should be included in any consumer strategy. According to MEPs, consumer protection should be an integral part of the processes of the planning and design of products and services by undertakings, and it is therefore vital to examine market change.

Noting that financial, banking and insurance markets are particularly open to e-commerce, MEPs urge the Commission and the Member States to ensure more favourable conditions for the development of the cross-border e-purchase. The Commission is called upon to conduct a study on the different mechanisms for solving disagreements between consumers and enterprises used in the Member States, with the aim to identify and promote the use of the effective ones.

MEPs call for measures to improve dialogue at EU level between consumer organisations and industry, to include all actors in the value chain. Furthermore, they underline the fact that the development of a consumer culture is assisted by the systematic education of consumers as regards their rights and the assertion thereof.

Enhanced focus on services : the report highlights the importance of promoting cross-border transactions in order to increase freedom of choice and the role of competition policy and education about responsible consumption. MEPs stress that enhanced liberalisation of the services market in particular is needed to promote competition, thus offering lower prices for consumers.

Special attention is needed to ensure consumer protection and choice in the completion of the internal market for financial services. In this respect, the report stresses that financial, banking and insurance products are extremely complex. MEPs believe that if citizens are to be encouraged to increase their use of those products, especially when dealing with their future pensions, binding policies favouring consumer information and advice should ensure that consumers are aware of all the options available. They stress, however, that consumer protection cannot be an excuse for protectionism.

In relation to financial markets , MEPs recommend strengthening uniform enforcement of existing legislation before proposing additional rules.

Improved access to redress: MEPs take the view that disputes between consumers and economic operators should primarily be settled out of court, which necessitates strengthening the European Consumers Centres and SOLVIT and greater financial resources for their network. The Commission is called upon to explore the merits of establishing a special European Consumer Ombudsman in the European Ombudsman's office and MEPs support the proposal for consumer liaison officers to be appointed within the Commission.

The resolution recalls that the Community is not competent to prescribe rules for national procedural law. The specific features of national legal systems must as far as possible be taken into account by leaving Member States free to choose between different options having equivalent effect. MEPs highlight that, in a number of Member States, there are constitutional constraints that have to be taken into account when it comes to designing a European model for consumer redress.

The Commission is called upon to carefully assess, in consultation with the Parliament, the issue of consumer redress, bearing in mind the following considerations:

that any new proposals by the Commission in the area of consumer redress should be based on a thorough examination of existing problems, if any, and the envisaged benefits for consumers; that in respect of cross-border proceedings and possible systems of collective redress, extensive research should be carried out into systems of collective redress, drawing on experience around the world, with special regard to the concerns expressed at the excesses and drawbacks of the US model and at the possible lack of a legal base for such an instrument at EU level.

Documents
2008/05/20
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2008/05/19
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2008/04/16
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2008/04/16
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2008/04/08
   EP - Vote in committee
Details

The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection adopted the own initiative report by Lasse LEHTINEN (PES, FI), in response to the Commission’s Communication on the EU Consumer Policy strategy 2007-2013.

MEPs take the view that a horizontal approach to consumer policy is necessary and that it is vital to take the consumer's interest into account in all relevant policy areas in order to ensure that all EU consumers enjoy a high level of protection. They remind the Commission, in this respect, that consumer policy should be present in all policy areas as early as the stage of the impact assessment.

Regarding the review of the consumer acquis on consumer protection, the parliamentary committee recalls its preference for the adoption of a mixed approach , i.e. a horizontal instrument with the primary goal of ensuring the coherence of existing legislation and enabling loopholes to be closed by grouping together, in consistent law, cross-sectoral issues common to all directives. Therefore, specific questions should continue to be considered separately in the sectoral directives.

MEPs deplore the weak emphasis on the law of contract in consumer protection. They call for the removal of all remaining barriers and obstacles in order to secure consumer confidence in cross-border purchases and contracts, particularly concerning services.

Emphasising the important role played by consumer organisations in improving consumer culture, MEPs call on the Commission and the Member States to provide adequate funding for such organisations. They also encourage the Commission to continue to support consumers' rights in relation to product safety by ensuring the integrity of the CE marking and improving market surveillance at all appropriate national levels, using the RAPEX (Rapid Alert System for non-food consumer products).

Improved knowledge base : MEPs call for an increased focus on genuine consumer behaviour, while taking into account special needs of vulnerable groups such as children and elderly people and people with certain disabilities. Special focus should also be given to equip consumers with the skills and tools needed to increase their confidence in the digital environment. In this respect, data protection and privacy rules should be included in any consumer strategy.

Noting that financial, banking and insurance markets are particularly open to e-commerce, MEPs urge the Commission and the Member States to ensure more favourable conditions for the development of the cross-border e-purchase. The Commission is called upon to conduct a study on the different mechanisms for solving disagreements between consumers and enterprises used in the Member States, with the aim to identify and promote the use of the effective ones.

MEPs call for measures to improve dialogue at EU level between consumer organisations and industry, to include all actors in the value chain. Furthermore, they underline the fact that the development of a consumer culture is assisted by the systematic education of consumers as regards their rights and the assertion thereof.

Enhanced focus on services : the report highlights the importance of promoting cross-border transactions in order to increase freedom of choice and the role of competition policy and education about responsible consumption. They stress that enhanced liberalisation of the services market in particular is needed to promote competition, thus offering lower prices for consumers.

Special attention is needed to ensure consumer protection and choice in the completion of the internal market for financial services. In this respect, the report stresses that financial, banking and insurance products are extremely complex. MEPs believe that if citizens are to be encouraged to increase their use of those products, especially when dealing with their future pensions, binding policies favouring consumer information and advice should ensure that consumers are aware of all the options available. They stress, however, that consumer protection cannot be an excuse for protectionism.

In relation to financial markets, MEPs recommend strengthening uniform enforcement of existing legislation before proposing additional rules.

Improved access to redress : MEPs take the view that disputes between consumers and economic operators should primarily be settled out of court, which necessitates strengthening the European Consumers Centres and SOLVIT and greater financial resources for their network. The Commission is called upon to explore the merits of establishing a special European Consumer Ombudsman in the European Ombudsman's office.

The report recalls that the Community is not competent to prescribe rules for national procedural law. The specific features of national legal systems must as far as possible be taken into account by leaving Member States free to choose between different options having equivalent effect. MEPs highlight that, in a number of Member States, there are constitutional constraints that have to be taken into account when it comes to designing a European model for consumer redress.

The Commission is called upon to carefully assess the issue of consumer redress, bearing in mind the following considerations:

that any new proposals by the Commission in the area of consumer redress should be based on a thorough examination of existing problems, if any, and the envisaged benefits for consumers; that in respect of cross-border proceedings and possible systems of collective redress, extensive research should be carried out into systems of collective redress, drawing on experience around the world, with special regard to the concerns expressed at the excesses and drawbacks of the US model and at the possible lack of a legal base for such an instrument at EU level.

2008/03/31
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2008/02/05
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2008/02/01
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2008/01/31
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2007/12/19
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2007/11/28
   EP - WALLIS Diana (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2007/10/23
   EP - MONTORO ROMERO Cristobal (PPE-DE) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2007/10/15
   EP - HEDH Anna (PSE) appointed as rapporteur in FEMM
2007/10/03
   EP - LEHTINEN Lasse (PSE) appointed as rapporteur in IMCO
2007/09/28
   CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2007/09/28
   CSL - Council Meeting
2007/09/27
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2007/03/15
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2007/03/13
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2007/03/13
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2007/03/13
   EC - Non-legislative basic document published
Details

PURPOSE: to propose an EU Consumer Policy strategy 2007-2013.

BACKGROUND: the place of EU consumer policy will be at the heart of the next phase of the internal market, as set out in the Commission’s communication to the 2007 Spring European Council on the Single Market Review (COM(2007)0060). The 493 million EU consumers are central to the three main challenges facing the EU: growth, jobs and the need to re-connect with our citizens. The internal market has the potential to be the largest retail market in the world. Today, it remains largely fragmented along national lines, forming 27 mini-markets instead. The advent of the e-commerce revolution, which has still not reached critical mass, has transformed the potential for integration of retail markets in the EU to give a major stimulus to competitiveness and expand the opportunities for EU citizens.

This is an ambitious agenda for a relatively young EU policy. In the period 2007-2013, consumer policy is uniquely well placed to help the EU rise to the challenges of growth and jobs and re-connecting with its citizens. The EU will know if it has succeeded if by 2013 it can credibly demonstrate to all EU citizens that they can shop from anywhere in the EU, from corner-shop to website, confident they are equally effectively protected, whether from dangerous products or rogue traders; and to be able to demonstrate to all retailers, but especially SMEs, that they can sell anywhere on the basis of a single, simple set of rules.

In April 2005 the Commission adopted a joint strategy for health and consumer policy from 2007-2013 ( COD/2005/0042B ). In order to respond to a demand from stakeholders, the Council and European Parliament, this strategy develops the strategy for consumer policy further. An analysis of the main outcomes of the Consumer Policy Strategy 2002-2006 together with an Impact Assessment are set out in staff working papers.

CONTENT : the consumer policy strategy (2007-2013) seeks to establish equal levels of security and protection throughout the European Union (EU), as well as a more integrated internal market, through the following objectives:

empower EU consumers : putting consumers in the driving seat benefits citizens but also boosts competition significantly. Empowered consumers need real choices, accurate information, market transparency and the confidence that comes from effective protection and solid rights; enhance EU consumers’ welfare in terms of price, choice, quality, diversity, affordability and safety : consumer welfare is at the heart of well-functioning markets. protect consumers effectively from the serious risks and threats that they cannot tackle as individuals : a high level of protection against these threats is essential to consumer confidence.

In achieving these three objectives the Commission will be guided by the relevant articles of the Treaty which are also reflected in the operational objectives of the new consumer financial programme 2007-2013 which sets out the legal framework for EU consumer policy expenditure in the period covered by the strategy:

to ensure a high level of consumer protection through a simple legal framework, improved evidence, better consultation and better representation of consumers’ interests; to ensure the effective application of the rules notably through enforcement cooperation, information, education and redress.

These objectives reflect a high degree of continuity with previous EU consumer policy goals. 2007-2013 will however see a change in gear from the past and different priorities for action:

better monitoring of consumer markets and national consumer policies; better consumer protection regulation; enhancing product safety through the development of market monitoring tools; putting consumers at the heart of other EU policies; better informed and educated consumers, for example through strengthening the role of the European Consumer Centres.

Before March 2011 the Commission will produce a mid-term report and before December 2015 an ex-post evaluation report.

Documents

Activities

Votes

Rapport Lehtinen A6-0155/2008 - par. 34 #

2008/05/20 Outcome: +: 473, -: 200, 0: 15
DE IT PL GB CZ FR RO NL IE HU LV LT BE BG FI CY SK SE SI AT EL LU DK EE ES MT PT
Total
93
55
51
69
23
71
25
25
10
23
8
12
20
17
13
6
10
17
7
16
20
5
14
5
48
4
21
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
247
2

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Denmark PPE-DE

1

Estonia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
86

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1
2

Latvia ALDE

1

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1

Estonia ALDE

2

Spain ALDE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Romania Verts/ALE

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
36

Lithuania UEN

2

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
36

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Greece GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

3
icon: NI NI
28
2

Czechia NI

1

Slovakia NI

2

Austria NI

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
21

Poland IND/DEM

3

Czechia IND/DEM

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Greece IND/DEM

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark IND/DEM

For (1)

1
icon: PSE PSE
195

Czechia PSE

2

Lithuania PSE

2

Finland PSE

3

Slovakia PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PSE

Against (1)

1

Estonia PSE

2

Malta PSE

2

Rapport Lehtinen A6-0155/2008 - par. 37 #

2008/05/20 Outcome: +: 426, -: 242, 0: 9
DE IT PL CZ RO IE LT HU LV BG CY SK FR SI NL FI EL BE GB DK EE LU MT SE AT PT ES
Total
92
55
49
23
25
10
12
23
8
16
6
10
70
7
25
13
18
20
66
13
5
5
4
18
16
21
47
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
246
2

Denmark PPE-DE

1

Estonia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Malta PPE-DE

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
85

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1
2

Latvia ALDE

1

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Estonia ALDE

2

Sweden ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1
icon: UEN UEN
34

Lithuania UEN

2

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
36

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

3
icon: NI NI
27
2

Czechia NI

1

Bulgaria NI

2

Slovakia NI

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

6

Austria NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
21

Poland IND/DEM

3

Czechia IND/DEM

1

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Greece IND/DEM

1

Denmark IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

Italy Verts/ALE

2

Romania Verts/ALE

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Spain Verts/ALE

3
icon: PSE PSE
189

Czechia PSE

2

Lithuania PSE

2

Slovakia PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

Against (1)

1

Finland PSE

3

Estonia PSE

2

Luxembourg PSE

Against (1)

1

Malta PSE

2

Rapport Lehtinen A6-0155/2008 - par. 39 #

2008/05/20 Outcome: +: 389, -: 271, 0: 15
PL DE IT RO IE LT HU LV BG SI FI CZ BE SK EL CY GB DK NL EE LU AT MT FR PT SE ES
Total
50
93
50
24
10
11
23
8
17
7
13
23
20
10
20
6
69
11
25
5
5
16
4
70
21
18
46
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
246
2

Denmark PPE-DE

1

Estonia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Malta PPE-DE

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
84

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1
2

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Estonia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1

Sweden ALDE

2

Spain ALDE

1
icon: UEN UEN
35

Lithuania UEN

2

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
27
2

Italy NI

2

Bulgaria NI

For (1)

3

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

Slovakia NI

2

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

Against (1)

6

Austria NI

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
19

Poland IND/DEM

3

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Czechia IND/DEM

1

Greece IND/DEM

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

France IND/DEM

2

Sweden IND/DEM

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
35

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2
2

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
38

Italy Verts/ALE

2

Romania Verts/ALE

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Spain Verts/ALE

3
icon: PSE PSE
191

Lithuania PSE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia PSE

Against (1)

1

Finland PSE

3

Czechia PSE

2

Slovakia PSE

2

Estonia PSE

2

Luxembourg PSE

Against (1)

1

Malta PSE

2

Rapport Lehtinen A6-0155/2008 - am. 3/1 #

2008/05/20 Outcome: +: 629, -: 38, 0: 11
DE FR IT ES GB NL RO HU PT CZ BG EL SE BE AT DK FI LT IE SK LV SI CY EE LU PL MT
Total
92
71
55
47
66
25
24
23
20
23
17
18
18
20
16
14
13
12
10
10
8
7
6
5
5
49
4
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
245

Denmark PPE-DE

1
2

Estonia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Malta PPE-DE

2
icon: PSE PSE
190

Czechia PSE

2

Lithuania PSE

2

Slovakia PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

For (1)

1

Estonia PSE

2

Luxembourg PSE

For (1)

1

Malta PSE

For (1)

Abstain (1)

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
84

Spain ALDE

1
2

Sweden ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Romania Verts/ALE

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
36

France GUE/NGL

For (1)

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: NI NI
28

Italy NI

Against (1)

3

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

Against (2)

6

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

For (1)

3

Austria NI

2

Slovakia NI

2
2
icon: UEN UEN
35

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
21

France IND/DEM

3

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Czechia IND/DEM

1

Greece IND/DEM

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Poland IND/DEM

3

Rapport Lehtinen A6-0155/2008 - am. 3/2 #

2008/05/20 Outcome: +: 380, -: 279, 0: 9
FR IT DK ES NL PT BE PL FI AT EL LT BG RO SE EE CY MT SI LU DE SK LV GB HU IE CZ
Total
67
52
13
45
25
21
19
47
13
16
19
12
17
25
17
5
6
4
7
5
92
10
7
69
23
10
22
icon: PSE PSE
186

Lithuania PSE

2

Estonia PSE

2

Malta PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PSE

For (1)

1

Slovakia PSE

2

Czechia PSE

For (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
85

Spain ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

1

Sweden ALDE

2

Estonia ALDE

2

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Latvia ALDE

1
2

Ireland ALDE

Abstain (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
36
2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
38

Italy Verts/ALE

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Romania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4
icon: NI NI
25

Italy NI

Abstain (1)

3

Belgium NI

2
2

Austria NI

2

Bulgaria NI

3

Slovakia NI

2

United Kingdom NI

6

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
32

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2

Latvia UEN

3
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
21

Denmark IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Poland IND/DEM

3

Greece IND/DEM

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
245

Denmark PPE-DE

Against (1)

1
5

Lithuania PPE-DE

2

Bulgaria PPE-DE

4

Estonia PPE-DE

Against (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

Against (2)

2

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Latvia PPE-DE

2

Ireland PPE-DE

4

Rapport Lehtinen A6-0155/2008 - résolution #

2008/05/20 Outcome: +: 438, 0: 166, -: 84
IT FR PL ES GB RO EL BG NL CZ BE DE DK HU PT LT FI SE IE AT SK LV EE MT SI CY LU
Total
54
71
50
48
70
25
20
17
25
23
20
93
14
23
21
12
13
18
10
16
10
8
5
4
7
6
5
icon: PSE PSE
194

Czechia PSE

2

Lithuania PSE

2

Slovakia PSE

2

Estonia PSE

2

Malta PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PSE

For (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
86

Spain ALDE

1
2

Sweden ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Austria ALDE

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Estonia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

2

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
249

Bulgaria PPE-DE

4

Denmark PPE-DE

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania PPE-DE

2

Ireland PPE-DE

For (1)

4

Latvia PPE-DE

For (1)

3

Estonia PPE-DE

Abstain (1)

1

Malta PPE-DE

2

Slovenia PPE-DE

4

Cyprus PPE-DE

Abstain (1)

3

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3
icon: UEN UEN
35

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1

Lithuania UEN

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
36
2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Greece GUE/NGL

Against (1)

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

3

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: NI NI
28
2

United Kingdom NI

6

Czechia NI

1

Austria NI

2

Slovakia NI

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
21

Poland IND/DEM

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

3

Greece IND/DEM

1

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Czechia IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Denmark IND/DEM

For (1)

1

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Ireland IND/DEM

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Romania Verts/ALE

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2