Interview

• Access to interviews list

Evelyne GEBHARDT
Member of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection of the European Parliament

Evelyne Gebhardt, ©European Parliament

Q: Your report on the Directive on Services in the Internal Market was adopted at first reading on 16 February 2008. What is the balance you draw for the European Parliament today, two years later?

R: Two years after the voting at first reading I am more than ever convinced that we, the European Parliament, came to the right decision: make sure that the social, ecological and consumer rights have to be guaranteed in the member states during the composition of the internal marked. Today we are challenged by the implementation of the directive in the member states though.

Q: Can you explain the content of the directive in a few words?

R: The aim of the directive is to enable service providers to offer their services in other member states. We managed a balance between an essential opening of markets for services in Europe on the one hand – which means the reduction of needless and protective barriers – and the guarantee of consumers’ and employees’ rights and a high level of quality for the services on the other hand.

Screening of standards and the establishment of unitary contact points, where the service providers can gather needful information and complete administrative modalities in an uncomplicated and unbureaucratic manner, are important aspects of the directive. It is about checking regulations in the member states and the reduction of existing protective measures. Particularly, I would like to emphasize that the target country principle is anchored in the directive. The consumers can be sure that their national law is used in the case of service provision from another European country. They will not be confronted with foreign law.

Q: What about the implementation of the Directive on Services in the different member states?

R: The implementation of the Directive on Services in the member states is on the rigth track. For example there are discussions how to manage the installation of unitary contact points. The implementation turns out to be problematic to some extend. For example the screening of standards: Some member states yield this sensitive issue to civil servants only although it is a very political question. There is an urgent need for action, also in the national parliaments.

Q: You have been involved in the applicable law in matrimonial matters. Could you present us a few aspects of your current activity in the European Parliament?

R: Currently, I am in dialogue with representatives of the member states having a problem with the proposal of the European Commission. In fact there are extremely different adjustments to divorce law: In Malta for example, divorce is not provided by the law, and in Sweden you can divorce after only six months. As a rapporteur I have to pave the way and search together for a solution. Therefore I delayed the voting of the European Parliament, which was planed for April. We have more time now to search for a solution satisfying all citizens of Europe.