EEC: Consumer Affairs (Hansard, 28 June 1984)

§ Baroness Burton of Coventry
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Lord Belstead)
My Lords, my honourable friend Mr. Alexander Fletcher attended the Consumer Affairs Council on 5th June. Progress towards agreement was made on the proposal for a directive on misleading advertising. The directive is not yet ready for adoption, but Community work since 5th June, on the basis of new options identified at the Council meeting, has resolved the main outstanding problems of substance.
Consideration of the proposal for a directive on product liability again centred on the question of whether there should be a financial limit to a producer's liability. There was a wide range of views on this, and compromise proposals for further study by the Committee of Permanent Representatives were identified.
The proposal for a directive on doorstop selling was briefly discussed. There is now general agreement on the text, but adoption is not yet possible because one member state continues to retain its general reserve on this directive.
The Commission has a number of other proposals which it expects to bring before the Council of Ministers in due course, but the only additional item of current Council business outstanding is the completion of consideration of draft directives on the price indication of foodstuffs and of non-food products.

§ Baroness Burton of Coventry
My Lords, does the Minister realise how difficult it is not only for him but also for me when we have Answers that seem to be continually unsatisfactory? Is he aware that my information is that the last meeting of the Council of Ministers made no progress at all on the three matters outstanding, despite the fact that they have been up for discussion on the three occasions that the Council of 1026 Ministers has met during the past year? Can the Minister say whether or not, in the current business outstanding, those three matters—unfair and misleading advertising, product liability and doorstep selling—still have to be discussed or has he told me, and I misheard, that some at least of them have been settled?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I think that the noble Baroness is being perhaps a little less than fair in saying that progress has not been made. The noble Baroness will remember that at the last Council meeting, on which I reported in response to a Question of the noble Baroness, agreement was reached and a Council directive was adopted on the early warning system on dangerous consumer products.
I turn to the three particular directives about which the noble Baroness is again questioning me. With regard to misleading advertising, we are in the situation where the draft directive as it now stands would enable us to legislate to reinforce the system of the Advertising Standards Authority on broadly the basis proposed by the Burgh Report in 1980. But this is a matter that needs to be reported back to the Scrutiny Committees of both Houses. I know that the Department of Trade and Industry will certainly be doing that.
On product liability, the situation is as I reported it to your Lordships just now in my original Answer. The matter is turning really on the question of financial limits. There are some compromise proposals that have been worked out. They are being looked at in the Committee of Permanent Representatives and I hope very much that this will put the Council in a position to make more progress next time.
So far as doorstep selling is concerned, we should like to see the directive as it is now drafted put into effect without delay, but there is a reserve from one member state.

§ Lord Sainsbury
My Lords, is the Minister aware that these draft directives have been under discussion since the mid-1970s? Does he feel that the time of civil servants and others spent on these directives has been justified?

§ Lord Belstead
Yes, my Lords.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, in view of the fact that these directives, when they are finally approved, become enforceable under the European Communities Act 1972, would it not be wise for the Government to consider publishing from time to time the progress being made in connection with these various objectives and also to define from time to time the points of difference that have arisen and the attitude of Her Majesty's Government towards the directives? In that event they might occasionally extend their support for their arguments to Her Majesty's loyal Opposition.

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I should like to draw the attention of my right honourable friend the Secretary of State to what the noble Lord, Lord Bruce, says. It is important, and probably wise, advice. There are two things that I should say. One of the advantages that 1027 have resulted from meetings of the Consumer Affairs Council is that a flow of information has come to both Houses of Parliament in this country, not least as a result of the questions asked by the noble Baroness. I cannot tell the House today of the date of the next Council, but I understand that there is a possible date agreed for next December.
Of course, we must not forget that the Scrutiny Committees of both your Lordships' House and of another place have a very close interest in these matters. There is no question at all but that what has now very nearly been agreed on misleading advertising has to come back to the Scrutiny Committees of both Houses, which hold very trenchant views on that directive, going back a few years, as the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, reminded us. I have no doubt also that when agreement is reached on product liability, that, too, will have to come back to the Scrutiny Committees.

§ Lord Allen of Abbeydale
My Lords, since the Minister says that the one outstanding point on product liability is the financial ceiling, does this imply that there has been agreement on the state of the art defence?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, there is no final agreement on the product liability directive as yet. The noble Lord knows, of course, the view of Her Majesty's Government about the state of the art defence.

§ Baroness Burton of Coventry
My Lords, it was difficult to hear. Did the Minister say that the next meeting of the Council of Ministers would be in September. or December? Following from that, does he think that it would he more helpful if, instead of taking up the time of the House, I were to put down a Question for Written Answer, inquiring as to the progress that has been made in various meetings this year? Does the noble Lord feel that that report, which could be circulated in Hansard, would be of much greater benefit to everyone in the House? If so, is it any use putting it down before December, if it was indeed to December that he referred?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, December was the month that I stated. This would fall within the term of the presidency of the Republic of Ireland. The reason that it is still only provisional is that until, I think, tomorrow, we do not have the Republic of Ireland in the presidency. It will be for the Republic of Ireland to decide whether the next Council meeting will be held then. The noble Baroness asks me whether it would be helpful all round for a Question to be put down for Written Answer. Far be it from me to suggest that I would prefer a Question for Written Answer rather than for oral answer. If the noble Baroness feels that it would be a good thing to put down a Question, I suggest that she should do so after we know when the next Council meeting is to be held. I can perhaps keep in touch with the noble Baroness on this point and let her know when there is a definite date for the next Council meeting.

§ Baroness Burton of Coventry
My Lords, the Minister may not know it, but I am appreciative of the way in which he tries to help. It is not his fault. I lay the fault at other doors.