Services Standards: Defining the Core Consumer Elements ... - ANEC
Services Standards: Defining the Core Consumer Elements ... - ANEC
Services Standards: Defining the Core Consumer Elements ... - ANEC
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Services</strong> <strong>Standards</strong><br />
• in Transport, CEN TC 320 (consumer representative from BSI <strong>Consumer</strong><br />
Policy Unit).<br />
The short survey demonstrates that <strong>the</strong> consumer representatives raised <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
voice in <strong>the</strong> large majority of all standards here to be analysed in more detail.<br />
So <strong>the</strong> true question is not one of getting access to standardisation, but to what<br />
extent <strong>the</strong> consumer voice is heard and listened to in <strong>the</strong> relevant committees.<br />
CEN is much more relevant here than CENELEC. Formally speaking, <strong>the</strong><br />
CEN’s Technical Committees are in no way bound to take <strong>ANEC</strong>’s view into<br />
consideration. A simple rejection might be counterproductive for <strong>the</strong> consentoriented<br />
approach on standard-making and might even yield political reactions,<br />
at least in <strong>the</strong> long run. In current practice, however, it depends to a large extent<br />
on <strong>ANEC</strong>’s arguments alone whe<strong>the</strong>r or not it can bring its particular position<br />
through. That is why <strong>the</strong> concrete impact of <strong>ANEC</strong> in standard-making could<br />
only be evaluated by reconstructing <strong>the</strong> process of elaborating a specific<br />
standard. This has been done in <strong>the</strong> area of toy safety, where <strong>ANEC</strong><br />
commissioned a study on <strong>the</strong> degree to which <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>n prevailing proposals<br />
neglect <strong>the</strong> specific safety needs of smaller children 301 . In <strong>the</strong> areas here to be<br />
investigated in <strong>the</strong> following chapters, a more general assessment of <strong>ANEC</strong>’s<br />
impact might be enough to give shape to <strong>the</strong> idea that standard-making may<br />
only gain democratic accountability if all stakeholders are given <strong>the</strong> opportunity<br />
to make <strong>the</strong>ir views known and to influence <strong>the</strong> outcome of voluntary standardmaking.<br />
As a last resort <strong>ANEC</strong> may contradict <strong>the</strong> publication of those CEN<br />
standards which have to be published in <strong>the</strong> Official Journal of <strong>the</strong> European<br />
Union. However, <strong>ANEC</strong> has no rights and no remedies to stop <strong>the</strong> European<br />
Commission. It can only address <strong>the</strong> press and raise public awareness. This is<br />
exactly what happened when <strong>ANEC</strong> criticised <strong>the</strong> publication of certain<br />
European toy standards 302 .<br />
III. The next step: Reviewing <strong>the</strong> existing EC rules and technical<br />
standards against <strong>the</strong> core consumer elements<br />
The analysis of existing best practice allowed me to draft leading principles and<br />
to deduce from <strong>the</strong>m <strong>the</strong> core consumer elements of best practice. These core<br />
consumer elements will now be used as a yardstick against which are<br />
measured<br />
301 http://www.anec.org/attachments/R&T006-04rev.pdf.<br />
302 See Comment from <strong>ANEC</strong> on Draft list of standards for consideration in view of publication<br />
of references in <strong>the</strong> OJEU, <strong>ANEC</strong>2005/CHILD/077, November 2005.<br />
105