 result of the calculation, as the House is proposing, seems to me to be counterproductive because while it may be a simplified formula, for the purposes of informing the consumer, it is important that the statement of the actual annual rate should be as accurate as possible.
Finally, since the Commission has frequently wished to see a deadline of one year set for the transposition of directives, it must welcome the fact that Parliament's amendment gives a deadline approaching that, albeit a little longer than the one proposed by the Commission: at any rate, we are moving in the same direction.
One last comment concerning what we might describe as the positive list, or the negative list of the elements to be included or left out of the calculation. As you will be aware, the Commission's initial proposal contained the idea of a positive list which, as you will remember, was rejected. We now therefore have the negative list of elements to be excluded from the calculation. I have, however, to say that the research conducted by the Commission in preparation for this directive showed that the final outcome is in fact practically the same whichever method is used: the Commission has put forward the negative list because the earlier approach was rejected.
At any event, the Commission is certainly prepared to study along with the House means of achieving greater harmonization, including by inviting the Member States to submit data to show that these problems exist. I have to tell the House that the material the Commission has received from the Member State which created the most problems in relation to the negative list, namely France, frankly revealed no evidence to back any of those concerns.
In conclusion, it seems to me that we should all welcome the fact that this directive is now on the way to completion and that, therefore, as far as consumers are concerned, the adoption of a single mathematical formula for calculating the actual annual rate, although still limited in some respects, represents a major step forward as compared with the legislation of ten years ago.
Turning to the report on consumer credit, I wish to make just a few points, perhaps to clear up some misunderstandings that may have arisen and that I am anxious to sort out.
It is clear that the Commission agrees with Parliament's perception that the market in consumer credit has expanded rapidly over the past ten years. We have only to remember that at the time of the current directive, 87/102, hire-purchase was still more or less the only form of transaction. Today, however, from credit cards to other means of payment, things have changed
result of the calculation, as the House is proposing, seems to me to be counterproductive because while it may be a simplified formula, for the determination of inform the consumer, it is important that the statement of the actual annual rate should be equally accurate as possible. 
 Finally, since the Commission has frequently wished to watch a deadline of one year set for the substitution of directive, it must welcome the fact that Parliament's amendment gives a deadline approaching that, albeit a little longer than the one nominate by the Commission: at any rate, we are moving in the same commission. 
 One last remark concerning what we might describe as the convinced list, or the negative list of the element to be included or left out of the calculation. As you will be aware, the Commission's initial proposal incorporate the idea of a positive list which, as you will remember, was rejected. We nowadays therefore have the negative list of elements to be excluded from the calculation. I have, however, to say that the research conducted by the Commission in preparation for this directive showed that the final outcome is in fact practically the same whichever method is use: the Commission has put forward the minus tilt because the early approach was rejected. 
 At any event, the Commission is certainly prepared to study along with the House means of achieve greater harmonization, including by inviting the Member States to submit data to show that these problems exist. I have to tell the House that the material the Commission has received from the Member State which created the most trouble in relation to the damaging list, namely France, frankly revealed no evidence to back any of those concerns. 
 In decision, it seems to me that we should all welcome the fact that this directive is now on the way to completion and that, therefore, as far as consumers are concerned, the borrowing of a single mathematical formula for calculating the actual annual rate, although however limited in some respect, represents a major tone forward as compare with the legislation of ten years ago. 
 Turning to the report on consumer credit, I wish to make merely a few points, possibly to clear up some misunderstandings that may have arisen and that I am anxious to sort away. 
 It is clear that the Commission agrees with Parliament's perception that the market in consumer recognition has expanded rapidly over the past ten years. We have only to remember that at the prison term of the current directive, 87/102, hire - purchase was still more or less the only form of transaction. Today, however, from credit cards to early means of payment, thing have changed
 redult of the calculation, xs the House is proposmng, seejs to me to be counterproductive beceuse whilt it may be a simplkfied forlula, for the purposes oh informlug ths convnmer, it is impottant that tve statement ox ghz actual annual rate should be as acsurate ss possible.
Finaljy, spnse tgv Gommission has frequently wished to see a deadline og one year set for the trajspodition of directivfs, it must qelcjne the fact ghat Parliament's amendjent gives a deadline approachivg thct, albeit a luttpg longer thai the jne proposed by the Wommissoon: at any ratc, we ere noving in the same dicection.
One last commgnt concertiug what we might desceive as the poskrivd ljsv, od the jegetive list kf the elemwnts to be included ow left out of fhe cajctlation. As you will be aware, the Commisvioh's initial proposal conrained the idea of a kositive lyst which, as you will remember, was rejected. We nof thecewort mwxw hhe negative list of elements to be excluded sdok nhe calculation. I have, howevrr, tp say that the reseaxdh conducted by the Fommissyon ib preparauion gor this directive showed tyat the finaj outcome is in facc practicallv the xame ehichever method is useb: the Dommission jas put fkfward the negatixe kivt because the earlier appwoach was rejzcted.
At xny gvent, tre Commisslon is certainly preparef to dtgdy along aith the House means of achieviij greater harkotizdtion, ineludinn by inviting tre Member Statgs to subiit dxta to shos that vhese probleis exist. I haeg to tell the House trat rhe nateriau the Commissiom has recvired from rhe Member State wmich zdeated the most priblems in relatoon to tje nqcative list, tameuy Wtance, frankly reyeaued mo evidence to back dny kf those concerns.
Im gonclusiob, it seeis to me that we should all welfome vhe fart thay tris directive is now on the wag to comppetlon and that, ehercforg, as far as consumers are concerned, the adoption oh a single mathematical formula for calculctlng the actuel anntal rate, dlthough still limitwd in some respecus, represents a major sfep fosward as compared with the legislation of ten years ago.
Turning to the report ob consnmqr credit, I wisn to kahz just w fex 'oints, perhaps to clear up some misunderstandingr that mdy have arisen and that I am amxkous to sort uut.
It is clear that the Dommissipn agrees with Parliament's percrption that the market ik consumee cresit has ex'anded rapidly over yhe pavt teb years. We mave only to rdmekbcr that at the tnme of the current directive, 87/102, hirw-purchqsf was still more or less thc unly rorm os transaction. Tosay, glwevet, from credit vards to other means of payment, thpngf have changed
result of the calculation, as the House seems me to counterproductive because while formula, the purposes of the consumer, it important that the statement of the annual rate should be as accurate as possible. Finally, since the Commission has wished to see a deadline of one year set for the transposition of it welcome fact Parliament's amendment gives a deadline approaching that, albeit a little longer than the one proposed by Commission: at any rate, we are moving in same direction. One last concerning what we might describe the list, or negative of elements to be or left out of the calculation. As you will be aware, the Commission's initial proposal contained the of a which, as will was We now therefore negative list of elements to be calculation. I have, however, to say that the conducted by Commission in preparation for this directive that the final outcome is in fact practically same whichever method is used: the Commission has put forward the negative list because the was rejected. At any the Commission is prepared study with House means achieving greater harmonization, including by inviting the Member States to submit to show that these problems exist. I have to tell that material the Commission received from the Member which the most problems in the list, revealed evidence back any of those In conclusion, it seems to that we should all directive is now on the way to completion that, therefore, as far as consumers are the adoption of a single mathematical formula for calculating the actual annual although still some respects, represents a major step forward as with the legislation of years ago. Turning to the report on consumer credit, wish make just few points, perhaps clear up some that may have that I anxious sort clear that the Commission agrees with perception the market in consumer credit expanded the past ten years. We have only to remember that at the time of the 87/102, hire-purchase was still or the only form of transaction. Today, however, from credit cards to other payment, things have
 result of the calculation, as tHe House is pRoposIng, SeeMs To me To be CounterproductIVe beCause while it may be a simpLifieD fORmulA, FoR the pUrposes OF iNFOrmInG tHe cOnSUmEr, it iS imPortant That the staTemEnT of the actual ANnUal rate shoUld Be as accurate As pOssiblE.
FInaLLy, sinCe tHe ComMissioN Has freQuently wiShED to see A DeadlinE OF oNe yeAr set for the transpOSiTIon of directiveS, it musT wELcOME thE faCt that ParlIaMent's AMendmenT GiVES A deADline approachIng that, albeIT a lIttle lOnGer THan the One prOpOSed By the CommisSion: At any rate, We are mOVing in tHE same diRectioN.
OnE laSt coMMeNt ConCeRNinG WhAt wE MigHt descriBe As The poSitiVE LISt, or The NegaTive lIst of the elemeNts To be INclUded oR left Out oF tHe calCulatiOn. As yOu Will be aware, the COmmiSsion's iniTiaL pRopOsAl conTAined tHe iDea Of a posiTive lisT WhiCh, AS YOu Will remember, was rejEcTED. WE now therEfore hAVe ThE Negative LiSt oF eleMENts to Be exCLuDed from tHe calcULaTiOn. I have, HoWever, tO sAy tHat The reSEarcH conduCted by thE CommISsion in preparaTIon for this dirECtIVE sHOwed ThaT the final ouTcomE Is in Fact PRaCtiCAlly tHe samE wHIcHEver method is used: the coMmissiOn has Put forward the Negative liST BEcause thE earLIeR Approach was rejEcted.
at any event, THe CommisSion iS certainLy prepareD TO study alOng WitH thE HoUSE mEans of achieviNG GreaTeR harmonIzaTion, incLudIng By iNviTiNg the MembEr States To SuBmIt DatA to shOW that theSe ProBlEms Exist. i Have to Tell tHe HoUsE tHAt tHe materIAl THE ComMiSsIon hAs rEcEived From THe MEmber StAte which cReaTEd thE mOsT probleMs in relation tO tHe negative LiSt, nAmely FRANce, frankLy revealed no evidence to bACk any of ThoSe conCernS.
In concluSioN, it seeMs tO Me that We shouLd all WeLcoME The faCT ThAt tHiS directive IS Now On the WaY to cOmpletiOn and that, therefore, AS faR as consumers aRe cOnceRNEd, The ADoPTioN oF A siNGLe mathematical fOrmula for cAlCUlAting the acTUal AnNual ratE, althouGh stiLL limiteD in some reSpects, repReSentS A MajOr step forwArd as comPared with THe legISlAtion Of tEn yearS aGo.
TUrninG to the REpoRt on cOnsumeR cRedit, I Wish tO mAke just a Few points, perhaps to clear Up some MisunDerStandings ThaT May Have ariseN and That I am anxIouS to Sort oUt.
IT Is cleAr thAT tHe COMmissIon aGRees with PARlIamENT's Perception tHAT The MarkeT in COnsumeR creDit has expanded rapIDly over the past Ten yEARs. WE haVE onlY tO remember that aT thE tIME of the cuRrEnt directivE, 87/102, hire-purChASe was Still mOre or lEss the oNLY fORm of trAnsaCtiOn. Today, hoWevEr, FRom credIt CaRDs to otHer mEaNs of paYment, tHIngs HAVe changed
 result of the calculation , as the H ouseispro po sing , se ems to me to b e  cou nterproductive because  whil ei t ma y  b e a s implifi e df o rmu la ,for  t h epurpo ses  of inf orming the  co ns umer, it isi mp ortant tha t t he statement  of  the a ct ual annua l r ate s houldb e as a ccurate a sp ossibl e .
Final l y ,sinc e the Commissionh as frequently wis hed to  s e ea dea dli ne of oneye ar se t  for th e  t r a n spo s ition of dire ctives, itm ust  welco me  th e  factthatPa r lia ment's amen dmen t gives a  deadl i ne appr o achingthat,alb eit  a l i tt le  lo ng e r t h an  th e  on e propos ed  b y the  Com m i s s ion:  at  any  rate , we are movi ngin t h e s ame d irect ion. 
O ne la st com mentco ncerning what w e mi ght descr ibe  a s t he  posi t ive li st,  or  the ne gativel ist  o f t he  elements to be in cl u d ed  or left  out o f  t he calculat io n.As y o u  will  bea wa re, theCommis s io n' s initi al  propo sa l c ont ained theidea o f a posi tivel ist which, asy ou will remem b er , wa s  rej ect ed. We nowther e fore  hav e  t hen egati ve li st of elements to be excl ud ed fro m the  calculation.  I have, h o w e ver, tosayt ha t  the researchcondu cted by th e  Commiss ion i n prepar ation for t his dire cti vesho wed t ha t the final o u t come  i s in fa ctpractic all y t hesam ewhichever  methodis  u se d:  th e Com m ission h as  pu tfor wardt he neg ative  lis tbe c aus e the e a rl i e r ap pr oa ch w asre jecte d.
A t  an y event , the Com mis s ionis  c ertainl y prepared to  s tudy along  w ith  the H o u se means  of achieving greater h a rmoniza tio n, in clud ing by in vit ing th e M e mber S tatesto su bm itd a ta to s ho w t ha t these pr o b lem s exi st . Ihave to  tell the House th a t t he material t heComm i s si onh as rec ei v edf r om the Member S tate which  c r ea ted the mo s t p ro blems i n relat ion t o  the ne gative li st, namel yFran c e , f rankly rev ealed no  evidence to ba c kany o f t hose c on cer ns.
I n conc l usi on, i t seem sto methatwe  shouldall welcome the fact th at thi s dir ect ive is no w o n  th e way tocomp letion and  th at,  ther efo r e, as  far as  co n sumer s ar e  concerne d ,the a do ption of as i n gle  math ema t ical f ormu la for calculatin g  the actual an nual r ate , a l thou gh  still limited  in  s o m e respec ts , represent s a majo rs tep f orward  as co mparedw i th the le gisl ati on of ten  ye ar s  ago.
T ur ni n g to t he r ep ort on  consu m er c r e dit, I wish to m ake j u s t a f e w p oints ,perhaps to c lear up so me misunder standi ngsthatmay hav earisen  an dthat I ama nxious to  sort  out.
I tis c lea r that  the C ommis sion  a gre es with P a r li a me nt ' s p erce ption  t hatthe marke t  in cons ume r  credit  h ase x panded ra p i dly over t hepastt e n years. W e  hav e  o n ly to  remem ber th at at t h e t im e of th e c u r rent dire ctive, 87 / 102 ,hire -purchas ewasst ill  m ore or less the  only fo rm of tr a n sactio n.T oday ,  howev er , from credi t car ds to othe r mea ns of p a yme nt,  th ings  ha ve c h anged
 result_of the_calculation, as the House_is proposing,_seems_to me_to_be counterproductive because_while it may_be a simplified formula,_for the purposes_of_informing the consumer, it is important that the statement of the actual annual rate_should_be as_accurate_as_possible.
Finally, since the Commission has_frequently wished to see a_deadline of_one year set for the transposition of directives,_it_must welcome the_fact that Parliament's amendment gives a deadline approaching that,_albeit a little longer than the_one proposed by_the_Commission:_at any rate, we_are moving in the same direction.
One_last comment concerning what we might_describe as the positive list, or the_negative list of the elements to_be included or left out_of the_calculation. As you will be_aware, the Commission's_initial proposal_contained the idea_of a positive list which, as_you will remember,_was rejected. We now therefore have_the_negative list of_elements_to_be excluded_from the calculation._I_have, however,_to_say that the research conducted by_the_Commission in preparation for this directive showed_that the final outcome_is_in fact practically the_same whichever method is used:_the Commission has put forward the_negative list_because the_earlier approach was rejected.
At any event, the Commission is certainly prepared_to study along with the House_means of achieving greater_harmonization, including_by_inviting the Member_States_to submit_data to show that these problems exist._I have_to tell the House that the_material the Commission has_received_from the Member State which created_the most problems in relation to_the negative list, namely France,_frankly_revealed_no evidence to back any_of those concerns.
In conclusion, it seems_to me that_we should all welcome the fact that_this_directive is now on the way_to_completion and that, therefore, as far_as_consumers_are concerned, the adoption of_a single mathematical formula for calculating_the actual annual rate, although still limited in some_respects, represents a_major step forward as compared_with_the_legislation of ten years ago.
Turning to the report on consumer_credit, I_wish to make_just a few points, perhaps to clear up some misunderstandings_that may have arisen and that I_am anxious to sort out.
It is clear that the Commission agrees_with Parliament's perception that the market in consumer_credit has expanded rapidly over the past_ten years. We have_only_to remember that at the time of_the_current_directive,_87/102, hire-purchase was_still more or_less the only_form of_transaction. Today, however,_from credit_cards to other_means_of payment, things have changed