http://academy.epo.org/pubs/_pdf/223_230.pdf
"Mr Mercer went on to question why we are worried about the level of inventive
step as long as it is consistently applied? Are we worried about what effect that it
will have economically. Users will not want trivial patents granted to their
competitors. The problem that the EPO and epi has, is that they are working in a
vacuum. Patents are an economic tool and should be part of a grand strategy to
work out how Europe's economy could be promoted and the patent system is part
of that. What we need is to look at the overall strategy that is being developed in
Europe, and perhaps embark on a strategy debate about what patents are for
within Europe. This might set a clearer idea for people as to what inventive step
might be and what sort of quality we should have. There are a lot of players that
need to discuss this at the highest level; national governments, do we mind that
Europe has a few trivial patents, do we mind that the EPO has this particular
procedure and this might feed into legislation. There are many people who do not
use the system and others who are against the system. So what we need to do is
to persuade people that the system is useful. The quality of the strategy
surrounding the whole patenting process in Europe needs to be addressed and
how this makes Europe an economically more useful place."


