# C_2013161EN.01005801.xml

| 6.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/58

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 723/2009 concerning the Community legal framework for a European Research Infrastructures Consortium (ERIC)’

COM(2012) 682 final — 2012/0321 (NLE)

2013/C 161/10

Rapporteur: Mr STANTIČ

Mr STANTIČ

On 19 December 2012 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 187 and 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a Council regulation amending regulation (EC) No 723/2009 concerning the Community legal framework for a European Research Infrastructures Consortium (ERIC)

Proposal for a Council regulation amending regulation (EC) No 723/2009 concerning the Community legal framework for a European Research Infrastructures Consortium (ERIC)

COM(2012) 682 final — 2012/0321 (NLE).

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 March 2013.

At its 488th plenary session, held on 20 and 21 March 2013 (meeting of 20 March), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 78 votes to one with three abstentions.

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

Conclusions and recommendations

| 1.1 | The EESC supports the proposed amendment to Article 9 of the Regulation in order to eliminate discrimination between Member States and associated countries and boost more active participation of associated countries in setting up and operating future ERICs. |
| --- | --- |

1.1

The EESC supports the proposed amendment to Article 9 of the Regulation in order to eliminate discrimination between Member States and associated countries and boost more active participation of associated countries in setting up and operating future ERICs.

| 1.2 | The EESC believes that equality in voting rights will not affect the Community dimension of the Regulation and that the Community can retain enough control over essential elements of ERIC activities through other existing provisions in the Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

1.2

The EESC believes that equality in voting rights will not affect the Community dimension of the Regulation and that the Community can retain enough control over essential elements of ERIC activities through other existing provisions in the Regulation.

Community dimension of the Regulation

| 1.3 | The EESC is concerned about the slow pace at which the ERIC legal instrument is being applied to the setting up and operation of research infrastructure projects of European interest from the European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructure (ESFRI) Roadmap. Therefore, it urges the Commission to provide maximum support to potential partners and thus facilitate use of the ERIC legal form. |
| --- | --- |

1.3

The EESC is concerned about the slow pace at which the ERIC legal instrument is being applied to the setting up and operation of research infrastructure projects of European interest from the European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructure (ESFRI) Roadmap. Therefore, it urges the Commission to provide maximum support to potential partners and thus facilitate use of the ERIC legal form.

| 1.4 | The EESC would also recommend that the Community contributes more to the co-financing of ERIC projects, by ensuring better synergies between the Structural Funds and the Horizon 2020 Framework programme. |
| --- | --- |

1.4

The EESC would also recommend that the Community contributes more to the co-financing of ERIC projects, by ensuring better synergies between the Structural Funds and the Horizon 2020 Framework programme.

2.   Introduction and background

Introduction and background

| 2.1 | Top-class research infrastructure plays a crucial role in the advancement of knowledge and new technologies for a more competitive and knowledge-based European economy. |
| --- | --- |

2.1

Top-class research infrastructure plays a crucial role in the advancement of knowledge and new technologies for a more competitive and knowledge-based European economy.

| 2.2 | Although support and development of research infrastructure in Europe has been an ongoing objective of the Community for the last decade, the relative fragmentation and regionalisation (1) of this infrastructure have consistently been among the reasons for a lack of excellence. |
| --- | --- |

2.2

Although support and development of research infrastructure in Europe has been an ongoing objective of the Community for the last decade, the relative fragmentation and regionalisation (1) of this infrastructure have consistently been among the reasons for a lack of excellence.

1

| 2.3 | In 2006 the ESFRI identified numerous key infrastructure projects of pan-European interest to be developed by 2020 (2). One major barrier to setting up such infrastructure between EU countries was the lack of an adequate legal framework for the creation of proper partnerships. |
| --- | --- |

2.3

In 2006 the ESFRI identified numerous key infrastructure projects of pan-European interest to be developed by 2020 (2). One major barrier to setting up such infrastructure between EU countries was the lack of an adequate legal framework for the creation of proper partnerships.

2

| 2.4 | Therefore, in 2009 the Council adopted the ERIC Regulation (3). This specific legal instrument gives an ERIC a legal personality recognised in all Member States. It can also benefit from VAT and excise duty exemption, and may adopt its own procurement procedures. |
| --- | --- |

2.4

Therefore, in 2009 the Council adopted the ERIC Regulation (3). This specific legal instrument gives an ERIC a legal personality recognised in all Member States. It can also benefit from VAT and excise duty exemption, and may adopt its own procurement procedures.

3

3.   Context of the proposal to amend the ERIC Regulation

Context of the proposal to amend the ERIC Regulation

| 3.1 | According to the current Regulation, ERICs should have members from at least three Member States and may also include qualified associated countries (4) as well as third countries and specialised intergovernmental organisations. EU Member States always jointly hold the majority of voting rights in the Assembly. |
| --- | --- |

3.1

According to the current Regulation, ERICs should have members from at least three Member States and may also include qualified associated countries (4) as well as third countries and specialised intergovernmental organisations. EU Member States always jointly hold the majority of voting rights in the Assembly.

4

| 3.2 | Such an arrangement puts associated countries in an unequal and subordinate position in respect to their voting rights, even though they may be willing to make a substantial financial contribution to setting up and operating an ERIC (5). |
| --- | --- |

3.2

Such an arrangement puts associated countries in an unequal and subordinate position in respect to their voting rights, even though they may be willing to make a substantial financial contribution to setting up and operating an ERIC (5).

5

| 3.3 | In order to encourage associated countries to actively participate in ERICs, the amendment to Article 9 proposes a change, with only one Member State (of a minimum of three members) being needed to establish a Consortium. The other two members can be from associated countries. Associated countries would also be able to hold voting rights accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

3.3

In order to encourage associated countries to actively participate in ERICs, the amendment to Article 9 proposes a change, with only one Member State (of a minimum of three members) being needed to establish a Consortium. The other two members can be from associated countries. Associated countries would also be able to hold voting rights accordingly.

4.   General and specific comments

General and specific comments

| 4.1 | The EESC generally supports the amendment to the ERIC Regulation if it can boost the active participation of associated countries in setting up and operating ERICs, but would like to make the following remarks. |
| --- | --- |

4.1

The EESC generally supports the amendment to the ERIC Regulation if it can boost the active participation of associated countries in setting up and operating ERICs, but would like to make the following remarks.

| 4.1.1 | The main argument for the minimum of three Member States in the current Regulation was to assure the Community dimension of the Regulation
   (6). In this respect the change from three to one seems quite radical. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.1

The main argument for the minimum of three Member States in the current Regulation was to assure the Community dimension of the Regulation
   (6). In this respect the change from three to one seems quite radical.

Community dimension of the Regulation

6

| 4.1.2 | The EESC recalls that this Regulation was primarily established to ensure efficient execution of Community research and technological infrastructure projects. The EESC therefore recognises the need for the Community to retain control over certain essential elements of ERIC activities. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.2

The EESC recalls that this Regulation was primarily established to ensure efficient execution of Community research and technological infrastructure projects. The EESC therefore recognises the need for the Community to retain control over certain essential elements of ERIC activities.

| 4.1.3 | On the other hand, the EESC notes some provisions in the current Regulation which may compensate for the potential weakening of the position of EU parties due to the amendment to Article 9, for example:






  — | Entities wishing to set up an ERIC have to submit an application to the European Commission. |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.1.3

On the other hand, the EESC notes some provisions in the current Regulation which may compensate for the potential weakening of the position of EU parties due to the amendment to Article 9, for example:

—

Entities wishing to set up an ERIC have to submit an application to the European Commission.

| — | ERICs are governed by Union law, in addition to the law of the host State. |
| --- | --- |

—

ERICs are governed by Union law, in addition to the law of the host State.

| — | ERICs must submit their annual reports and any information that may prevent them from fulfilling their tasks or meeting the requirements of the Regulation to the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

—

ERICs must submit their annual reports and any information that may prevent them from fulfilling their tasks or meeting the requirements of the Regulation to the Commission.

| — | Substantial amendments to the Statutes require the formal approval of the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

—

Substantial amendments to the Statutes require the formal approval of the Commission.

| — | The European Court of Justice has jurisdiction over ERICs. |
| --- | --- |

—

The European Court of Justice has jurisdiction over ERICs.

The EESC requires full assurance that the above provisions outweigh the proposed amendment to Article 9 and ensure enough control over ERIC activities.

| 4.1.4 | The EESC expresses its concern that so far no associated countries or third states have joined an ERIC, and hopes that the unfavourable situation regarding voting rights was indeed the main reason for their lack of interest. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.4

The EESC expresses its concern that so far no associated countries or third states have joined an ERIC, and hopes that the unfavourable situation regarding voting rights was indeed the main reason for their lack of interest.

| 4.1.5 | The EESC acknowledges with satisfaction that 19 of the 51 infrastructure projects in the ESFRI roadmap anticipate using the ERIC legal form for their establishment and operation. At the same time, the Committee is concerned that only 2 ERICs have been established since the Regulation entered into force, back in 2009. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.5

The EESC acknowledges with satisfaction that 19 of the 51 infrastructure projects in the ESFRI roadmap anticipate using the ERIC legal form for their establishment and operation. At the same time, the Committee is concerned that only 2 ERICs have been established since the Regulation entered into force, back in 2009.

| 4.1.6 | The EESC would like to see this process being speeded up. It considers that the reasons for such slow progress include the complex and demanding administrative and legal procedures required to establish an ERIC. Therefore, the EESC urges the Commission to provide support measures and tools for potential partners in order to facilitate their work (templates for statutes, practical guidelines, specific support measures for ERICs under Horizon 2020, etc.) |
| --- | --- |

4.1.6

The EESC would like to see this process being speeded up. It considers that the reasons for such slow progress include the complex and demanding administrative and legal procedures required to establish an ERIC. Therefore, the EESC urges the Commission to provide support measures and tools for potential partners in order to facilitate their work (templates for statutes, practical guidelines, specific support measures for ERICs under Horizon 2020, etc.)

| 4.1.7 | Although not directly related to the proposed amendment to the Regulation, the EESC would like to reiterate its recommendation that the Community contributes more actively to the co-financing of ERIC projects by increasing the funds for research infrastructures in the Horizon 2020 framework programme, and in particular by increasing synergies between Horizon 2020 and the Structural Funds. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.7

Although not directly related to the proposed amendment to the Regulation, the EESC would like to reiterate its recommendation that the Community contributes more actively to the co-financing of ERIC projects by increasing the funds for research infrastructures in the Horizon 2020 framework programme, and in particular by increasing synergies between Horizon 2020 and the Structural Funds.

Brussels, 20 March 2013.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON

---

(1)  Half of total research expenditure goes to 30 regions out of 254, and a majority of ESFRI Roadmap projects are located in just 10 Member States.

1

(2)  The ESFRI Roadmap was updated in 2008 and 2010. The next update is scheduled for 2015.

2

(3)  Council Regulation (EC) No 723/2009 – Community Legal Framework for a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC).

3

(4)  There are currently 14 countries associated to the 7th Framework Programme. These are the following: Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein (on the basis of the EEA Agreement), Israel, Faroe Islands, Switzerland (on the basis of a self-standing international agreement); Moldova, Croatia, Turkey, Bosnia Herzegovina, Montenegro, Albania, Serbia and FY Republic of Macedonia (on the basis of Memoranda of Understanding).

4

(5)  Norway is interested in hosting 3 ERICs for major projects from the ESFRI Roadmap (CESSDA, SIOS, ECCSEL), subject to more favourable voting rights.

5

(6)  See paragraph (14), OJ L 206 of 8.8.2009, p. 1.

6

---