----

----

II Preparatory Acts

European Economic and Social Committee

418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June 2005

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters

(COM(2004) 718 final – 2004/0251 (COD))

(2005/C 286/01)

On 16 November 2004, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

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 23 May 2005. The rapporteur was Ms Sánchez Miguel.

At its 418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June 2005 (meeting of 9 June), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 157 votes to 1 with 1 abstention.

1.   Introduction

2.   Substance of the proposal

3.   Comments on the proposal for a directive

4.   Specific comments

Given that mediation is a voluntary dispute settlement procedure which can only work if both parties agree to participate and to accept the outcome, the future Directive should clarify some extremely important aspects, to ensure that this is a workable instrument and that it inspires confidence in the European public. To this end, the EESC considers that account should be taken of some of the following observations.

Brussels, 9 June 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  See the Council Directive on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters [COM(1999)219 final]. EESC opinion, rapporteur: Mr B. Hernández Bataller. OJ C 368, 20.12.1999.

(2)  EESC opinion, rapporteur: Mr H. Malosse, OJ C 117, 26.4.2000.

(3)  COM(2000) 592 final. EESC opinion, rapporteur: Mr D. Retureau, OJ C 139, 11.5.2001.

(4)  Commission Recommendation of 4 April 2001 on the principles for out-of-court bodies in the consensual resolution of consumer disputes. OJ L 109, 19.4.2001.

(5)  Opinion CESE, point 3.7, rapporteur: Mr D. Retureau. OJ C 139, 11.5.2001.

(6)  The Brussels Convention of 27 September specified the scope of jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters.

(7)  The EESC opinion (rapporteur: Mr Retureau, OJ C 139, 11.05.2001) referred in point 3.7 to the problem of defining the civil and commercial spheres, and called for ‘the decision to make specific reference to the Court of Justice definitions. Since civil actions heard in the context of criminal and tax cases do not fall outside the scope of the proposal, and it is also possible that documents which cannot easily be defined in legal terms by the appropriate legal body may be requested, an indent along the following lines should be inserted in order to protect the rights of the parties involved: “the receiving agency shall define as flexibly as possible those documents whose legal character cannot be clearly assigned to either the civil or the commercial field, but which nevertheless have points in common with them”.’

(8)  The German version of the proposed Directive frequently uses the term ‘Streitschlichtung’ (dispute resolution). Dispute resolution cannot be considered the same as mediation because the resultant decision is at the least a reasoned proposal by the arbitrator aimed at resolving the conflict, while a mediator traditionally does not adopt any position as to the substance of the conflict. Consequently the German version of the draft Directive should use the term ‘amicable settlement’ instead of ‘dispute resolution’.

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on compulsory licensing of patents relating to the manufacture of pharmaceutical products for export to countries with public health problems

(COM(2004) 737 final – 2004/0258 (COD))

(2005/C 286/02)

On 15 December 2004, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

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 23 May 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Braghin.

At its 418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June 2005 (meeting of 8 June), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 64 votes to one with one abstention.

1.   Gist of the opinion

2.   Introduction

3.   Gist of the proposal for a regulation

4.   Comments

Brussels, 8 June 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)OJ C 133 of 6.6.2003.

(2)  TRIPS stands for Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights: the agreement regulates the possibility of making compulsory changes to intellectual property rights, binding them to certain conditions.

(3)Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health, adopted on 14 November 2001, http://www.wto.org

(4)  Decision of the General Council on implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreements and public health, http://www.wto.org

(5)  The General Council chairperson's statement, 30 August 2003, http://www.wto.org

(6)OJ L 311 of 28.11.2001

(7)  Chapter V, Article 18 of Regulation 1383 (2003).

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 98/71/EC on the legal protection of designs

(COM(2004) 582 final — 2004/0203 (COD))

(2005/C 286/03)

On 6 December 2004 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Committee Bureau instructed the Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption to prepare the Committee's work on the subject. At its meeting of 20 April 2005, the Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption rejected the draft opinion presented by Mr Ranocchiari.

Given the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Ranocchiari as rapporteur-general at its 418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June 2005 (meeting of 8 June). The draft opinion was rejected in favour of the present counter-opinion tabled by Mr Pegado Liz and Mr Steffens. The counter-opinion was adopted by 107 votes to 71, with 22 abstentions.

1.   Introduction — background to the question

2.   The provisions of Directive 98/71/EC (7)concerning components

3.   The content of the proposal for a directive

4.   Comments on technical aspects

5.   Final comments and recommendations

Brussels, 8 June 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)OJ C 345 of 23.12.1993.

(2)  Case 53/87, judgment of 5 October 1988.

(3)  Case 238/87, judgment of 5 October 1988.

(4)OJ C 142 of 14.5.1996.

(5)  R. Hughes, Legal Counsel ECAR ‘The legal protection of designs’, 1996; and Briefing Notes (1 to 6) of the European Campaign for the Freedom of the Automotive Parts and Repair Market, 1996.

(6)  ‘ACEA comments on the proposed directive regarding industrial design protection’, ref. 97000622, and ‘Key questions about design protection for car parts’, ref. 97000517.

(7)OJ L 289 of 28.10.1998.

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Information and measurement instruments for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in a globalised economy

(2005/C 286/04)

On 15 September 2004, the European Economic and Social Committee, acting in accordance with Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on: Information and measurement instruments for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in a globalised economy (Own-initiative opinion).

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 24 May 2005. The rapporteur was Ms Pichenot.

At its 418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June (meeting of 8 June 2005), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 135 votes to 2 with 18 abstentions:

1.   Introduction

2.   From experimentation to maturity: moving towards greater transparency

2.1   International conventions, standards and principles (5)

2.2   The body of European standards (8)

2.3   CSR instruments: standards and implementing criteria (9)

3.   Making the measurement of CSR more reliable and more transparent

3.1   General observations

3.2   The coherence of the instruments

3.3   The suitability of the instruments

3.4   The reliability of the instruments

4.   Extending the use and improving the quality of the instruments

4.1   Developing the practice of providing information

4.2   Differentiating the instruments

4.3   Extending the area of utilisation of the instruments

4.4   Establishing a new generation of instruments

5.   Moving from a management initiative to voluntary participation in CSR involving the stakeholders

5.1   Transparency of the action

5.2   Making a distinction between ‘communicating’ and ‘reporting’

5.2.1   Reporting

5.2.2   Communication

5.3   The quality of information

5.4   Dialogue with the stakeholders

Brussels, 8 June 2005.

The president

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  cf. EESC opinion of 22 and 23 January 2003 on the Proposal for a Directive amending the Directives on the annual and consolidated accounts of certain types of companies and insurance undertakings (rapporteur: Mr Ravoet) (OJ C85 of 8.4.2003) and the Commission Recommendation of 30 May 2001 on the recognition, measurement and disclosure of environmental issues in the annual accounts and annual reports of companies (Recommendation 2001/453/EC).

(2)  EESC opinion on corporate social responsibility (Rapporteur: Ms Hornung-Draus) – OJ No. C 125 of 27.5.2002.

(3)  It should be pointed out that the word ‘social’ does not have the same connotation in French as it does in English. This has led French speakers to make a distinction between ‘social’ and ‘sociétal’. The term ‘social’, which in French implies ‘industrial relations’, is used to designate responsibility vis-à-vis internal stakeholders (‘responsabilité sociale’). The term ‘sociétale’, which in French implies ‘the community within which an enterprise operates’, ‘the labour market area’ and ‘the catchment area’, is used to designate responsibility vis-à-vis external stakeholders (‘responsabilité sociétale’).

(4)  The important and complex issue of the link between competitiveness and CSR will not be analysed in this opinion.

(5)  For a more exhaustive list, see the conclusions of the EMS Forum.

(6)  Conventions related to environment and governance principles:

Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the Ozone Layer

Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal

Stockholm Convention on persistent Organic Pollutants

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

Convention on Biological Diversity

Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961)

UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971)

UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (1988)

Mexico UN Convention against Corruption

cf. EESC opinion no. 132/2005 of 9.2.2005 on the Scheme of generalised tariff preferences (Rapporteur: Mr Pezzini)

(7)  Report of the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalisation issued in February 2004;

EESC opinion No. 252/2005 of 9.3.2005 on The social dimension of globalisation – the EU's policy contribution on extending the benefits to all; rapporteurs: Mr Tom Etty and Mrs Renate Hornung-Draus (COM(2004) 383 final).

(8)  For a more exhaustive list, see the conclusions of the EMS Forum.

(9)  See ‘ABC of CSR Instruments’, drawn up by the European Commission's Directorate for Employment and Social Affairs.

(10)  The ‘societal balance-sheet’, drawn up by coops, mutuals and the non-profit sector, is a global diagnostic tool based on the ‘cross-appraisal’ principle, involving internal and external stakeholders of enterprises.

(11)  ‘Guidance and social responsibility’

(12)  See the EESC Information Report on The current state of co-regulation and self-regulation in the Single Market (Rapporteur: Mr Vever).

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Green paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration

(COM(2004) 811 final)

(2005/C 286/05)

On 11 January 2005, the European Commission adopted a Communication addressed to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Green paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 24 May 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Pariza Castaños.

At its 418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June 2005 (meeting of 9 June 2005), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 137 votes to 1 with 3 abstentions.

1.   Introduction

2.   Comments on the issues raised in the Green Paper

2.1   What degree of harmonisation should the EU aim at?

2.2   Preference for the domestic labour market

2.3   Admission systems

2.4   Admission procedures for self-employment

2.5   Applications for work and residence permit(s)

2.6   Possibility of changing employer/sector

2.7   Rights

2.8   Integration, return and cooperation with third countries

Brussels, 9 June 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  Article III-267.

(2)  COM (2001) 386 final.

(3)  See the EESC Opinion in OJ C 80 of 03.04.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños) and the EP Opinion in OJ C 43E of 19.2.2004 (rapporteur: Ms Ana Terron i Cusi).

(4)  See point 30 of the Conclusions of the European Council

(5)  See the EESC Opinion in OJ C 80 of 30.03.2004 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños).

(6)  See Commission communication on demographic change, COM(2005) 94 of 16.3.2005.

(7)  See the EESC Opinions on the Communication on a Community immigration policy, OJ C 260, 17.9.2001 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños) and on the Communication on illegal immigration, OJ C 149, 21.6.2002, (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños).

(8)  Article III-267 5.

(9)  See the opinion on The role of civil society in helping to prevent undeclared work (SOC/172), adopted at the plenary session on 6/7.4.2005 (rapporteur: Mr Hahr)

(10)  See the Opinion on the Commission communication, Study on the links between legal and illegal migration (COM(2004) 412 final) adopted by the plenary session on 15.12.2004 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños).

(11)  Council Resolution of 20 June 1994

(12)  See the EESC Opinion on the Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, OJ C 36, 8.2.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(13)  See the EESC Opinion on the Conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment, OJ C 80, 3.4.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(14)  See the EESC Opinion on the Conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment, OJ C 80, 3.4.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(15)  See the EESC Opinion on the Conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment, OJ C 80, 3.4.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(16)  See the EESC Opinion on the Conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment, OJ C 80, 3.4.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(17)  See directive 2003/86/EC

(18)  See the EESC Opinions in OJ C 204, 18.7.2000 (Rapporteur: Ms Cassina) and OJ C 241, 7.10.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Mengozzi) and the EP opinion in OJ C 135, 7.5.2001 (rapporteur: Mr Watson)

(19)  See the Commission's proposal for a directive (COM(2004)178) on the admission of third-country nationals to carry out scientific research. See also the related EESC opinion adopted by the plenary session on 27.10.2004 (rapporteur: Ms King)

(20)  See the EESC Opinion on the Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, OJ C 36, 8.2.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(21)  See points 6.4 and 6.5 of the Opinion on Access to European Union citizenship, OJ C 208, 3.9.2003 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(22)  See the EESC Opinion on the International Convention on Migrants, OJ C 302, 7.12.2004 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(23)  Resolution 45/158 of 18 December 1990 which came into force on 1 July 2003

(24)  See the EESC Opinion on the Communication on illegal immigration, OJ C 149, 21.6.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(25)  See the EESC Opinion on the Communication on the Community return policy, OJ C 85, 8.4.2003 (Rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(26)  See the EESC Opinion on the Green Paper on the Community return policy, OJ C 61, 14.3.2003 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(27)  See the EESC Opinion in OJ C 80 of 30.03.04 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños) and the Opinion on Immigration, integration and the role of civil society organisations, OJ C 125, 27.5.2002 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños – co-rapporteur: Mr Melícias)

(28)  See the appendix to the Opinion on Immigration, integration and employment, OJ C 80, 30.3.2004 (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(29)

ILO:

Council of Europe:

European Union:

United Nations:

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the General agreement on trade in services (GATS) — Mode 4 negotiations (movement of physical persons)

(2005/C 286/06)

On 20 January 2003, the Commission, in a letter from Commissioner Lamy, decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the General agreement on trade in services (GATS) — Mode 4 negotiations (movement of physical persons).

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 May 2005. The rapporteur was Ms Florio.

At its 418th plenary session, held on 8 June 2005 the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 134 votes to 1 with 7 abstentions.

Introduction

The EESC has established constructive relations of cooperation and dialogue with the European Commission's Directorate General Trade in various fora (conferences, opinions, institutional meetings). In particular, during his mandate, the previous Commissioner, Pascal Lamy held several discussions with the European Economic and Social Committee on issues relating to international trade, human rights, and the WTO negotiations.

The EESC now presents its proposal for a discussion of the GATS Mode 4 negotiations, which are considered to be a key element in ongoing WTO negotiations for opening up international trade in services. The free movement of services in the European Union and beyond its borders is rightly considered to be a potential instrument for regenerating the economy and employment. A more detailed analysis of the obstacles and risks could contribute to balanced development in this sector in an economically and socially sustainable framework of new international agreements.

The temporary physical presence of someone operating on behalf of a business or company that wishes to supply services in another country where he is not a resident, requires deeper analysis for both developing countries and EU Member States.

1.   The GATS agreement

2.   The modes of supply

2.1   The logic between the different modes

2.2   Mode 4 and the Annex on Movement of natural persons supplying services under the Agreement

2.3   EU commitments

2.5   EU requests to other WTO Members

2.6   Requests by WTO Members

3.   EU offer

4.   Third country offers

5.   Temporary stays, the labour market and social cohesion

6.   Conclusions and recommendations

Brussels, 8 June 2005

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  Refer to the European Economic and Social Committee's activities during the Dutch Presidency in 2004. ESC opinion on the preparation of the 4th WTO Ministerial Conference in Qatar: ESC position, 17 October 2001 (OJ C 36, 8.2.2002 p. 85). ESC opinion on The European Airline Industry: from Single Market to Worldwide Challenges of 26 January 2000 (OJ C 75, 15.3.2000 p.4). EESC opinion on the Green Paper on Services of General Interest of 11 December 2003 (OJ C 80, 30.03.2004 p. 66). EESC opinion entitled For a WTO with a human face: the EESC's proposals of 26 March 2003 (OJ C 133, 6.6.2003 p. 75)

(2)  These services and their regulation vary from country to country.

(3)  http://www.oecd.org/document/25/0,2340,fr_2649_34145_31773849_1_1_1_1,00.html

(4)  ILO International Labour Conference, Philadelphia Declaration, 1944

(5)  http://www.ilo.org/dyn/declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.INDEXPAGE?var_language=EN

(6)  The UNICE report on Cancun, Moving Forward Together, July 2003, defines Mode IV as ‘temporary movement of key business personnel’.

(7)  For example, the GATS agreements make no mention of the rights of spouses or children.

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Council Directive on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste and spent fuel

(COM(2004) 716 final — 2004/0249 (CNS))

(2005/C 286/07)

On 12 November 2004 the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 31 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 19 May 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Buffetaut.

At its 418th plenary session, held on 8 and 9 June 2005 (meeting of 9 June 2005), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 120 votes with 6 abstentions.

1.   Introduction

2.   The new Proposal for a Directive

3.   General comments

4.   Specific comments

The drafting of the proposal raises important points of principle.

4.1   The new Directive and the free movement of spent fuel intended for reprocessing

4.2   State of transit considerations

4.3   Defining a State of transit's rights

4.4   Conditions governing the exercise of rights conferred upon a State of transit

4.5   Practical difficulties in implementing certain procedures

4.6   Clarifying the rules for imports and exports (Articles 10, 11 and 12)

4.7   Clarification and standardisation of terminology

5.   Conclusions

Brussels, 9 June 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States, in accordance with Article 128 of the EC Treaty

(COM(2005) 141 final — 2005/0057 (CNS))

(2005/C 286/08)

On 22 April 2005 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 128 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 24 May 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Malosse.

The European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion on 31 May 2005 by written procedure (Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure) by a majority with one vote against.

1.   Introduction

The European Council of 22 and 23 March 2005 stated the need to relaunch the Lisbon Strategy and to refocus priorities on to growth and employment.

The Council asked the Commission to incorporate the priority given to growth and employment into new Broad Economic Policy Guidelines and new Employment Guidelines.

These two texts have been consolidated into a single document, which presents the first integrated guidelines for growth and employment for the period 2005-2008.

This opinion refers to the part entitled Proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States, in accordance with Article 128 of the EC Treaty.

The Committee deeply regrets that the very tight timetable for adoption of the guidelines does not, on such an important subject for European citizens, allow for a real debate with civil society. This runs counter to the principle of participatory democracy as enshrined in the Constitutional Treaty. The Committee therefore requests the Council to review this timetable in the future so that the democratic debate and civil dialogue can be held in reasonable conditions, both at European and at national level. Only then can all the relevant social players be fully involved in every phase of the process, as was so vigorously called for by all sides in the Lisbon mid-term review with a view to more effective implementation of the employment strategy.

At the same time, the Committee regrets that the consultation procedure only allows it to express its view in part on what is in principle an integrated proposal on growth and employment. It would have been appropriate for the employment guidelines and the broad economic policy guidelines for Member States to have been included in a single referral, with a truly comprehensive policy making possible a more balanced policy mix between the cyclical and structural aspects.

Finally, the Committee believes that the Commission must draw up a more consistent strategy ensuring support and assistance to employment policy, which will respond better to public expectations and make it possible actually to achieve the full employment goals of the Lisbon Strategy.

2.   General comments

2.1   Overall consistency

In order to make the process of refocusing on growth and employment effective, the European Council has decided to strengthen the consistency and complementarity of the existing mechanisms by launching a new cycle of governance.

The EESC welcomes this new approach, provided that it is put into effect and does not just remain on paper, which unfortunately is still the case. It is also important that consistency should be reflected in the evaluation.

For reasons of continuity, the Employment Guidelines and the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines should be fully reviewed every three years, allowing a real democratic debate.

Priorities

The priorities set out for the purpose of achieving full employment, job quality, labour productivity and social cohesion are as follows:

2.3   Evaluation of results achieved

2.4   Methods of implementation

3.   Specific comments

ATTRACT AND RETAIN MORE PEOPLE IN EMPLOYMENT AND MODERNISE SOCIAL PROTECTION SYSTEMS

IMPROVE ADAPTABILITY OF WORKERS AND ENTERPRISES AND THE FLEXIBILITY OF LABOUR MARKETS

INCREASE INVESTMENT IN HUMAN CAPITAL THROUGH BETTER EDUCATION AND SKILLS

Brussels, 31 May 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  COM(2005) 123 final.

(2)  Quoted from the draft Opinion on the Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration (SOC/199), which was discussed by the Section on 24 May.

(3)  EESC opinion 135/2005 on Employment policy: the role of the EESC following the enlargement of the EU and from the point of view of the Lisbon Process – rapporteur: Mr Greif

(4)  EESC Opinion 1418/2000 – White Paper: Youth Policy – Rapporteur: Ms Hassett van Turnhout

(5)  See note 1.

(6)OJ C 208 of 3.9.2003 on the Proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (Rapporteur: Mr Koryfidis)

(7)OJ C 80 of 30.3.2004 on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on immigration, integration and employment (rapporteur: Mr Pariza Castaños)

(8)  EESC opinion 1618/2003 – Rapporteur: Mr Delapina

(9)  See, especially, the EESC opinion on the European Dimension of Education: its nature, content and prospects – Rapporteur: Mr Koryfidis - OJ C 139, 11.05.2001)

----