# Official Journal C 114/15 A

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 114 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5715 April 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 114

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5715 April 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | RESOLUTIONS |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | 104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013 |
| 2014/C 114/01 | Resolution of the Committee of the Regions on Political priorities of the Committee of the Regions for 2014 based on the legislative and work programme of the European Commission | 1 |
| | OPINIONS |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | 104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013 |
| 2014/C 114/02 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on EU Citizenship Report 2013 | 6 |
| 2014/C 114/03 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on EU guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines | 11 |
| 2014/C 114/04 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The added value of macro-regional strategies | 18 |
| 2014/C 114/05 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Action plan for a competitive and sustainable steel industry in Europe | 23 |
| 2014/C 114/06 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Disability, sport and leisure | 27 |
| 2014/C 114/07 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on State aids to fisheries and aquaculture | 33 |
| 2014/C 114/08 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture | 37 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Committee of the Regions

104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013

2014/C 114/01

Resolution of the Committee of the Regions on Political priorities of the Committee of the Regions for 2014 based on the legislative and work programme of the European Commission

1

OPINIONS

Committee of the Regions

104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013

2014/C 114/02

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on EU Citizenship Report 2013

6

2014/C 114/03

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on EU guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines

11

2014/C 114/04

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The added value of macro-regional strategies

18

2014/C 114/05

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Action plan for a competitive and sustainable steel industry in Europe

23

2014/C 114/06

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Disability, sport and leisure

27

2014/C 114/07

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on State aids to fisheries and aquaculture

33

2014/C 114/08

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture

37

| | III   Preparatory acts |
| --- | --- |
| | COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS |
| | 104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013 |
| 2014/C 114/09 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Researchers, students, volunteers and other groups of third-country nationals | 42 |
| 2014/C 114/10 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on European Union Solidarity Fund | 48 |
| 2014/C 114/11 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Framework on future EU ports policy | 57 |
| 2014/C 114/12 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Roma integration strategies | 73 |
| 2014/C 114/13 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Directive on e-invoicing and on end-to-end e-procurement | 79 |
| 2014/C 114/14 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Enhanced cooperation between public employment services | 85 |
| 2014/C 114/15 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Smart Borders package | 90 |
| 2014/C 114/16 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Regulation on official controls | 96 |

III   Preparatory acts

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013

2014/C 114/09

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Researchers, students, volunteers and other groups of third-country nationals

42

2014/C 114/10

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on European Union Solidarity Fund

48

2014/C 114/11

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Framework on future EU ports policy

57

2014/C 114/12

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Roma integration strategies

73

2014/C 114/13

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Directive on e-invoicing and on end-to-end e-procurement

79

2014/C 114/14

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Enhanced cooperation between public employment services

85

2014/C 114/15

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Smart Borders package

90

2014/C 114/16

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Regulation on official controls

96

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Committee of the Regions

104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/1

---

Resolution of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Political priorities of the Committee of the Regions for 2014 based on the legislative and work programme of the European Commission’

2014/C 114/01

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| — | having regard to the European Commission’s Communication on its Work Programme for 2014 (1), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the European Commission’s Communication on its Work Programme for 2014 (1),

| — | having regard to its resolution of 4 July 2013 on the priorities of the Committee of the Regions for 2014 with a view to the work programme of the European Commission (2), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its resolution of 4 July 2013 on the priorities of the Committee of the Regions for 2014 with a view to the work programme of the European Commission (2),

| — | having regard to the Protocol of cooperation between the European Commission and the Committee of the Regions signed on 16 February 2012, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Protocol of cooperation between the European Commission and the Committee of the Regions signed on 16 February 2012,

Main political priorities for 2014

| 1. | considers the main challenges for the European Union to be — generate sustainable growth, and ensure social, economic and territorial cohesion, create jobs and reinforce the citizen’s trust in the European project; |
| --- | --- |

1.

considers the main challenges for the European Union to be — generate sustainable growth, and ensure social, economic and territorial cohesion, create jobs and reinforce the citizen’s trust in the European project;

| 2. | calls for a greater coordination of economic and social policies to help address the competitiveness gap between the Member States; reiterates the urgency of tackling youth unemployment and addressing the existing geographical inequalities between EU regions in order to prevent further loss of human capital; |
| --- | --- |

2.

calls for a greater coordination of economic and social policies to help address the competitiveness gap between the Member States; reiterates the urgency of tackling youth unemployment and addressing the existing geographical inequalities between EU regions in order to prevent further loss of human capital;

| 3. | calls for a thorough mid-term review of the EU 2020 strategy in 2014, based on the inclusion of: i) a territorial dimension, allowing for sub-national targets according to the different regional situations; ii) governance involving local and regional authorities in setting targets and implementing the strategy; iii) adequate funding for long-term investments, which should not be sacrificed to fiscal consolidation goals; |
| --- | --- |

3.

calls for a thorough mid-term review of the EU 2020 strategy in 2014, based on the inclusion of: i) a territorial dimension, allowing for sub-national targets according to the different regional situations; ii) governance involving local and regional authorities in setting targets and implementing the strategy; iii) adequate funding for long-term investments, which should not be sacrificed to fiscal consolidation goals;

| 4. | highlights the key importance of the democratic process in the European Union in the election year 2014 and will develop its contribution to the ongoing debate about the future of the Union in order to strengthen the role of local and regional authorities in the integration process; the CoR will therefore give impetus to any debate on Treaty reform through the organisation of political debates, and by better profiling the subsidiarity principle and the concept of multi-level-governance as important tools for attaining these objectives; |
| --- | --- |

4.

highlights the key importance of the democratic process in the European Union in the election year 2014 and will develop its contribution to the ongoing debate about the future of the Union in order to strengthen the role of local and regional authorities in the integration process; the CoR will therefore give impetus to any debate on Treaty reform through the organisation of political debates, and by better profiling the subsidiarity principle and the concept of multi-level-governance as important tools for attaining these objectives;

| 5. | in view of the subsidiarity principle as a recognised means to ensure that political decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizens, calls on the European Commission to better prove in its legislative proposals the added value of EU action; points to the contribution it will make to subsidiarity monitoring of EU initiatives included in the Commission’s 2014 Work Programme which have a local or regional dimension; |
| --- | --- |

5.

in view of the subsidiarity principle as a recognised means to ensure that political decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizens, calls on the European Commission to better prove in its legislative proposals the added value of EU action; points to the contribution it will make to subsidiarity monitoring of EU initiatives included in the Commission’s 2014 Work Programme which have a local or regional dimension;

| 6. | welcomes the Commission’s focus on delivery and implementation and commits itself to contribute to the strengthening of the territorial dimension of the impact assessment. |
| --- | --- |

6.

welcomes the Commission’s focus on delivery and implementation and commits itself to contribute to the strengthening of the territorial dimension of the impact assessment.

Economic and Monetary Union

| 7. | underlines that the coordination of economic policies needs to be reinforced and therefore believes that the regional and local authorities should be involved in the European Semester process at Member State level and also calls for the CoR to be involved at the level of the EU institutions; |
| --- | --- |

7.

underlines that the coordination of economic policies needs to be reinforced and therefore believes that the regional and local authorities should be involved in the European Semester process at Member State level and also calls for the CoR to be involved at the level of the EU institutions;

| 8. | welcomes the recognition of the need to strengthen the EMU’s social dimension in particular through the Commission’s proposal for the establishment of a scoreboard of key employment and social indicators to be included in the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure (MIP); expects the Commission to address further the issue of the quality of public spending; |
| --- | --- |

8.

welcomes the recognition of the need to strengthen the EMU’s social dimension in particular through the Commission’s proposal for the establishment of a scoreboard of key employment and social indicators to be included in the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure (MIP); expects the Commission to address further the issue of the quality of public spending;

| 9. | awaits the urgently needed Commission proposals to prepare the Banking Union through a reform of the European banking sector which would aim at improving corporate governance, allowing effective bank resolution and recovery, reinforcing bank capital, focussing on delivering credit to the real economy, and would entail a mandatory separation of banks’ retail and investment activities; |
| --- | --- |

9.

awaits the urgently needed Commission proposals to prepare the Banking Union through a reform of the European banking sector which would aim at improving corporate governance, allowing effective bank resolution and recovery, reinforcing bank capital, focussing on delivering credit to the real economy, and would entail a mandatory separation of banks’ retail and investment activities;

| 10. | supports all efforts leading to the completion of the Banking Union, taking into account its local and regional dimension and the key role of regional banks in providing capital for small and medium-sized businesses and public investment projects. |
| --- | --- |

10.

supports all efforts leading to the completion of the Banking Union, taking into account its local and regional dimension and the key role of regional banks in providing capital for small and medium-sized businesses and public investment projects.

Growth, jobs and inclusion

| 11. | agrees with the European Commission that unemployment rates, particularly among young people, remain at levels that are economically and socially unsustainable. The Committee of the Regions calls on the Commission to include and to take into account the good practices of local and regional authorities in its proposals for stimulating youth employment; welcomes the key priority in combatting youth unemployment, which supposes a real threat to the European social model; notes the importance of Youth Guarantee, as a measure to ensure equal opportunities for youth in the labour market; |
| --- | --- |

11.

agrees with the European Commission that unemployment rates, particularly among young people, remain at levels that are economically and socially unsustainable. The Committee of the Regions calls on the Commission to include and to take into account the good practices of local and regional authorities in its proposals for stimulating youth employment; welcomes the key priority in combatting youth unemployment, which supposes a real threat to the European social model; notes the importance of Youth Guarantee, as a measure to ensure equal opportunities for youth in the labour market;

| 12. | welcomes the Commission’s announcement to present a labour mobility package focusing on better coordination between social security schemes across Member States; but considers that breaking the deadlock on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers (3)is a prerequisite. This may entail revised measures to fight fraud, e.g. the suspension of the recognition of the A1 form. Also expects the future package to contain a legislative proposal on the information and consultation of workers in relation to anticipation and management of restructuring and to present proposals for an improved coordination of work accreditations; |
| --- | --- |

12.

welcomes the Commission’s announcement to present a labour mobility package focusing on better coordination between social security schemes across Member States; but considers that breaking the deadlock on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers (3)is a prerequisite. This may entail revised measures to fight fraud, e.g. the suspension of the recognition of the A1 form. Also expects the future package to contain a legislative proposal on the information and consultation of workers in relation to anticipation and management of restructuring and to present proposals for an improved coordination of work accreditations;

| 13. | supports the European Parliament in its efforts to review the Troika system in order to guarantee democratic scrutiny and its accountability; |
| --- | --- |

13.

supports the European Parliament in its efforts to review the Troika system in order to guarantee democratic scrutiny and its accountability;

| 14. | calls on the European Commission and Member States to make use of the new MFF programmes to face demographic challenges, improve the conciliation of work and family life and promote social cohesion; |
| --- | --- |

14.

calls on the European Commission and Member States to make use of the new MFF programmes to face demographic challenges, improve the conciliation of work and family life and promote social cohesion;

| 15. | welcomes the efforts to modernise state aid policy with a view to better match it with the Europe 2020 Strategy and cut red tape, bearing in mind that the goal should be, as a priority, to improve the competitiveness of less developed regions in terms of industry and business and high level of unemployment. Reiterates however its request to the European Commission to be formally consulted on further draft guidelines on EU state aid rules and in particular on those currently under preparation in relation to infrastructure; |
| --- | --- |

15.

welcomes the efforts to modernise state aid policy with a view to better match it with the Europe 2020 Strategy and cut red tape, bearing in mind that the goal should be, as a priority, to improve the competitiveness of less developed regions in terms of industry and business and high level of unemployment. Reiterates however its request to the European Commission to be formally consulted on further draft guidelines on EU state aid rules and in particular on those currently under preparation in relation to infrastructure;

| 16. | welcomes the foreseen European Accessibility Act and highlights that the accessibility of goods and services is a key factor for the quality of life of persons with disabilities. |
| --- | --- |

16.

welcomes the foreseen European Accessibility Act and highlights that the accessibility of goods and services is a key factor for the quality of life of persons with disabilities.

Cohesion policy

| 17. | calls on the European Commission to promote and scrutinise the involvement of local and regional authorities in the finalization of the Partnership Agreements and the related Operational Programmes, on the basis of the application of the Regulations and of the ‘Code of Conduct’, and requests a report on this matter by February 2014. The Partnership Agreements must become the pivotal element of multilevel governance in the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy or any European strategy for growth and jobs; |
| --- | --- |

17.

calls on the European Commission to promote and scrutinise the involvement of local and regional authorities in the finalization of the Partnership Agreements and the related Operational Programmes, on the basis of the application of the Regulations and of the ‘Code of Conduct’, and requests a report on this matter by February 2014. The Partnership Agreements must become the pivotal element of multilevel governance in the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy or any European strategy for growth and jobs;

| 18. | notes the increase of various uncoordinated EU initiatives affecting urban development policy; calls for the preparation of a White Paper on an integrated urban agenda for the EU and indicates its intention to be involved in this process; |
| --- | --- |

18.

notes the increase of various uncoordinated EU initiatives affecting urban development policy; calls for the preparation of a White Paper on an integrated urban agenda for the EU and indicates its intention to be involved in this process;

| 19. | commits itself to following closely the implementation of measures under the rural development pillar of the reformed Common Agricultural Policy, especially as regards the diversification and modernisation of economic activities in rural areas, and to support close cooperation between rural and urban municipalities through territorial functional partnerships; |
| --- | --- |

19.

commits itself to following closely the implementation of measures under the rural development pillar of the reformed Common Agricultural Policy, especially as regards the diversification and modernisation of economic activities in rural areas, and to support close cooperation between rural and urban municipalities through territorial functional partnerships;

| 20. | urges the Member States and the Commission to assess the development of any new macro-regional strategies in view of the shared challenges and opportunities of the geographical areas in question and their European added value; stresses the importance of streamlining the current governance structures and strengthening the application of the multi-level governance principle. |
| --- | --- |

20.

urges the Member States and the Commission to assess the development of any new macro-regional strategies in view of the shared challenges and opportunities of the geographical areas in question and their European added value; stresses the importance of streamlining the current governance structures and strengthening the application of the multi-level governance principle.

EU Budget

| 21. | reiterates its call for a reform of the present own resources system as provided for in the Treaty and as a means to reduce Member States’ direct contributions to the EU budget, to increase transparency and to guarantee the sustainability of the EU finances; expects therefore the high-level group on own resources to be provided with a mandate allowing to present reform proposals in view of the mid-term review of the MFF; |
| --- | --- |

21.

reiterates its call for a reform of the present own resources system as provided for in the Treaty and as a means to reduce Member States’ direct contributions to the EU budget, to increase transparency and to guarantee the sustainability of the EU finances; expects therefore the high-level group on own resources to be provided with a mandate allowing to present reform proposals in view of the mid-term review of the MFF;

| 22. | commits to delivering an opinion on the execution of the EU budget, looking horizontally at the spending of EU funds from the perspective of local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

22.

commits to delivering an opinion on the execution of the EU budget, looking horizontally at the spending of EU funds from the perspective of local and regional authorities;

| 23. | points out the lack of a consolidated vision of the budgetary means available to support the Europe 2020 strategy, reiterates that the synergy between EU, national and subnational budgets is essential to achieve the objectives set, expresses concerns with regard to the consequences of the crisis on the availability of financial resources to fund long-term investments, and requests the European Commission to explore this dimension in the context of the Europe 2020 strategy mid-term review. |
| --- | --- |

23.

points out the lack of a consolidated vision of the budgetary means available to support the Europe 2020 strategy, reiterates that the synergy between EU, national and subnational budgets is essential to achieve the objectives set, expresses concerns with regard to the consequences of the crisis on the availability of financial resources to fund long-term investments, and requests the European Commission to explore this dimension in the context of the Europe 2020 strategy mid-term review.

Agriculture and maritime policy

| 24. | calls on the European Commission to revise the Directive 2004/18/EC on the coordination of procedures for the award of public contracts so that ‘locally produced’ can be a standard selection criterion in tenders for the supply of food to, for instance, schools, nursing homes and public facilities (4); |
| --- | --- |

24.

calls on the European Commission to revise the Directive 2004/18/EC on the coordination of procedures for the award of public contracts so that ‘locally produced’ can be a standard selection criterion in tenders for the supply of food to, for instance, schools, nursing homes and public facilities (4);

| 25. | calls for careful evaluation of the territorial impact of all proposals to abolish market regulation mechanisms in agriculture, including bilateral trade agreements and association agreements, and to check whether these proposals are not at odds with the objective of territorial cohesion enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

25.

calls for careful evaluation of the territorial impact of all proposals to abolish market regulation mechanisms in agriculture, including bilateral trade agreements and association agreements, and to check whether these proposals are not at odds with the objective of territorial cohesion enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty.

Transport

| 26. | requests to the European Commission to monitor the involvement of the regions and the local authorities in the governance platforms of the priority corridors of the Core Transport Network, and its support to the participation of these authorities in the preparation of projects with an impact in their territories or with a cross-border dimension; |
| --- | --- |

26.

requests to the European Commission to monitor the involvement of the regions and the local authorities in the governance platforms of the priority corridors of the Core Transport Network, and its support to the participation of these authorities in the preparation of projects with an impact in their territories or with a cross-border dimension;

| 27. | it will participate actively in the initiatives of the European Commission related to the transport area which promote the use of efficient multimodal networks and contribute to consolidate the Single European Railway Area and the Single European Sky. |
| --- | --- |

27.

it will participate actively in the initiatives of the European Commission related to the transport area which promote the use of efficient multimodal networks and contribute to consolidate the Single European Railway Area and the Single European Sky.

Environment, climate change and energy

| 28. | calls on the European Commission to deliver an ambitious new climate and energy framework for the period up to 2030, including legally binding targets for greenhouse gases, energy efficiency and renewable energy; |
| --- | --- |

28.

calls on the European Commission to deliver an ambitious new climate and energy framework for the period up to 2030, including legally binding targets for greenhouse gases, energy efficiency and renewable energy;

| 29. | calls for stable EU legislative frameworks in relation to access to justice in environmental matters and the protection of soil; |
| --- | --- |

29.

calls for stable EU legislative frameworks in relation to access to justice in environmental matters and the protection of soil;

| 30. | expects the European Commission’s initiative on resource efficiency and waste not only to set resource efficiency indicators, but also targets based on these indicators; |
| --- | --- |

30.

expects the European Commission’s initiative on resource efficiency and waste not only to set resource efficiency indicators, but also targets based on these indicators;

| 31. | calls on the European Commission to ensure that its 2014 review of waste legislation and of existing prevention, re-use, recycling, recovery and landfill diversion targets, as part of its resource efficiency and waste initiative, will take due account of the Committee’s Outlook Opinion requested by the European Commission; the review should live up to the ‘aspirational targets’ set out in the Resource Efficiency Roadmap paving the way towards an economy based on re-use and recycling; demands that in the context of the 2014 review attention be placed on plastic waste, taking due account of the Committee’s Opinion on the subject; |
| --- | --- |

31.

calls on the European Commission to ensure that its 2014 review of waste legislation and of existing prevention, re-use, recycling, recovery and landfill diversion targets, as part of its resource efficiency and waste initiative, will take due account of the Committee’s Outlook Opinion requested by the European Commission; the review should live up to the ‘aspirational targets’ set out in the Resource Efficiency Roadmap paving the way towards an economy based on re-use and recycling; demands that in the context of the 2014 review attention be placed on plastic waste, taking due account of the Committee’s Opinion on the subject;

| 32. | expects the European Commission to propose an ambitious agenda for the implementation of a fully integrated and competitive internal market in energy; asks the European Commission to promote measures that facilitate the spread of micro-production of energy and its integration into the distribution grids and to ensure in this process that the consumers in the retail market can fully benefit from affordable energy and that sustainable energy investment at the local and regional level is facilitated by modernised state aid rules in the field of energy; at the request of the Greek presidency will outline proposals for an EU strategy on affordable energy for all; |
| --- | --- |

32.

expects the European Commission to propose an ambitious agenda for the implementation of a fully integrated and competitive internal market in energy; asks the European Commission to promote measures that facilitate the spread of micro-production of energy and its integration into the distribution grids and to ensure in this process that the consumers in the retail market can fully benefit from affordable energy and that sustainable energy investment at the local and regional level is facilitated by modernised state aid rules in the field of energy; at the request of the Greek presidency will outline proposals for an EU strategy on affordable energy for all;

| 33. | calls on the European Commission to supervise that, in the energy sector, the regulatory framework at national level remains stable and aligned with the objectives established by the Europe 2020 strategy; |
| --- | --- |

33.

calls on the European Commission to supervise that, in the energy sector, the regulatory framework at national level remains stable and aligned with the objectives established by the Europe 2020 strategy;

| 34. | looks forward to the European Commission’s proposals for the necessary legal framework on shale gas/tight gas to guarantee the safety and sustainability of the exploration of unconventional hydrocarbons in the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

34.

looks forward to the European Commission’s proposals for the necessary legal framework on shale gas/tight gas to guarantee the safety and sustainability of the exploration of unconventional hydrocarbons in the European Union.

Research and innovation

| 35. | awaits with interest the Commission’s initiative on ‘Research and innovation as new sources of growth’ and its assessment of how the innovation economy promotes competitiveness and provides an evidence base for identifying priority investments to be co-financed by Horizon 2020; |
| --- | --- |

35.

awaits with interest the Commission’s initiative on ‘Research and innovation as new sources of growth’ and its assessment of how the innovation economy promotes competitiveness and provides an evidence base for identifying priority investments to be co-financed by Horizon 2020;

| 36. | will continue to be actively involved in the Smart Specialisation Platform and related projects in the regions and will follow up on the next phase of designing and implementation of the smart specialisation strategies in the regions. |
| --- | --- |

36.

will continue to be actively involved in the Smart Specialisation Platform and related projects in the regions and will follow up on the next phase of designing and implementation of the smart specialisation strategies in the regions.

ICT

| 37. | welcomes the focus placed on the digital economy, innovation and services, and calls on the Council and the Commission to take forward this agenda so as to incentivise investments in this field, complete the Digital Single Market by 2015, and launch measures to improve skills and reduce the digital gap among Member States regions. Commits itself to promote the modernisation of local and regional public administrations in the provision of services such as e-government, e-health, e-invoicing and e-procurement. |
| --- | --- |

37.

welcomes the focus placed on the digital economy, innovation and services, and calls on the Council and the Commission to take forward this agenda so as to incentivise investments in this field, complete the Digital Single Market by 2015, and launch measures to improve skills and reduce the digital gap among Member States regions. Commits itself to promote the modernisation of local and regional public administrations in the provision of services such as e-government, e-health, e-invoicing and e-procurement.

Education, culture and tourism

| 38. | places great importance on ensuring that the future Erasmus + provides adequate support and equal opportunities for all target groups from previous programmes and will continue to follow the aspects of funding distribution and programme management. The CoR — will support further measures to boost young people’s employability such as the proposal for a Quality Framework for Traineeships and initiatives aimed at modernisation of school policies and the teaching professions; awaits proposals by the European Commission for the establishment of a genuine European Area of Skills and Qualifications; |
| --- | --- |

38.

places great importance on ensuring that the future Erasmus + provides adequate support and equal opportunities for all target groups from previous programmes and will continue to follow the aspects of funding distribution and programme management. The CoR — will support further measures to boost young people’s employability such as the proposal for a Quality Framework for Traineeships and initiatives aimed at modernisation of school policies and the teaching professions; awaits proposals by the European Commission for the establishment of a genuine European Area of Skills and Qualifications;

| 39. | reiterates its request for a communication on sustainable and competitive cultural tourism in the EU, maintaining that a clear strategic framework in this field could be highly beneficial for the development of local small and medium-sized businesses, promotion and preservation of diverse European heritage and further integration of European citizens. |
| --- | --- |

39.

reiterates its request for a communication on sustainable and competitive cultural tourism in the EU, maintaining that a clear strategic framework in this field could be highly beneficial for the development of local small and medium-sized businesses, promotion and preservation of diverse European heritage and further integration of European citizens.

Area of Freedom, Security, Justice and Citizens’ rights

| 40. | looks forward to the European Commission’s response to the first batch of successful citizens’ initiatives and re-iterates its offer to assist the European Commission in their evaluation and to participate in the public hearings organised at the European Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

40.

looks forward to the European Commission’s response to the first batch of successful citizens’ initiatives and re-iterates its offer to assist the European Commission in their evaluation and to participate in the public hearings organised at the European Parliament;

| 41. | awaits the proposals by the European Commission for the follow-up to the Stockholm programme and will formulate its own expectations towards the future development of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice; |
| --- | --- |

41.

awaits the proposals by the European Commission for the follow-up to the Stockholm programme and will formulate its own expectations towards the future development of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice;

| 42. | calls for comprehensive EU policies to address migration, mobility and asylum based on the respect of individuals’ fundamental rights and freedoms and capable of protecting EU borders, intensifying the fight against human trafficking and illegal immigration, enhancing cooperation with third countries of origin and transit and building genuine solidarity between the EU Member States as well as between local and regional authorities; in particular calls for the revision of the Dublin II regulation in order to allow for a fair redistribution of asylum seekers across the Member States; these considerations should also apply to the projected EU Maritime Security Strategy; |
| --- | --- |

42.

calls for comprehensive EU policies to address migration, mobility and asylum based on the respect of individuals’ fundamental rights and freedoms and capable of protecting EU borders, intensifying the fight against human trafficking and illegal immigration, enhancing cooperation with third countries of origin and transit and building genuine solidarity between the EU Member States as well as between local and regional authorities; in particular calls for the revision of the Dublin II regulation in order to allow for a fair redistribution of asylum seekers across the Member States; these considerations should also apply to the projected EU Maritime Security Strategy;

| 43. | intends to contribute to setting up priority actions, as requested by the European Council, to reinforce the European strategy on migration and integration of migrants; considers in that respect that the management of migration flows, particularly in the Mediterranean, should be developed in a comprehensive way in order to promote sustainable solutions involving all the stakeholders, notably third countries, EU Member States as well as regional and local authorities. |
| --- | --- |

43.

intends to contribute to setting up priority actions, as requested by the European Council, to reinforce the European strategy on migration and integration of migrants; considers in that respect that the management of migration flows, particularly in the Mediterranean, should be developed in a comprehensive way in order to promote sustainable solutions involving all the stakeholders, notably third countries, EU Member States as well as regional and local authorities.

Europe as a global actor

| 44. | will continue the effort to empower the local and regional authorities from candidate and potential candidate countries within the accession process; draws the attention to the work and opportunities offered by the Euro-Mediterranean Regional and Local Assembly (ARLEM) and the Conference of Regional and Local Authorities for the Eastern Partnership (CORLEAP) in strengthening democracy through economic, social and territorial cooperation in Europe’s neighbourhood; |
| --- | --- |

44.

will continue the effort to empower the local and regional authorities from candidate and potential candidate countries within the accession process; draws the attention to the work and opportunities offered by the Euro-Mediterranean Regional and Local Assembly (ARLEM) and the Conference of Regional and Local Authorities for the Eastern Partnership (CORLEAP) in strengthening democracy through economic, social and territorial cooperation in Europe’s neighbourhood;

| 45. | welcomes the Commission’s reiterated commitment to support the democratic transition process in the Mediterranean partner countries and recalls that ownership on all levels is needed for a successful transition; stands ready to support efforts of decentralisation as a tool for the formulation and implementation of local and regional public policies to increase economic growth, social and territorial cohesion; |
| --- | --- |

45.

welcomes the Commission’s reiterated commitment to support the democratic transition process in the Mediterranean partner countries and recalls that ownership on all levels is needed for a successful transition; stands ready to support efforts of decentralisation as a tool for the formulation and implementation of local and regional public policies to increase economic growth, social and territorial cohesion;

| 46. | welcomes the proposal and the emerging decision on a European Year for Development 2015 to secure the follow-up of the Millennium Development Goals and launch the new international agenda for sustainable development; reiterates the need for local and regional authorities to be fully involved in the implementation of both the future post-2015 agenda and the European Year for Development 2015; reiterates therefore its request that the budget provides for adequate financial support to local and regional authorities’ initiatives. |
| --- | --- |

46.

welcomes the proposal and the emerging decision on a European Year for Development 2015 to secure the follow-up of the Millennium Development Goals and launch the new international agenda for sustainable development; reiterates the need for local and regional authorities to be fully involved in the implementation of both the future post-2015 agenda and the European Year for Development 2015; reiterates therefore its request that the budget provides for adequate financial support to local and regional authorities’ initiatives.

Brussels, 29 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  COM(2013) 739 final.

1

(2)  CdR 4044/2013.

2

(3)  Proposal for a Directive on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services COM(2012) 131 final.

3

(4)  Cf. CdR 341/2010.

4

---

OPINIONS

Committee of the Regions

104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/6

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘EU Citizenship Report 2013’

2014/C 114/02

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | notes that European citizenship, irrespective of the ways in which national citizenship is recognised, not only enables different national identities to coexist within the European Union and citizens to be involved in the process of European integration, but helps to build European democracy; |
| --- | --- |

1.

notes that European citizenship, irrespective of the ways in which national citizenship is recognised, not only enables different national identities to coexist within the European Union and citizens to be involved in the process of European integration, but helps to build European democracy;

| 2. | underlines that free movement is a cornerstone for the EU's further economic and political development, opens professional and learning opportunities for EU citizens and creates closer bonds between Europeans and thus is a central element of Union citizenship; |
| --- | --- |

2.

underlines that free movement is a cornerstone for the EU's further economic and political development, opens professional and learning opportunities for EU citizens and creates closer bonds between Europeans and thus is a central element of Union citizenship;

| 3. | highlights the need to focus also on the economic dimension in order to secure an economically strong Europe, which would be able to strengthen the social dimension of EU citizenship, in view of the ever-worsening debt crisis and increase in unemployment affecting more and more EU citizens, especially young people; |
| --- | --- |

3.

highlights the need to focus also on the economic dimension in order to secure an economically strong Europe, which would be able to strengthen the social dimension of EU citizenship, in view of the ever-worsening debt crisis and increase in unemployment affecting more and more EU citizens, especially young people;

| 4. | accepts that a proportion of Europe's citizens feel remote from decision-making at European level and repeats that decisions must be taken as transparently as possible and as close as possible to ordinary people; |
| --- | --- |

4.

accepts that a proportion of Europe's citizens feel remote from decision-making at European level and repeats that decisions must be taken as transparently as possible and as close as possible to ordinary people;

| 5. | knows that because local and regional authorities are close to citizens, they are ideally placed to promote a better understanding of EU citizenship and to highlight it and make people more aware of its real benefits for individuals; |
| --- | --- |

5.

knows that because local and regional authorities are close to citizens, they are ideally placed to promote a better understanding of EU citizenship and to highlight it and make people more aware of its real benefits for individuals;

| 6. | stresses the need for closer integration to be accompanied by more democratic legitimacy at a time when economic and monetary union is deepening and the possibility of strengthening political union through a revision of the treaties is being discussed; |
| --- | --- |

6.

stresses the need for closer integration to be accompanied by more democratic legitimacy at a time when economic and monetary union is deepening and the possibility of strengthening political union through a revision of the treaties is being discussed;

Political and legal framework for European citizenship

| 7. | notes that a fundamental and highly symbolic stage in the development of a European identity and European democracy was the introduction in the Maastricht Treaty of ‘European citizenship’, granted to every citizen of every Member State of the European Union, and which with the adoption of the Amsterdam Treaty was considered to complement national citizenship; |
| --- | --- |

7.

notes that a fundamental and highly symbolic stage in the development of a European identity and European democracy was the introduction in the Maastricht Treaty of ‘European citizenship’, granted to every citizen of every Member State of the European Union, and which with the adoption of the Amsterdam Treaty was considered to complement national citizenship;

| 8. | also points out that the new legislative arrangements brought in by the Treaty of Lisbon signalled a consolidation of European citizenship, which now extends (and does not just complement), without replacing, national citizenship; European citizenship is not meant to be an expression of pre-existing ties that hold the political system together, but a framework of rules that transform freedom of movement between Member States into a system of rights rather than one of exclusions; |
| --- | --- |

8.

also points out that the new legislative arrangements brought in by the Treaty of Lisbon signalled a consolidation of European citizenship, which now extends (and does not just complement), without replacing, national citizenship; European citizenship is not meant to be an expression of pre-existing ties that hold the political system together, but a framework of rules that transform freedom of movement between Member States into a system of rights rather than one of exclusions;

| 9. | remarks that twenty years after the Maastricht Treaty set out the rights of EU citizens, those rights are not always part of people's everyday reality. Ordinary EU citizens attested to this in a broad public consultation on European citizenship in which 12 000 citizens gave examples of red tape that they still faced, for example in exercising their right to free movement (1). Eurobarometer surveys on citizens' rights (2) and electoral rights (3), a series of direct discussions between citizens and national and European policy-makers, and a number of questions about European rights put by the general public to the Europe Direct information service all confirm that more needs to be done in this area; |
| --- | --- |

9.

remarks that twenty years after the Maastricht Treaty set out the rights of EU citizens, those rights are not always part of people's everyday reality. Ordinary EU citizens attested to this in a broad public consultation on European citizenship in which 12 000 citizens gave examples of red tape that they still faced, for example in exercising their right to free movement (1). Eurobarometer surveys on citizens' rights (2) and electoral rights (3), a series of direct discussions between citizens and national and European policy-makers, and a number of questions about European rights put by the general public to the Europe Direct information service all confirm that more needs to be done in this area;

| 10. | emphasises that the rights referred to in the report are rights granted by the EU Treaties to citizens of the European Union, but that many of these rights are fundamental rights enjoyed also by third-country nationals; |
| --- | --- |

10.

emphasises that the rights referred to in the report are rights granted by the EU Treaties to citizens of the European Union, but that many of these rights are fundamental rights enjoyed also by third-country nationals;

| 11. | observes that the relationship between European citizenship and citizenship of the Member States remains ambiguous. On the one hand, EU citizenship is directly dependent on citizenship of the Member States, which is the sole criterion for acquiring EU citizenship, as laid down by the relevant national law. This characteristic of EU citizenship limits its role to being an additional source of rights linked to citizenship of the Member States. On the other hand, EU citizenship separates the concept of citizenship from the national state and shifts the emphasis from individual membership of a political community to residence, to equal protection of individual, political and social rights, and to free movement as a European citizen; |
| --- | --- |

11.

observes that the relationship between European citizenship and citizenship of the Member States remains ambiguous. On the one hand, EU citizenship is directly dependent on citizenship of the Member States, which is the sole criterion for acquiring EU citizenship, as laid down by the relevant national law. This characteristic of EU citizenship limits its role to being an additional source of rights linked to citizenship of the Member States. On the other hand, EU citizenship separates the concept of citizenship from the national state and shifts the emphasis from individual membership of a political community to residence, to equal protection of individual, political and social rights, and to free movement as a European citizen;

| 12. | notes that the acquisition of the citizenship of a member state — and through that EU citizenship — can be a key mechanism for integrating third-country nationals into European societies and as such must be sufficiently accessible to immigrants who have been legally established in the EU for a long time. Granting citizenship to such immigrants is an important way of integrating them into European societies; |
| --- | --- |

12.

notes that the acquisition of the citizenship of a member state — and through that EU citizenship — can be a key mechanism for integrating third-country nationals into European societies and as such must be sufficiently accessible to immigrants who have been legally established in the EU for a long time. Granting citizenship to such immigrants is an important way of integrating them into European societies;

| 13. | points out that in an opinion on EU citizenship adopted in 2010 the Committee already called on the European Union to make its policy and decision-making systems more democratic and transparent. It also asked for mechanisms to be introduced that could promote a two-way political dialogue, and for the principle of participatory democracy to be put into practice; |
| --- | --- |

13.

points out that in an opinion on EU citizenship adopted in 2010 the Committee already called on the European Union to make its policy and decision-making systems more democratic and transparent. It also asked for mechanisms to be introduced that could promote a two-way political dialogue, and for the principle of participatory democracy to be put into practice;

| 14. | notes that in its report the European Commission evaluates progress to date and endeavours to keep its promises to promote EU citizenship by proposing twelve key actions; |
| --- | --- |

14.

notes that in its report the European Commission evaluates progress to date and endeavours to keep its promises to promote EU citizenship by proposing twelve key actions;

| 15. | points out, however, that the proposals contained in the report mainly concern the economic dimension of the EU and only secondarily the political or social aspects of European integration. For example, it does not contain clear and specific proposals for strengthening the rights of patients or for cross-border delivery of health services, enhancing multiculturalism, promoting a more ‘social Europe’ (e.g. by combating poverty and social exclusion) or the gradual creation of a European identity; |
| --- | --- |

15.

points out, however, that the proposals contained in the report mainly concern the economic dimension of the EU and only secondarily the political or social aspects of European integration. For example, it does not contain clear and specific proposals for strengthening the rights of patients or for cross-border delivery of health services, enhancing multiculturalism, promoting a more ‘social Europe’ (e.g. by combating poverty and social exclusion) or the gradual creation of a European identity;

| 16. | notes that the measures announced in the report appear at first sight to be compatible with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles, but that it is essential for the European Commission to justify in detail each specific measure when it makes a formal proposal, since certain proposals might require closer examination (e.g. issuing of optional uniform European documents). In addition, the measures envisaged should not entail an excessive administrative or financial burden for the national, regional and local authorities concerned; |
| --- | --- |

16.

notes that the measures announced in the report appear at first sight to be compatible with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles, but that it is essential for the European Commission to justify in detail each specific measure when it makes a formal proposal, since certain proposals might require closer examination (e.g. issuing of optional uniform European documents). In addition, the measures envisaged should not entail an excessive administrative or financial burden for the national, regional and local authorities concerned;

| 17. | points out that with a view to the upcoming European elections in 2014, the report must be read in the light of the relevant recent communication and related report of the European Commission (4). These texts are intended to enhance democratic procedures and representative democracy in the EU by boosting participation in the European elections; |
| --- | --- |

17.

points out that with a view to the upcoming European elections in 2014, the report must be read in the light of the relevant recent communication and related report of the European Commission (4). These texts are intended to enhance democratic procedures and representative democracy in the EU by boosting participation in the European elections;

| 18. | recalls that the CoR was closely associated to the preparation of the report and that it takes into account the findings and proposals of a survey commissioned by the CoR on the role of local and regional authorities in promoting Union citizenship and citizens' rights (5); |
| --- | --- |

18.

recalls that the CoR was closely associated to the preparation of the report and that it takes into account the findings and proposals of a survey commissioned by the CoR on the role of local and regional authorities in promoting Union citizenship and citizens' rights (5);

Conditions for effective citizenship

| 19. | recommends that measures be taken to provide education and training on citizenship, to ensure that citizens are able to exercise their rights and obligations in a free and informed way, to strengthen the social dimension of citizenship in view of the worsening economic crisis, and to remove any obstacles limiting European citizens' ability to exercise their right of free movement; |
| --- | --- |

19.

recommends that measures be taken to provide education and training on citizenship, to ensure that citizens are able to exercise their rights and obligations in a free and informed way, to strengthen the social dimension of citizenship in view of the worsening economic crisis, and to remove any obstacles limiting European citizens' ability to exercise their right of free movement;

| 20. | emphasises the importance of creating a real area of freedom, security and justice to serve citizens, in a world where people are more mobile (6), and notes that ensuring the smooth exercise by EU citizens of their right to free movement and residence is crucial, because it is the EU Treaty right which citizens value the most and see as the most important achievement of EU integration. In this context it is not enough just to establish rights; it is also essential to ensure that all levels of governance work together to make sure that they can be exercised without hindrance by those who hold them; |
| --- | --- |

20.

emphasises the importance of creating a real area of freedom, security and justice to serve citizens, in a world where people are more mobile (6), and notes that ensuring the smooth exercise by EU citizens of their right to free movement and residence is crucial, because it is the EU Treaty right which citizens value the most and see as the most important achievement of EU integration. In this context it is not enough just to establish rights; it is also essential to ensure that all levels of governance work together to make sure that they can be exercised without hindrance by those who hold them;

Role of regional and local authorities

| 21. | notes that an important conclusion of the 2010 report was that the difficulties faced by EU citizens in exercising their rights are not so much due to a legislative deficit at European level as to issues of transposing and implementing legislation at national level. In view of this, the Committee points out that the Commission's report does not focus specifically on the contribution that regional and local authorities can make to the effectiveness and quality of European citizenship; |
| --- | --- |

21.

notes that an important conclusion of the 2010 report was that the difficulties faced by EU citizens in exercising their rights are not so much due to a legislative deficit at European level as to issues of transposing and implementing legislation at national level. In view of this, the Committee points out that the Commission's report does not focus specifically on the contribution that regional and local authorities can make to the effectiveness and quality of European citizenship;

| 22. | points out that regional and local authorities will be asked to play a key role in the participatory processes to be put in place, so as to implement a real bottom-up approach in which citizens can make a substantial contribution to defining EU policies that give positive effect to their rights; |
| --- | --- |

22.

points out that regional and local authorities will be asked to play a key role in the participatory processes to be put in place, so as to implement a real bottom-up approach in which citizens can make a substantial contribution to defining EU policies that give positive effect to their rights;

| 23. | emphasises that local and regional authorities can help in managing problems relating to movement and residence of European citizens, and in issues concerning the entry of migrants, and recognises that local authorities are able to reach groups that often have lower levels of participation in the political process, such as young people and migrants; |
| --- | --- |

23.

emphasises that local and regional authorities can help in managing problems relating to movement and residence of European citizens, and in issues concerning the entry of migrants, and recognises that local authorities are able to reach groups that often have lower levels of participation in the political process, such as young people and migrants;

| 24. | commends the European Commission's proposal to use an e-training tool for local authorities to address the lack of knowledge of European citizens' rights at local and regional level — which often leads to people receiving incorrect information and makes it more difficult for them to exercise their rights. Since CoR members are well placed to understand the needs and capabilities of local government officials in their regions, the Committee would like to work actively with the European Commission on designing and promoting this tool in the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

24.

commends the European Commission's proposal to use an e-training tool for local authorities to address the lack of knowledge of European citizens' rights at local and regional level — which often leads to people receiving incorrect information and makes it more difficult for them to exercise their rights. Since CoR members are well placed to understand the needs and capabilities of local government officials in their regions, the Committee would like to work actively with the European Commission on designing and promoting this tool in the Member States;

| 25. | welcomes the Commission's new initiatives to remove obstacles to the exercise of the rights associated with EU citizenship, while also pointing out that there is still a gap in the Member States between prevailing legal provisions and the everyday reality for citizens, especially in cross-border contexts, and that this fact should receive more attention; |
| --- | --- |

25.

welcomes the Commission's new initiatives to remove obstacles to the exercise of the rights associated with EU citizenship, while also pointing out that there is still a gap in the Member States between prevailing legal provisions and the everyday reality for citizens, especially in cross-border contexts, and that this fact should receive more attention;

Dimensions of EU citizenship
   (7)

Active citizenship

| 26. | believes that the consolidation of European citizenship can be underpinned by promoting active participation in the life of local communities of citizens, especially young people, who move around more within the EU; |
| --- | --- |

26.

believes that the consolidation of European citizenship can be underpinned by promoting active participation in the life of local communities of citizens, especially young people, who move around more within the EU;

Social citizenship

| 27. | believes it is essential to boost European-level initiatives in support of social citizenship, given that access to social rights is in some cases associated with Member State requirements and criteria that favour various forms of discrimination, running counter to the principle of equality and equal treatment provided for under European law; |
| --- | --- |

27.

believes it is essential to boost European-level initiatives in support of social citizenship, given that access to social rights is in some cases associated with Member State requirements and criteria that favour various forms of discrimination, running counter to the principle of equality and equal treatment provided for under European law;

| 28. | notes that the European Commission's report contains a number of measures to strengthen social citizenship, including the positive step of introducing a quality framework for traineeships, but which in our view only make sense as guidelines; |
| --- | --- |

28.

notes that the European Commission's report contains a number of measures to strengthen social citizenship, including the positive step of introducing a quality framework for traineeships, but which in our view only make sense as guidelines;

| 29. | firmly supports the effective consolidation of the right to free movement, especially movement of young people, given the continuing increase in unemployment in the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

29.

firmly supports the effective consolidation of the right to free movement, especially movement of young people, given the continuing increase in unemployment in the Member States;

Civic citizenship

| 30. | points out that measures are still needed in relation to civic citizenship. By way of illustration, a Special Eurobarometer survey (8) found only half of respondents to be aware of the existence and responsibilities of the European Ombudsman, and they were also poorly informed about the right to submit a petition to the European Parliament (9); |
| --- | --- |

30.

points out that measures are still needed in relation to civic citizenship. By way of illustration, a Special Eurobarometer survey (8) found only half of respondents to be aware of the existence and responsibilities of the European Ombudsman, and they were also poorly informed about the right to submit a petition to the European Parliament (9);

| 31. | recommends here that local and regional authorities organise specific and effective measures to raise European citizens' awareness of the European Ombudsman and of the right to petition the European Parliament, with support from the relevant European funds; |
| --- | --- |

31.

recommends here that local and regional authorities organise specific and effective measures to raise European citizens' awareness of the European Ombudsman and of the right to petition the European Parliament, with support from the relevant European funds;

Political citizenship

| 32. | points out that rates of participation in European elections have shown a steady decline since 1979, falling to 43% in 2009 (10), which corroborates the finding that Europe's citizens feel their opinions are not taken into account in European decision-making (Eurobarometer reports 68% of respondents expressing this concern); |
| --- | --- |

32.

points out that rates of participation in European elections have shown a steady decline since 1979, falling to 43% in 2009 (10), which corroborates the finding that Europe's citizens feel their opinions are not taken into account in European decision-making (Eurobarometer reports 68% of respondents expressing this concern);

| 33. | draws attention to good practice (11) based on which local and regional authorities, supported by the appropriate European funding, can organise programmes and campaigns at local and regional level to inform local people about their right not only to vote, but also to stand as candidates in the European elections. Local authorities can also play a role in informing and raising awareness among schoolchildren and students, preparing them to actively exercise their electoral rights; |
| --- | --- |

33.

draws attention to good practice (11) based on which local and regional authorities, supported by the appropriate European funding, can organise programmes and campaigns at local and regional level to inform local people about their right not only to vote, but also to stand as candidates in the European elections. Local authorities can also play a role in informing and raising awareness among schoolchildren and students, preparing them to actively exercise their electoral rights;

| 34. | emphasises the need to further consolidate the political rights of third-country nationals and urges the Member States not to apply excessively restrictive conditions for acquiring citizenship of their countries. In previous opinions, the Committee of the Regions has recognised the aspiration of immigrants residing legally in the Member States to acquire Union citizenship, while also expressing the view that participation of legal immigrants in political life is a key factor in facilitating their integration into local communities; |
| --- | --- |

34.

emphasises the need to further consolidate the political rights of third-country nationals and urges the Member States not to apply excessively restrictive conditions for acquiring citizenship of their countries. In previous opinions, the Committee of the Regions has recognised the aspiration of immigrants residing legally in the Member States to acquire Union citizenship, while also expressing the view that participation of legal immigrants in political life is a key factor in facilitating their integration into local communities;

| 35. | calls on every single Member State to make it easier for their citizens to exercise the right to vote and right to stand as candidates in national elections, irrespective of whether they reside or are staying in the country in question. Exercising the right to free movement within the EU should not entail the forfeiting of political rights; |
| --- | --- |

35.

calls on every single Member State to make it easier for their citizens to exercise the right to vote and right to stand as candidates in national elections, irrespective of whether they reside or are staying in the country in question. Exercising the right to free movement within the EU should not entail the forfeiting of political rights;

| 36. | believes that the time is ripe to begin or continue dialogue on extending EU citizens' right to vote to include regional and national elections of the country of residence, without prejudice to the national sovereignty of each Member State (jus domicili); |
| --- | --- |

36.

believes that the time is ripe to begin or continue dialogue on extending EU citizens' right to vote to include regional and national elections of the country of residence, without prejudice to the national sovereignty of each Member State (jus domicili);

| 37. | notes that the concept of European citizenship could boost the process of EU enlargement. Enlargement is not just a process of economic and legal adaptation to the EU acquis, but also requires policy measures in the enlargement countries to strengthen democratic structures and the rule of law. The prospect of European citizenship could give such measures tangible significance; |
| --- | --- |

37.

notes that the concept of European citizenship could boost the process of EU enlargement. Enlargement is not just a process of economic and legal adaptation to the EU acquis, but also requires policy measures in the enlargement countries to strengthen democratic structures and the rule of law. The prospect of European citizenship could give such measures tangible significance;

Administrative citizenship

| 38. | reiterates that measures are needed to cut red tape at local and regional level to facilitate the practical exercise of European citizenship rights, in particular the right to free movement, and to eliminate all obstructive practices or other forms of discrimination entailing unequal treatment of EU citizens, particularly in the granting of residence rights. Local and regional authorities should be able to offer the right solutions based on a diagnosis of the problems they face; |
| --- | --- |

38.

reiterates that measures are needed to cut red tape at local and regional level to facilitate the practical exercise of European citizenship rights, in particular the right to free movement, and to eliminate all obstructive practices or other forms of discrimination entailing unequal treatment of EU citizens, particularly in the granting of residence rights. Local and regional authorities should be able to offer the right solutions based on a diagnosis of the problems they face;

| 39. | appreciates that the measures announced by the Commission are some positive steps in this direction. Since some types of measure actively involve local authorities (12), the Committee calls for both an impact assessment of their effects and provision for funding from EU resources; |
| --- | --- |

39.

appreciates that the measures announced by the Commission are some positive steps in this direction. Since some types of measure actively involve local authorities (12), the Committee calls for both an impact assessment of their effects and provision for funding from EU resources;

| 40. | welcomes the proposals by the European Commission to promote easier recognition of car roadworthiness certificates across EU borders, and also the proposed harmonisation of requirements for technical checks on motor vehicles, which should be implemented as soon as possible and in a way to ensure that citizens can exercise their right to free movement, including moving vehicle registrations between countries, more easily; |
| --- | --- |

40.

welcomes the proposals by the European Commission to promote easier recognition of car roadworthiness certificates across EU borders, and also the proposed harmonisation of requirements for technical checks on motor vehicles, which should be implemented as soon as possible and in a way to ensure that citizens can exercise their right to free movement, including moving vehicle registrations between countries, more easily;

Culture of citizenship

| 41. | recommends stepping up cooperation initiatives to promote public information on the right to free movement, e.g. town twinning and various cross-border cooperation projects; |
| --- | --- |

41.

recommends stepping up cooperation initiatives to promote public information on the right to free movement, e.g. town twinning and various cross-border cooperation projects;

| 42. | points out again (13) that with a view to the European elections in 2014 it is very important to increase awareness among all EU citizens of their rights, in particular their electoral rights in the Member State where they reside, and to facilitate the exercise of those rights; |
| --- | --- |

42.

points out again (13) that with a view to the European elections in 2014 it is very important to increase awareness among all EU citizens of their rights, in particular their electoral rights in the Member State where they reside, and to facilitate the exercise of those rights;

Ways of financing measures, networking facilities and cooperation

| 43. | with a view to the new multiannual financial framework for 2014-2020, emphasises the major boost that the Fundamental rights and citizenship and Europe for citizens programmes could give to consolidating European citizenship and supporting activities to promote understanding and implementation of EU legislation and EU policies in the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

43.

with a view to the new multiannual financial framework for 2014-2020, emphasises the major boost that the Fundamental rights and citizenship and Europe for citizens programmes could give to consolidating European citizenship and supporting activities to promote understanding and implementation of EU legislation and EU policies in the Member States;

| 44. | calls for a simpler and more effective approach to funding programmes for European citizenship, with more precise identification of priorities that are compatible with policy decisions, and consideration given to outcomes, so that projects have more impact in terms of achieving strategic and political goals. For this to happen, it is essential the local and regional authorities be involved in the planning of measures, especially as regards training and drawing up annual work programmes. |
| --- | --- |

44.

calls for a simpler and more effective approach to funding programmes for European citizenship, with more precise identification of priorities that are compatible with policy decisions, and consideration given to outcomes, so that projects have more impact in terms of achieving strategic and political goals. For this to happen, it is essential the local and regional authorities be involved in the planning of measures, especially as regards training and drawing up annual work programmes.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/citizen/files/eu-citizen-brochure_en.pdf.

1

(2)  http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_365_en.pdf.

2

(3)  http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_364_en.pdf.

3

(4)  COM(2013) 126 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Preparing for the 2014 European elections: further enhancing their democratic and efficient conduct and C(2013) 1303 final, Commission Recommendation on Enhancing the democratic and efficient conduct of the elections to the European Parliament.

4

Preparing for the 2014 European elections: further enhancing their democratic and efficient conduct

Enhancing the democratic and efficient conduct of the elections to the European Parliament.

(5)  Committee of the Regions survey (2012) on Local and regional authorities promoting EU citizenship and citizens' rights. A summary of the survey is available at: http://cor.europa.eu/en/events/forums/Pages/ey2013-toolkit.aspx.

5

Local and regional authorities promoting EU citizenship and citizens' rights

(6)  CdR 201/2009.

6

(7)  These categories were proposed in the CoR opinion on the EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens' rights (rapporteur: Roberto Pella (IT/EPP), CdR 355/2010 fin) and have been adopted for the present opinion.

7

EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens' rights

(8)  See Committee of the Regions study (2012) on The role of Local and Regional Authorities in Promoting EU Citizenship and Citizens' Rights. A summary of the survey is available at: http://cor.europa.eu/en/events/forums/Pages/ey2013-toolkit.aspx, p. 12.

8

The role of Local and Regional Authorities in Promoting EU Citizenship and Citizens' Rights

(9)  Article 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

9

(10)  Committee of the Regions study (2012) on The role of Local and Regional Authorities in Promoting EU Citizenship and Citizens' Rights, p. 11.

10

The role of Local and Regional Authorities in Promoting EU Citizenship and Citizens' Rights

(11)  Op. cit. p. 11.

11

(12)  Specifically, these include increasing the availability of targeted and accessible information on the EU, making electronic training tools available to local authorities and providing citizen-friendly information to address people's issues.

12

(13)  See 2013 opinion on strengthening EU citizenship.

13

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/11

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘EU guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines’

2014/C 114/03

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | notes that in the context of the overall process of modernising State aid rules initiated by the European Commission in 2012 (1), air transport was one of the first sectors considered to need an updated legislative framework governing public funding, as regards infrastructure and operating aid to airports, and start-up aid to airlines (2); |
| --- | --- |

1.

notes that in the context of the overall process of modernising State aid rules initiated by the European Commission in 2012 (1), air transport was one of the first sectors considered to need an updated legislative framework governing public funding, as regards infrastructure and operating aid to airports, and start-up aid to airlines (2);

| 2. | points out that in 1994 (3), the Commission introduced the first rules on State aid for civil aviation, following the liberalisation of air transport. The sector became significantly more competitive once it had been gradually liberalised, creating the need for regulation to ensure that competition could develop on a level playing field; |
| --- | --- |

2.

points out that in 1994 (3), the Commission introduced the first rules on State aid for civil aviation, following the liberalisation of air transport. The sector became significantly more competitive once it had been gradually liberalised, creating the need for regulation to ensure that competition could develop on a level playing field;

| 3. | points out that in 2005 (4), the consolidation of air transport liberalisation and rapid developments in the sector over the next few years, including the emergence of the new business model of low cost airlines based in small airports, made it necessary to update the existing legislative framework by means of new Commission guidelines on public funding of airports and airlines operating in regional airports; |
| --- | --- |

3.

points out that in 2005 (4), the consolidation of air transport liberalisation and rapid developments in the sector over the next few years, including the emergence of the new business model of low cost airlines based in small airports, made it necessary to update the existing legislative framework by means of new Commission guidelines on public funding of airports and airlines operating in regional airports;

| 4. | notes that, after only eight years, developments in the European market have revolutionised air traffic volume. This is particularly due to the exponential growth in the market share of low cost companies, with a business model centred on small, decentralised regional airports rather than traditional national airports and major hubs; |
| --- | --- |

4.

notes that, after only eight years, developments in the European market have revolutionised air traffic volume. This is particularly due to the exponential growth in the market share of low cost companies, with a business model centred on small, decentralised regional airports rather than traditional national airports and major hubs;

| 5. | agrees with the Commission that there is an urgent need for action regarding the legislative framework governing public support for airports. This action must be consistent with the aims of the modernisation programme which will provide Member States with an updated, streamlined and efficient set of rules protecting competition and the single market for the 2014-2020 period. Accordingly reiterates the recommendations set out in the opinion on EU State aid modernisation (5); |
| --- | --- |

5.

agrees with the Commission that there is an urgent need for action regarding the legislative framework governing public support for airports. This action must be consistent with the aims of the modernisation programme which will provide Member States with an updated, streamlined and efficient set of rules protecting competition and the single market for the 2014-2020 period. Accordingly reiterates the recommendations set out in the opinion on EU State aid modernisation (5);

| 6. | welcomes the public consultation launched by the European Commission (stage one on 6 June 2011 and the second and current stage on 3 July 2013) to gather the views of all stakeholders regarding the review of the current legislative framework and the proposal for new guidelines; supports the Commission's approach, which seeks to establish fair competition between the various operators in the European aviation sector, irrespective of their business model, to enable the European aviation sector to be successful and competitive; |
| --- | --- |

6.

welcomes the public consultation launched by the European Commission (stage one on 6 June 2011 and the second and current stage on 3 July 2013) to gather the views of all stakeholders regarding the review of the current legislative framework and the proposal for new guidelines; supports the Commission's approach, which seeks to establish fair competition between the various operators in the European aviation sector, irrespective of their business model, to enable the European aviation sector to be successful and competitive;

| 7. | nonetheless regrets that European legislation on competition, which is exclusively a Commission competence, and the over-abundance of soft law prevent local and regional authorities from making a real contribution in key sectors of regional and local development, such as regional airports and regional development policies; |
| --- | --- |

7.

nonetheless regrets that European legislation on competition, which is exclusively a Commission competence, and the over-abundance of soft law prevent local and regional authorities from making a real contribution in key sectors of regional and local development, such as regional airports and regional development policies;

| 8. | alerts the Commission to the diversity of airport situations in Europe, and particularly the situation of the outermost regions, whose isolation and remoteness prevents the airports located there, irrespective of the passenger traffic recorded, being financially viable or competing with other EU airports or, even less, posing any threat to other, alternative modes of transport, whether inland or rail; |
| --- | --- |

8.

alerts the Commission to the diversity of airport situations in Europe, and particularly the situation of the outermost regions, whose isolation and remoteness prevents the airports located there, irrespective of the passenger traffic recorded, being financially viable or competing with other EU airports or, even less, posing any threat to other, alternative modes of transport, whether inland or rail;

| 9. | points out that in these sectors, local and regional authorities are key players in territorial development and growth policies, partly via State aid, and are very familiar with the local economy owing to their close ties to economic and social actors. European legislation cannot overlook these economic and social actors if it genuinely wants to support the regions and help integrate them into the single market and build territorial cohesion across the EU; |
| --- | --- |

9.

points out that in these sectors, local and regional authorities are key players in territorial development and growth policies, partly via State aid, and are very familiar with the local economy owing to their close ties to economic and social actors. European legislation cannot overlook these economic and social actors if it genuinely wants to support the regions and help integrate them into the single market and build territorial cohesion across the EU;

| 10. | recalls the arguments set out in the opinion on The regional State aid guidelines for 2014-2020
   (6): when proposing rules on State aid, the Commission should ensure advance and systematic consultation of the Committee of the Regions (CoR) (7). This will provide the Commission with the information needed for an impact assessment in compliance with the principle of multilevel governance (8); |
| --- | --- |

10.

recalls the arguments set out in the opinion on The regional State aid guidelines for 2014-2020
   (6): when proposing rules on State aid, the Commission should ensure advance and systematic consultation of the Committee of the Regions (CoR) (7). This will provide the Commission with the information needed for an impact assessment in compliance with the principle of multilevel governance (8);

Public funding of infrastructure

| 11. | together with the EESC (9), reminds the Commission that regional airports have assumed a central position in European aviation: in 2010, around 60% of EU airports served fewer than a million passengers. Therefore hopes that this central position will be reflected in the new guidelines; |
| --- | --- |

11.

together with the EESC (9), reminds the Commission that regional airports have assumed a central position in European aviation: in 2010, around 60% of EU airports served fewer than a million passengers. Therefore hopes that this central position will be reflected in the new guidelines;

| 12. | stresses the importance of regional airports in promoting local development and improving accessibility, thus contributing to the objectives of territorial cohesion and economic growth, and employment. Accessibility (e.g. proper flight connections) is crucial for enabling more sparsely populated areas of the EU and the outermost regions (and those which are wholly dependent on air transport) also to play an active part in the single market; |
| --- | --- |

12.

stresses the importance of regional airports in promoting local development and improving accessibility, thus contributing to the objectives of territorial cohesion and economic growth, and employment. Accessibility (e.g. proper flight connections) is crucial for enabling more sparsely populated areas of the EU and the outermost regions (and those which are wholly dependent on air transport) also to play an active part in the single market;

| 13. | considers that this role is particularly pertinent and strategic at the current juncture, when the EU is struggling to exit the economic crisis. Since its effects first became apparent in 2008, the current crisis has left European and national authorities no option but to take vigorous and decisive action to reverse economic trends. The European Commission has recognised and upheld this need, approving the frequent use of derogation 107.3b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (10). In difficult economic times it is therefore especially important to promote improved accessibility to all parts of the market; |
| --- | --- |

13.

considers that this role is particularly pertinent and strategic at the current juncture, when the EU is struggling to exit the economic crisis. Since its effects first became apparent in 2008, the current crisis has left European and national authorities no option but to take vigorous and decisive action to reverse economic trends. The European Commission has recognised and upheld this need, approving the frequent use of derogation 107.3b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (10). In difficult economic times it is therefore especially important to promote improved accessibility to all parts of the market;

| 14. | reiterates, with regard to the Commission's communication on European airport policy, the importance of regional airports (11), which considerably alleviate the mounting congestion of the major hubs — a cause of significant nuisance to local populations and the environment — and at the same time support tourism in the EU and provide SMEs with market access, giving them a competitive edge (12); |
| --- | --- |

14.

reiterates, with regard to the Commission's communication on European airport policy, the importance of regional airports (11), which considerably alleviate the mounting congestion of the major hubs — a cause of significant nuisance to local populations and the environment — and at the same time support tourism in the EU and provide SMEs with market access, giving them a competitive edge (12);

| 15. | therefore considers that the sustainability and efficiency of air transport in the EU is largely dependent on an appropriate network of small airports; |
| --- | --- |

15.

therefore considers that the sustainability and efficiency of air transport in the EU is largely dependent on an appropriate network of small airports;

| 16. | shares the European Commission's concerns (13) regarding the surge in infrastructure requirements dictated by the Europe 2020 strategy. This strategy calls for modern, appropriate and flexible networks in the energy, ICT and transport sectors to support Europe's switch to a knowledge-based, low-carbon, highly competitive economy; |
| --- | --- |

16.

shares the European Commission's concerns (13) regarding the surge in infrastructure requirements dictated by the Europe 2020 strategy. This strategy calls for modern, appropriate and flexible networks in the energy, ICT and transport sectors to support Europe's switch to a knowledge-based, low-carbon, highly competitive economy;

| 17. | also agrees that the market is not always able to deliver the infrastructure that Europe needs, and that without public action many of the investments needed to carry out the strategy's objectives would be impossible or deferred until after 2020; |
| --- | --- |

17.

also agrees that the market is not always able to deliver the infrastructure that Europe needs, and that without public action many of the investments needed to carry out the strategy's objectives would be impossible or deferred until after 2020;

| 18. | welcomes the Commission's call to increase EU infrastructure investment. The Commission estimates that between 2010 and 2020, over EUR 1,5 thousand billion will be needed to meet current transport needs, highlighting the strong link between geographical accessibility and territorial economic growth; |
| --- | --- |

18.

welcomes the Commission's call to increase EU infrastructure investment. The Commission estimates that between 2010 and 2020, over EUR 1,5 thousand billion will be needed to meet current transport needs, highlighting the strong link between geographical accessibility and territorial economic growth;

| 19. | notes the principles of ECJ case-law in Leipzig v. Halle (14), but draws attention to the specific circumstances shaping them. Therefore calls on the Commission to ensure that its guidelines take account of the wide range of public support for infrastructure. An element of public sector participation, in addition to private capital, is often essential to ensure the success of larger infrastructure projects such as airports whether their end use is for commercial purposes or not; |
| --- | --- |

19.

notes the principles of ECJ case-law in Leipzig v. Halle (14), but draws attention to the specific circumstances shaping them. Therefore calls on the Commission to ensure that its guidelines take account of the wide range of public support for infrastructure. An element of public sector participation, in addition to private capital, is often essential to ensure the success of larger infrastructure projects such as airports whether their end use is for commercial purposes or not;

| 20. | believes that absolute passenger numbers should be an appropriate criterion for judging the potential viability of an airport as an infrastructure facility and for classifying it only as a general rule, and calls for greater flexibility in the compatibility rules so that the particular circumstances of each case can be taken into account; |
| --- | --- |

20.

believes that absolute passenger numbers should be an appropriate criterion for judging the potential viability of an airport as an infrastructure facility and for classifying it only as a general rule, and calls for greater flexibility in the compatibility rules so that the particular circumstances of each case can be taken into account;

| 21. | points out that, at a time when the EU is exiting the crisis, it would be wise to give priority to the positive impact of public funding of infrastructure on cohesion, growth and employment and take this into due account alongside competition rules in the evaluation process; |
| --- | --- |

21.

points out that, at a time when the EU is exiting the crisis, it would be wise to give priority to the positive impact of public funding of infrastructure on cohesion, growth and employment and take this into due account alongside competition rules in the evaluation process;

| 22. | takes note of the Market Economy Operator principle used as a yardstick by the Commission, but is concerned about the consequences of using the principle for infrastructure where the State is historically and institutionally irreplaceable. Given the sheer volume of investments needed and the impossibility of passing on refinancing costs entirely to the public using the infrastructure, most infrastructure investment is in principle out of the question for private investors. The premise that the State can be compared to a private operator and act without any regard for social, regional-policy or sectoral issues, is unrealistic and detrimental to the public good when applied to territorial infrastructure projects which are an essential part of the State's role; |
| --- | --- |

22.

takes note of the Market Economy Operator principle used as a yardstick by the Commission, but is concerned about the consequences of using the principle for infrastructure where the State is historically and institutionally irreplaceable. Given the sheer volume of investments needed and the impossibility of passing on refinancing costs entirely to the public using the infrastructure, most infrastructure investment is in principle out of the question for private investors. The premise that the State can be compared to a private operator and act without any regard for social, regional-policy or sectoral issues, is unrealistic and detrimental to the public good when applied to territorial infrastructure projects which are an essential part of the State's role;

| 23. | asks the Commission to take the view that public support for infrastructure construction and development (15) and to compensate for the accessibility deficit affecting their residents often constitutes fully-fledged economic policy measures and is consequently not State aid but public interest measures. Therefore urges the Commission to continue modernising the rules on State aid, with due regard for the fundamental principles underpinning public policy and the institutional role of the State; points out that airports, like roads and railways, have a public infrastructure function; |
| --- | --- |

23.

asks the Commission to take the view that public support for infrastructure construction and development (15) and to compensate for the accessibility deficit affecting their residents often constitutes fully-fledged economic policy measures and is consequently not State aid but public interest measures. Therefore urges the Commission to continue modernising the rules on State aid, with due regard for the fundamental principles underpinning public policy and the institutional role of the State; points out that airports, like roads and railways, have a public infrastructure function;

Small and micro airports which do not come under the rules on State aid

| 24. | urges the Commission to continue the modernisation process with a view to genuine simplification. It should focus its attention on those circumstances and events most prone to distort competition and which are a real threat to the integrity of the single market; |
| --- | --- |

24.

urges the Commission to continue the modernisation process with a view to genuine simplification. It should focus its attention on those circumstances and events most prone to distort competition and which are a real threat to the integrity of the single market;

| 25. | endorses the need for rules guaranteeing a level playing field in the European Economic Area for all businesses operating in the air transport sector. These rules should limit distorting public action as far as possible and avoid subsidy races between Member States; |
| --- | --- |

25.

endorses the need for rules guaranteeing a level playing field in the European Economic Area for all businesses operating in the air transport sector. These rules should limit distorting public action as far as possible and avoid subsidy races between Member States;

| 26. | considers however that the Commission should focus on major airports, and that support for small airports averaging less than 300 000 passengers each year should fall outside the scope of State aid as it can have no impact on trade between Member States and because these airports are structurally unable to cover capital and operating costs. Points out that the Commission has already recognised the appropriateness of the threshold of 300 000 passengers in its Decision of 20 December 2011 on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest, limiting this, however, to ports and to air links to islands, and establishing a lower threshold for SGEIs as regards airports. Therefore calls on the Commission to take a more consistent and simplified approach to the thresholds laid down in the various legal bases and thus to amend the proposed new guidelines — specifically points 80(1) and 80(2) on airport categorisation and point 92 on aid intensity, to which a category should be added of airports with fewer than 300 000 passengers — as well as Article 2(1)(e) of the aforementioned Decision; |
| --- | --- |

26.

considers however that the Commission should focus on major airports, and that support for small airports averaging less than 300 000 passengers each year should fall outside the scope of State aid as it can have no impact on trade between Member States and because these airports are structurally unable to cover capital and operating costs. Points out that the Commission has already recognised the appropriateness of the threshold of 300 000 passengers in its Decision of 20 December 2011 on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest, limiting this, however, to ports and to air links to islands, and establishing a lower threshold for SGEIs as regards airports. Therefore calls on the Commission to take a more consistent and simplified approach to the thresholds laid down in the various legal bases and thus to amend the proposed new guidelines — specifically points 80(1) and 80(2) on airport categorisation and point 92 on aid intensity, to which a category should be added of airports with fewer than 300 000 passengers — as well as Article 2(1)(e) of the aforementioned Decision;

| 27. | welcomes the Commission's focus on airports with a very low capacity in terms of annual passengers traffic and its recognition of the fact that these airports, right up to those serving five million passengers per annum, are often structurally unable to cover capital and operating costs without an element of public support. At the same time, regrets that it does not go on to focus equally on criteria for the compatibility of aid to these airports (16); |
| --- | --- |

27.

welcomes the Commission's focus on airports with a very low capacity in terms of annual passengers traffic and its recognition of the fact that these airports, right up to those serving five million passengers per annum, are often structurally unable to cover capital and operating costs without an element of public support. At the same time, regrets that it does not go on to focus equally on criteria for the compatibility of aid to these airports (16);

| 28. | points out that these airports have the following features: |
| --- | --- |

28.

points out that these airports have the following features:

| — | a limited volume of passengers, |
| --- | --- |

—

a limited volume of passengers,

| — | the relative inaccessibility of the regions in which the airports are located because of their remoteness, the terrain or inadequate infrastructure for alternative connections with the surrounding areas, |
| --- | --- |

—

the relative inaccessibility of the regions in which the airports are located because of their remoteness, the terrain or inadequate infrastructure for alternative connections with the surrounding areas,

| — | small catchment areas and the resulting limited prospects for development; |
| --- | --- |

—

small catchment areas and the resulting limited prospects for development;

these features make the airports purely local, with no cross-border pull factors;

| 29. | notes that in many cases, it would be either difficult or impossible for other airports or other modes of public transport to replace these small airports in terms of transport capacity: redirecting small-airport passengers would have absolutely no impact on the volume of traffic in alternative airports; |
| --- | --- |

29.

notes that in many cases, it would be either difficult or impossible for other airports or other modes of public transport to replace these small airports in terms of transport capacity: redirecting small-airport passengers would have absolutely no impact on the volume of traffic in alternative airports;

| 30. | therefore considers that funding these airports does not constitute State aid in the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This is because it is quite unable to distort competition and affect trade between Member States and therefore should not fall within the scope of the new guidelines; |
| --- | --- |

30.

therefore considers that funding these airports does not constitute State aid in the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This is because it is quite unable to distort competition and affect trade between Member States and therefore should not fall within the scope of the new guidelines;

| 31. | proposes (17) that the up to 10 year transitional period, during which the European Commission considers State aid for the operating of airports to be compatible with the Treaties, be applied only to airports serving more than a million passengers annually. The proposed ban should not result in the widespread closure of smaller airports. Also proposes that in the table of investment aid ceilings, the category of airports serving less than a million passengers should be renamed to 300 000 to 1 million passengers each year; |
| --- | --- |

31.

proposes (17) that the up to 10 year transitional period, during which the European Commission considers State aid for the operating of airports to be compatible with the Treaties, be applied only to airports serving more than a million passengers annually. The proposed ban should not result in the widespread closure of smaller airports. Also proposes that in the table of investment aid ceilings, the category of airports serving less than a million passengers should be renamed to 300 000 to 1 million passengers each year;

| 32. | agrees with the Commission that duplication of unprofitable airports and creation of excess capacity is to be avoided. However, believes that when there are no legal grounds for considering funding to be State aid (as in the case of small local airports), these recommendations should not be subject to rules on State aid; these rules are intended to prevent distortion of competition between Member States with a view to preserving the integrity of the single market, and not to assess the wisdom of governments' choices in the area of public spending; |
| --- | --- |

32.

agrees with the Commission that duplication of unprofitable airports and creation of excess capacity is to be avoided. However, believes that when there are no legal grounds for considering funding to be State aid (as in the case of small local airports), these recommendations should not be subject to rules on State aid; these rules are intended to prevent distortion of competition between Member States with a view to preserving the integrity of the single market, and not to assess the wisdom of governments' choices in the area of public spending;

Services of General Economic Interest

| 33. | notes that the Commission considers the building and operation of airports as a special case in which compensation can be granted for assuming public service obligations, but thinks the scope of application far too narrow; |
| --- | --- |

33.

notes that the Commission considers the building and operation of airports as a special case in which compensation can be granted for assuming public service obligations, but thinks the scope of application far too narrow;

| 34. | thinks it is legitimate to consider maintaining airports not only in areas that without them would be cut off from the rest of the EU to a degree that would impede their social and economic development; |
| --- | --- |

34.

thinks it is legitimate to consider maintaining airports not only in areas that without them would be cut off from the rest of the EU to a degree that would impede their social and economic development;

| 35. | suggests that in principle Member States and their regional and local authorities have autonomy in determining a role of general economic interest and that the Commission can only scrutinise this in the event of patent errors; |
| --- | --- |

35.

suggests that in principle Member States and their regional and local authorities have autonomy in determining a role of general economic interest and that the Commission can only scrutinise this in the event of patent errors;

| 36. | takes the view that the construction and operation of an airport entails a general interest function above all when it so improves a region with weak infrastructure as to give it the prospect of economic development; |
| --- | --- |

36.

takes the view that the construction and operation of an airport entails a general interest function above all when it so improves a region with weak infrastructure as to give it the prospect of economic development;

| 37. | considers it necessary to implement a cooperation policy for European cross-border regions for the coordination and/or creation of regional airports that serve regions encompassing more than one country; |
| --- | --- |

37.

considers it necessary to implement a cooperation policy for European cross-border regions for the coordination and/or creation of regional airports that serve regions encompassing more than one country;

Operating aid for airports serving between 300 000 and 1 million passengers

| 38. | notes that the European Commission recognises that operating aid for small regional airports hinges largely on their inability to cover their own operating costs. The Commission also considers that it is possible, over a maximum of ten years, to encourage these airports to switch to a more market-oriented management style which will enable them to generate sufficient resources to cover their operating costs; |
| --- | --- |

38.

notes that the European Commission recognises that operating aid for small regional airports hinges largely on their inability to cover their own operating costs. The Commission also considers that it is possible, over a maximum of ten years, to encourage these airports to switch to a more market-oriented management style which will enable them to generate sufficient resources to cover their operating costs;

| 39. | has strong doubts that such a switch could ever occur below the threshold of a million passengers per year, much less in the decade anticipated by the Commission, owing to the market features of small regional airports; |
| --- | --- |

39.

has strong doubts that such a switch could ever occur below the threshold of a million passengers per year, much less in the decade anticipated by the Commission, owing to the market features of small regional airports;

| 40. | in principle endorses the Commission's market-oriented approach, whereby public resources are allocated on the basis of efficient-airport models avoiding the duplication of inefficient airports, and competition between airports and airlines is preserved; |
| --- | --- |

40.

in principle endorses the Commission's market-oriented approach, whereby public resources are allocated on the basis of efficient-airport models avoiding the duplication of inefficient airports, and competition between airports and airlines is preserved;

| 41. | however, cannot support the Commission's method of achieving these objectives, which fails to acknowledge the fact that market dynamics vary hugely depending on the size and features of airports and so companies managing airports only appear to be operating in the same market; |
| --- | --- |

41.

however, cannot support the Commission's method of achieving these objectives, which fails to acknowledge the fact that market dynamics vary hugely depending on the size and features of airports and so companies managing airports only appear to be operating in the same market;

| 42. | draws attention to the conclusions of a recent analysis by the Airports Council International (ACI) (18): 80% of an airport's costs are fixed and independent of passenger numbers, tied to infrastructure and operating costs which are largely the result of safety requirements. This means that the cost per passenger for a small airport is much higher than for a large airport which can spread the fixed costs over a large number of passengers, and makes it much harder to break even; |
| --- | --- |

42.

draws attention to the conclusions of a recent analysis by the Airports Council International (ACI) (18): 80% of an airport's costs are fixed and independent of passenger numbers, tied to infrastructure and operating costs which are largely the result of safety requirements. This means that the cost per passenger for a small airport is much higher than for a large airport which can spread the fixed costs over a large number of passengers, and makes it much harder to break even;

| 43. | also points out that small airports have structural competitive disadvantages which prevent them compensating for their fixed costs, either through commercial revenue, which depends strongly on the number of passengers, or by increasing the airport fees payable by airlines. The latter approach would make the airport even less attractive, when it is already penalised by a small catchment area and inadequate connections, and so encourage airlines to turn to larger airports; |
| --- | --- |

43.

also points out that small airports have structural competitive disadvantages which prevent them compensating for their fixed costs, either through commercial revenue, which depends strongly on the number of passengers, or by increasing the airport fees payable by airlines. The latter approach would make the airport even less attractive, when it is already penalised by a small catchment area and inadequate connections, and so encourage airlines to turn to larger airports;

| 44. | points out that many small airports serving between 300 000 and 1 million passengers per year tend to remain small owing to handicaps in the areas where they are located (island or mountain areas, decentralisation, inadequate infrastructure, limited intermodal connections, etc.). Nonetheless, they make up 20% (19) of the main and general TEN-T network, and are key to the future of trans-European networks and the Europe 2020 strategy's connectivity goals; |
| --- | --- |

44.

points out that many small airports serving between 300 000 and 1 million passengers per year tend to remain small owing to handicaps in the areas where they are located (island or mountain areas, decentralisation, inadequate infrastructure, limited intermodal connections, etc.). Nonetheless, they make up 20% (19) of the main and general TEN-T network, and are key to the future of trans-European networks and the Europe 2020 strategy's connectivity goals;

| 45. | points out that recent studies (20) have shown that compared to the overall losses of airports serving less than 1 million passengers per year, amounting to EUR 445 million, these same airports contribute EUR 16,15 billion annually to EU GDP and provide 265 000 jobs; |
| --- | --- |

45.

points out that recent studies (20) have shown that compared to the overall losses of airports serving less than 1 million passengers per year, amounting to EUR 445 million, these same airports contribute EUR 16,15 billion annually to EU GDP and provide 265 000 jobs;

| 46. | therefore considers that the new guidelines must not ban operating aid for airports serving less than 1 million passengers per year, or for airports in the outermost regions, even after a period of up to ten years. This aid is the only way to curb distortions arising from the structural handicaps described above, and is fully justified by the positive economic externalities it generates; |
| --- | --- |

46.

therefore considers that the new guidelines must not ban operating aid for airports serving less than 1 million passengers per year, or for airports in the outermost regions, even after a period of up to ten years. This aid is the only way to curb distortions arising from the structural handicaps described above, and is fully justified by the positive economic externalities it generates;

| 47. | calls on the Commission to recognise that the benefits to EU citizens of public support for small regional airports have priority over narrowly financial and economic considerations; |
| --- | --- |

47.

calls on the Commission to recognise that the benefits to EU citizens of public support for small regional airports have priority over narrowly financial and economic considerations;

| 48. | reminds the Commission of the positive externalities generated by a good network of small regional airports: it increases national and particularly trans-European mobility as competition drives down ticket prices and it reduces costs, it consolidates social, cultural and territorial cohesion in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

48.

reminds the Commission of the positive externalities generated by a good network of small regional airports: it increases national and particularly trans-European mobility as competition drives down ticket prices and it reduces costs, it consolidates social, cultural and territorial cohesion in the EU;

| 49. | agrees on the need to take steps to ensure that public support for small airports does not lead to cross-transfers to beneficiaries other than airport infrastructure; |
| --- | --- |

49.

agrees on the need to take steps to ensure that public support for small airports does not lead to cross-transfers to beneficiaries other than airport infrastructure;

| 50. | proposes that the end of the transitional period should be considered as a ‘mid-term review’ that did not exclude continuing operating aid beyond the transitional period if the conditions for it persisted. Further proposes that, in line with arrangements for investment aid, operating aid could also be proportionate to the airport's capacity and potential steps to boost management efficiency which cannot and must not be strictly set at an annual 10%, without distinction, for all airports; |
| --- | --- |

50.

proposes that the end of the transitional period should be considered as a ‘mid-term review’ that did not exclude continuing operating aid beyond the transitional period if the conditions for it persisted. Further proposes that, in line with arrangements for investment aid, operating aid could also be proportionate to the airport's capacity and potential steps to boost management efficiency which cannot and must not be strictly set at an annual 10%, without distinction, for all airports;

| 51. | considers that the maximum period of 24 months for establishing new routes should not be consecutive, as the business model of seasonal flights, which are frequently tied to tourist flows, is very common in small regional airports; |
| --- | --- |

51.

considers that the maximum period of 24 months for establishing new routes should not be consecutive, as the business model of seasonal flights, which are frequently tied to tourist flows, is very common in small regional airports;

Investment aid for airports

| 52. | is concerned that the proposed strict aid quotas linked to size proposed by the Commission for investment costs do not meet the specificities of the different cases, and therefore calls on the Commission to grant financial aid in a flexible manner, in line with its previous practice, in cases where an airport serves a common objective (especially transport links or regional development), is likely to be profitable over the long term according to traffic forecasts and based on a business plan, and guarantees non-discriminatory access for passengers and airlines; also considers inadequate the proposal to make State investment aid for these airports, for which there is a ceiling of 25%, conditional on repayment of the aid should the investment be successful; proposes that the 25% ceiling should not be tied in its entirety to the form of repayable advances; |
| --- | --- |

52.

is concerned that the proposed strict aid quotas linked to size proposed by the Commission for investment costs do not meet the specificities of the different cases, and therefore calls on the Commission to grant financial aid in a flexible manner, in line with its previous practice, in cases where an airport serves a common objective (especially transport links or regional development), is likely to be profitable over the long term according to traffic forecasts and based on a business plan, and guarantees non-discriminatory access for passengers and airlines; also considers inadequate the proposal to make State investment aid for these airports, for which there is a ceiling of 25%, conditional on repayment of the aid should the investment be successful; proposes that the 25% ceiling should not be tied in its entirety to the form of repayable advances;

| 53. | draws attention to the results of sector studies (21), which show that airports achieve competitive economies of scale only once they have passed the threshold of 5 million passengers per year. As the Commission itself has acknowledged, airports with a capacity of 3 to 5 million passengers per year do not always manage to cover all of their costs; |
| --- | --- |

53.

draws attention to the results of sector studies (21), which show that airports achieve competitive economies of scale only once they have passed the threshold of 5 million passengers per year. As the Commission itself has acknowledged, airports with a capacity of 3 to 5 million passengers per year do not always manage to cover all of their costs;

Funding airport intermodality

| 54. | calls for support for plans to convert existing aviation infrastructure in regional centres, which will be coordinated with the development of regional transport intermodality; concurs on the urgent need, expressed in the 2011 White Paper on transport policy (22), for swift EU action to foster integrated multimodal travel, particularly rail-air co-modality, and calls on the Commission to continue modernising State aid so that the new rules facilitate public action correcting the dangerous infrastructure deficiencies and modal fragmentation in the air transport system, and to consider such action to be an integral part of a public policy that supports the mobility of Europeans; |
| --- | --- |

54.

calls for support for plans to convert existing aviation infrastructure in regional centres, which will be coordinated with the development of regional transport intermodality; concurs on the urgent need, expressed in the 2011 White Paper on transport policy (22), for swift EU action to foster integrated multimodal travel, particularly rail-air co-modality, and calls on the Commission to continue modernising State aid so that the new rules facilitate public action correcting the dangerous infrastructure deficiencies and modal fragmentation in the air transport system, and to consider such action to be an integral part of a public policy that supports the mobility of Europeans;

The challenges of global competition

| 55. | points out that aviation plays a fundamental role in the European economy, as regards both Europe's people and its businesses: it provides over 5 million jobs and contributes EUR 365 billion to EU GDP (2,4%). It makes a key contribution to economic growth, employment, tourism, people-to-people contacts and the regional and social cohesion of the EU, and is thus pivotal in connecting Europe to the rest of the world; |
| --- | --- |

55.

points out that aviation plays a fundamental role in the European economy, as regards both Europe's people and its businesses: it provides over 5 million jobs and contributes EUR 365 billion to EU GDP (2,4%). It makes a key contribution to economic growth, employment, tourism, people-to-people contacts and the regional and social cohesion of the EU, and is thus pivotal in connecting Europe to the rest of the world;

| 56. | agrees that competition must not be distorted by unfair practices inside or outside the EU. Asks the Commission to ensure that the efforts to complete the single market do not hobble the EU's capacity to face up to the challenges of global competition — including competition from countries which are now among our chief competitors, and against which the Commission has noted a worrying and increasing loss of competitiveness in European aviation (23); |
| --- | --- |

56.

agrees that competition must not be distorted by unfair practices inside or outside the EU. Asks the Commission to ensure that the efforts to complete the single market do not hobble the EU's capacity to face up to the challenges of global competition — including competition from countries which are now among our chief competitors, and against which the Commission has noted a worrying and increasing loss of competitiveness in European aviation (23);

| 57. | considers that the competition for new routes is not confined to Europe but it is global. If peripheral regions are to remain or become economically competitive then support for improved connectivity is needed to share the inherent risk in the start-up of new routes. Such links outwith the EU are increasingly important for the maintenance and development of connections with existing and emerging markets and the direct economic benefits these can deliver and they, under certain conditions, could be also be supported; |
| --- | --- |

57.

considers that the competition for new routes is not confined to Europe but it is global. If peripheral regions are to remain or become economically competitive then support for improved connectivity is needed to share the inherent risk in the start-up of new routes. Such links outwith the EU are increasingly important for the maintenance and development of connections with existing and emerging markets and the direct economic benefits these can deliver and they, under certain conditions, could be also be supported;

| 58. | points out that the EU's strict control of State aid is unique throughout the world. European aviation cannot be globally competitive if it disregards the massive amounts of public funding still allocated to airport infrastructure and airlines in the United States, Asia and the Middle East. This places the EU at a dangerous competitive disadvantage: the modernisation process cannot ignore this scenario and the EU cannot keep up a restrictive approach (particularly as regards public aid for infrastructure) which may well further undermine the competitiveness of European aviation and the EU economy as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

58.

points out that the EU's strict control of State aid is unique throughout the world. European aviation cannot be globally competitive if it disregards the massive amounts of public funding still allocated to airport infrastructure and airlines in the United States, Asia and the Middle East. This places the EU at a dangerous competitive disadvantage: the modernisation process cannot ignore this scenario and the EU cannot keep up a restrictive approach (particularly as regards public aid for infrastructure) which may well further undermine the competitiveness of European aviation and the EU economy as a whole.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  COM(2012) 209 final.

1

(2)  Public consultation begun on 7 April 2011 and closed on 7 June 2011.

2

(3)  94/C 350/07.

3

(4)  2005/C 312/01.

4

(5)  CdR 1528/2012.

5

(6)  CdR 2232/2012.

6

(7)  CdR 76/2005, p. 1.

7

(8)  Cfr. CdR 2232/2012, points 18-20.

8

(9)  2012/C 299/10.

9

(10)  Cfr. the measures adopted by the European Commission in response to the economic and financial crisis since 2008: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/temporary.html.

10

(11)  COM(2011) 823 final.

11

(12)  COM(2006) 819 final.

12

(13)  SEC(2011) 391 final.

13

(14)  Judgment of the European Court of Justice of 19 December 2012 — Mitteldeutsche Flughafen AG, Flughafen Leipzig/Halle GmbH/European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany, Arbeitsgemeinschaft Deutscher Verkehrsflughäfen ev.

14

Mitteldeutsche Flughafen AG, Flughafen Leipzig/Halle GmbH

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Deutscher Verkehrsflughäfen ev

(15)  94/C 350/07, p. 1.

15

(16)  Cfr. points 80(1) and 92 of the draft Commission communication on EU guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines (2013).

16

EU guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines

(17)  Ibid. p. 102.

17

(18)  Airports & State Aid: How to protect both growth & competition, ACI, 2013.

18

Airports & State Aid: How to protect both growth & competition

(19)  Ibid.

19

(20)  Ibid.

20

(21)  Ibid.

21

(22)  COM(2011) 144 final.

22

(23)  COM(2012) 556 final.

23

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/18

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘The added value of macro-regional strategies’

2014/C 114/04

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | welcome's the Commission's report of 27 June 2013 and its assessments based on the two current macro-regional strategies (for the Danube and the Baltic Sea regions). The Committee also welcomes the Commission's proposals to clarify the concept underlying macro-regional strategies, as well as its recommendations for subsequent measures, bearing in mind the continuing work on the existing macro-regional strategies, and on the action plan for the Atlantic, the strategy now being developed for the Adriatic and Ionian region, the macro-regional strategy for the Alps, and any other strategies that might be developed in future; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcome's the Commission's report of 27 June 2013 and its assessments based on the two current macro-regional strategies (for the Danube and the Baltic Sea regions). The Committee also welcomes the Commission's proposals to clarify the concept underlying macro-regional strategies, as well as its recommendations for subsequent measures, bearing in mind the continuing work on the existing macro-regional strategies, and on the action plan for the Atlantic, the strategy now being developed for the Adriatic and Ionian region, the macro-regional strategy for the Alps, and any other strategies that might be developed in future;

| 2. | welcomes the Council conclusions of 22 October 2013 on added value of macro-regional strategies, which emphasise the key role they have played in existing macro-regions and recommend that the Commission and the Member States also adapt where relevant the best practices of the macro-regional approach to cooperation areas of smaller scale and intensity; |
| --- | --- |

2.

welcomes the Council conclusions of 22 October 2013 on added value of macro-regional strategies, which emphasise the key role they have played in existing macro-regions and recommend that the Commission and the Member States also adapt where relevant the best practices of the macro-regional approach to cooperation areas of smaller scale and intensity;

| 3. | agrees with the Commission that macro-regional and sea-basin strategy approaches respond to similar aspirations, as they are effectively based on the same thinking, pursue the same objectives, implement the same range of measures in the areas concerned and are part of the same European political framework. Both kinds of strategy allow multi-sector cooperation and multi-level governance. The CoR requests that the Commission clarify how there can be mutual learning during future implementation of both approaches; |
| --- | --- |

3.

agrees with the Commission that macro-regional and sea-basin strategy approaches respond to similar aspirations, as they are effectively based on the same thinking, pursue the same objectives, implement the same range of measures in the areas concerned and are part of the same European political framework. Both kinds of strategy allow multi-sector cooperation and multi-level governance. The CoR requests that the Commission clarify how there can be mutual learning during future implementation of both approaches;

| 4. | is pleased with the timing of the Commission's report in relation to the new 2014-2020 programming period, and recalls that the CoR, in its opinion A Strategy for the North Sea-Channel Area (CdR 99/2010 fin), has already called for a Green Paper in which the Commission should investigate and define the role and function of macro-regions more precisely; |
| --- | --- |

4.

is pleased with the timing of the Commission's report in relation to the new 2014-2020 programming period, and recalls that the CoR, in its opinion A Strategy for the North Sea-Channel Area (CdR 99/2010 fin), has already called for a Green Paper in which the Commission should investigate and define the role and function of macro-regions more precisely;

| 5. | reiterates its support for developing and implementing macro-regional strategies, and underlines the political and strategic significance of work so far on the Baltic Sea and Danube strategies in promoting cooperation in those macro-regions both within the EU and with countries outside the EU. These strategies blaze a trail by applying new approaches to cooperation and driving European integration forward; |
| --- | --- |

5.

reiterates its support for developing and implementing macro-regional strategies, and underlines the political and strategic significance of work so far on the Baltic Sea and Danube strategies in promoting cooperation in those macro-regions both within the EU and with countries outside the EU. These strategies blaze a trail by applying new approaches to cooperation and driving European integration forward;

| 6. | notes that the basic principles of work on the macro-regional strategies include the synergies generated by cooperation when seeking solutions to problems affecting one geographical area or ideas for realising the area's potential. Also key are improving the coordination of available resources and stepping up cooperation between existing institutions, especially when it comes to the role assigned to local and regional authorities, without creating an additional level of administration; |
| --- | --- |

6.

notes that the basic principles of work on the macro-regional strategies include the synergies generated by cooperation when seeking solutions to problems affecting one geographical area or ideas for realising the area's potential. Also key are improving the coordination of available resources and stepping up cooperation between existing institutions, especially when it comes to the role assigned to local and regional authorities, without creating an additional level of administration;

| 7. | underlines the added value of the EU when developing and implementing macro-regional strategies, and notes the importance of the European Commission remaining a key strategic coordinating player in cooperation between Member States to develop and implement macro-regional strategies; |
| --- | --- |

7.

underlines the added value of the EU when developing and implementing macro-regional strategies, and notes the importance of the European Commission remaining a key strategic coordinating player in cooperation between Member States to develop and implement macro-regional strategies;

| 8. | notes the importance of the Commission's proposal that matters relating to the macro-regional strategies be regularly discussed in the relevant sectoral Councils. By approving and promoting a strategy, the European Commission and the European Parliament play a key role; |
| --- | --- |

8.

notes the importance of the Commission's proposal that matters relating to the macro-regional strategies be regularly discussed in the relevant sectoral Councils. By approving and promoting a strategy, the European Commission and the European Parliament play a key role;

| 9. | calls on the European Commission and the Member States to support the development of innovative governance systems and to involve regions, municipalities, and European entities such as EGTCs and other territorial cooperation instruments such as working communities in a real process of co-decision, especially in framing and implementing macro-regional strategies. The Committee of the Regions notes that the added value of EGTCs and other territorial cooperation instruments can be further enhanced by involving them in macro-regional strategies; |
| --- | --- |

9.

calls on the European Commission and the Member States to support the development of innovative governance systems and to involve regions, municipalities, and European entities such as EGTCs and other territorial cooperation instruments such as working communities in a real process of co-decision, especially in framing and implementing macro-regional strategies. The Committee of the Regions notes that the added value of EGTCs and other territorial cooperation instruments can be further enhanced by involving them in macro-regional strategies;

| 10. | feels that it is important that cooperation between local and regional authorities be stepped up and expanded to cover the different fields of Union policy, and that it extend across different sectors. Macro-regional strategies should serve as tools for cooperation between the local and regional level, Member States and the EU to support these objectives; |
| --- | --- |

10.

feels that it is important that cooperation between local and regional authorities be stepped up and expanded to cover the different fields of Union policy, and that it extend across different sectors. Macro-regional strategies should serve as tools for cooperation between the local and regional level, Member States and the EU to support these objectives;

Applying the macro-regional strategy approach effectively — results of the report

| 11. | notes the key observations in the Commission's report on strategy work carried out so far in the macro-regions; this has improved the focus of available resources to achieve shared objectives, promoted a cross-sectoral approach, e.g. to environmental issues and to making regions more competitive, and stepped up cooperation between participating countries and between the various national players; |
| --- | --- |

11.

notes the key observations in the Commission's report on strategy work carried out so far in the macro-regions; this has improved the focus of available resources to achieve shared objectives, promoted a cross-sectoral approach, e.g. to environmental issues and to making regions more competitive, and stepped up cooperation between participating countries and between the various national players;

| 12. | observes, on the basis of this report, that the macro-regional strategy approach has provided definite added value when it comes to promoting social, economic and regional cohesion in Europe; |
| --- | --- |

12.

observes, on the basis of this report, that the macro-regional strategy approach has provided definite added value when it comes to promoting social, economic and regional cohesion in Europe;

| 13. | points out that the current macro-regional strategies highlight — exhaustively and from different angles — the priorities requiring close cooperation. The revised Baltic Sea strategy has a total of 17 priority areas and five horizontal actions, while the Danube strategy has 11 priority areas. The themes span the need for cooperation on transport, the environment, business and the economy, skills and culture, and well-being. The action plan for the Baltic Sea strategy lists more than 100 flagship initiatives, while the Danube strategy includes more than 400 cooperative projects, 150 of which are already under way; |
| --- | --- |

13.

points out that the current macro-regional strategies highlight — exhaustively and from different angles — the priorities requiring close cooperation. The revised Baltic Sea strategy has a total of 17 priority areas and five horizontal actions, while the Danube strategy has 11 priority areas. The themes span the need for cooperation on transport, the environment, business and the economy, skills and culture, and well-being. The action plan for the Baltic Sea strategy lists more than 100 flagship initiatives, while the Danube strategy includes more than 400 cooperative projects, 150 of which are already under way;

| 14. | notes the importance of being able to reassess the priorities of macro-regional strategies as they are being implemented if there is a fundamental change in circumstances, or if lessons learned give reason to do so. This will ensure that resources are targeted effectively during implementation; |
| --- | --- |

14.

notes the importance of being able to reassess the priorities of macro-regional strategies as they are being implemented if there is a fundamental change in circumstances, or if lessons learned give reason to do so. This will ensure that resources are targeted effectively during implementation;

| 15. | notes the importance of focusing macro-regional strategies on clearly defined realistic objectives with macro-regional aspects; these should serve as a basis for continuous monitoring and evaluation involving all the relevant stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

15.

notes the importance of focusing macro-regional strategies on clearly defined realistic objectives with macro-regional aspects; these should serve as a basis for continuous monitoring and evaluation involving all the relevant stakeholders;

| 16. | underlines the key role played by practical cooperative projects in creating the real added value of macro-regional strategies. During practical implementation, more attention should be paid to ways of generating new and innovative project activity that meets macro-regional strategic objectives in a focused way. At the moment, project cooperation is guided more by the rules for financial instruments, leaving very little room for innovation. This approach is not the best way to support the implementation of macro-regional strategies. In future there will need to be flexibility both within and between individual financial instruments, as well as scope to improve coordination of different financial instruments. More effort should also be made to simplify the rules governing financial instruments. In this context, it emphasises the particular importance of the INTERREG-B programme, aimed at implementing cooperation projects within the macro-regions in the period 2014-2020; |
| --- | --- |

16.

underlines the key role played by practical cooperative projects in creating the real added value of macro-regional strategies. During practical implementation, more attention should be paid to ways of generating new and innovative project activity that meets macro-regional strategic objectives in a focused way. At the moment, project cooperation is guided more by the rules for financial instruments, leaving very little room for innovation. This approach is not the best way to support the implementation of macro-regional strategies. In future there will need to be flexibility both within and between individual financial instruments, as well as scope to improve coordination of different financial instruments. More effort should also be made to simplify the rules governing financial instruments. In this context, it emphasises the particular importance of the INTERREG-B programme, aimed at implementing cooperation projects within the macro-regions in the period 2014-2020;

| 17. | stresses that in future a more strategic approach to project work should be taken that dovetails with the Europe 2020 strategy, the general framework of the EU's 2014-2020 programme and national and regional strategies and programmes. In project work supporting the implementation of macro-regional strategies, it is important to enable cooperation across sectors and priority areas and enough flexibility and responsiveness to seize new opportunities and meet new challenges; |
| --- | --- |

17.

stresses that in future a more strategic approach to project work should be taken that dovetails with the Europe 2020 strategy, the general framework of the EU's 2014-2020 programme and national and regional strategies and programmes. In project work supporting the implementation of macro-regional strategies, it is important to enable cooperation across sectors and priority areas and enough flexibility and responsiveness to seize new opportunities and meet new challenges;

| 18. | underlines the need to promote new forms of cooperation and new project initiatives, and notes, by way of example, the importance of seed money in developing new cooperative ventures. The first application round for the Baltic Sea strategy's Seed Money Facility saw funding allocated to a total of 14 preparatory projects for developing cooperative projects to support implementation of the strategy. Support has also successfully been given to similar project preparation work as part of the Danube strategy; |
| --- | --- |

18.

underlines the need to promote new forms of cooperation and new project initiatives, and notes, by way of example, the importance of seed money in developing new cooperative ventures. The first application round for the Baltic Sea strategy's Seed Money Facility saw funding allocated to a total of 14 preparatory projects for developing cooperative projects to support implementation of the strategy. Support has also successfully been given to similar project preparation work as part of the Danube strategy;

| 19. | encourages Member States that are part of a macro-regional strategy, along with the European Commission, to consider together, when programming the EU's 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework, how best to support the promotion of international project activity as part of national and regional programming. Member States, under the guidance of the European Commission, should clearly demonstrate the link between different EU funding programmes and implementation of the macro-regional strategies, and where possible identify national financial instruments that could be used to this end; |
| --- | --- |

19.

encourages Member States that are part of a macro-regional strategy, along with the European Commission, to consider together, when programming the EU's 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework, how best to support the promotion of international project activity as part of national and regional programming. Member States, under the guidance of the European Commission, should clearly demonstrate the link between different EU funding programmes and implementation of the macro-regional strategies, and where possible identify national financial instruments that could be used to this end;

| 20. | underlines the critical importance of cooperation between the coordinators of priority areas and horizontal actions in both the Baltic Sea and the Danube strategies, and cooperation at regional and local level, in generating new project portfolios that help meet the objectives of macro-regional strategies. Adequate operating conditions should also be ensured for these players. The European Commission and the relevant stakeholders are requested to look into all options for simple and reliable financial support for priority area coordinators and horizontal action leaders; |
| --- | --- |

20.

underlines the critical importance of cooperation between the coordinators of priority areas and horizontal actions in both the Baltic Sea and the Danube strategies, and cooperation at regional and local level, in generating new project portfolios that help meet the objectives of macro-regional strategies. Adequate operating conditions should also be ensured for these players. The European Commission and the relevant stakeholders are requested to look into all options for simple and reliable financial support for priority area coordinators and horizontal action leaders;

| 21. | notes that, although the Commission has clarified the governance structures for both the Baltic Sea and the Danube strategies and spelt out the tasks and responsibilities of the various players (national contact points, priority area coordinators, horizontal action leaders and flagship project leaders), governance is still seen as problematic according to the survey that it carried out. The Committee of the Regions urges the Commission and the Member States to consider ways of streamlining the current governance structures. The role of the local and regional level should be further strengthened; |
| --- | --- |

21.

notes that, although the Commission has clarified the governance structures for both the Baltic Sea and the Danube strategies and spelt out the tasks and responsibilities of the various players (national contact points, priority area coordinators, horizontal action leaders and flagship project leaders), governance is still seen as problematic according to the survey that it carried out. The Committee of the Regions urges the Commission and the Member States to consider ways of streamlining the current governance structures. The role of the local and regional level should be further strengthened;

| 22. | underlines the importance of communicating the objectives of macro-regional strategies and ongoing cooperation to as many stakeholders as possible, so as to raise awareness of European cooperation and foster broad commitment to implementing the strategies. The Committee believes that guidelines should be drawn up at both macro-regional and national level to support communication and stakeholder activities. More use should be made of the opportunities offered by digital information platforms to share experience and examples of best practice identified during projects; |
| --- | --- |

22.

underlines the importance of communicating the objectives of macro-regional strategies and ongoing cooperation to as many stakeholders as possible, so as to raise awareness of European cooperation and foster broad commitment to implementing the strategies. The Committee believes that guidelines should be drawn up at both macro-regional and national level to support communication and stakeholder activities. More use should be made of the opportunities offered by digital information platforms to share experience and examples of best practice identified during projects;

Leadership

| 23. | notes that high-level political players must show clear commitment and assume a leading role if there is to be progress in implementing the strategy in all participating countries. Commitment should be ensured at Member State level so as to provide the best possible support to local and regional efforts to implement the strategy; |
| --- | --- |

23.

notes that high-level political players must show clear commitment and assume a leading role if there is to be progress in implementing the strategy in all participating countries. Commitment should be ensured at Member State level so as to provide the best possible support to local and regional efforts to implement the strategy;

| 24. | welcomes the separate review on strengthening leadership in the current strategies, which is to be carried out in conjunction with the annual strategy forums in 2014; |
| --- | --- |

24.

welcomes the separate review on strengthening leadership in the current strategies, which is to be carried out in conjunction with the annual strategy forums in 2014;

Multi-level governance: a vital aspect of implementation

| 25. | draws attention to previous opinions on the revised Baltic Sea strategy (2012), on the Danube strategy (2011), on territorial cooperation in the Mediterranean basin by means of the Adriatic-Ionian macro-region (2011), and on the strategy for the North Sea-Channel Area (2010), in which the Committee strongly emphasised the importance of multi-level governance in implementing the strategies. Involving all stakeholders in a consistent and sustained manner is crucial to meeting a strategy's objectives and to its success; |
| --- | --- |

25.

draws attention to previous opinions on the revised Baltic Sea strategy (2012), on the Danube strategy (2011), on territorial cooperation in the Mediterranean basin by means of the Adriatic-Ionian macro-region (2011), and on the strategy for the North Sea-Channel Area (2010), in which the Committee strongly emphasised the importance of multi-level governance in implementing the strategies. Involving all stakeholders in a consistent and sustained manner is crucial to meeting a strategy's objectives and to its success;

| 26. | considers noteworthy the Commission's proposal to consider including public and other EU institutional forums in the governance of the strategies, and recommends looking into how organisations in particular could be used. Various organisations and cooperation platforms can work even more effectively as tools for engaging players in the implementation of macro-regional strategies. The Committee is prepared for its part to cooperate in various expert forums; |
| --- | --- |

26.

considers noteworthy the Commission's proposal to consider including public and other EU institutional forums in the governance of the strategies, and recommends looking into how organisations in particular could be used. Various organisations and cooperation platforms can work even more effectively as tools for engaging players in the implementation of macro-regional strategies. The Committee is prepared for its part to cooperate in various expert forums;

| 27. | notes that a third of respondents to the survey carried out by the Commission for its assessment said that the principle of multi-level governance was not fully reflected in Member State or project-level policy guidelines or in decisions on project implementation. The Committee feels that more emphasis should be placed on strengthening the principles of multi-level governance, especially in strategy implementation. This will require action, particularly from the Member States participating in the strategy, in cooperation with the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

27.

notes that a third of respondents to the survey carried out by the Commission for its assessment said that the principle of multi-level governance was not fully reflected in Member State or project-level policy guidelines or in decisions on project implementation. The Committee feels that more emphasis should be placed on strengthening the principles of multi-level governance, especially in strategy implementation. This will require action, particularly from the Member States participating in the strategy, in cooperation with the Commission;

| 28. | suggests that opportunities for involvement not just of local and regional players, but also of civil society players, in implementing macro-regional strategies should be stepped up in accordance with the principles of partnership and transparency. Regular consultations of local authorities and civil society representatives should be introduced at all levels of governance of macro-regional strategy implementation; |
| --- | --- |

28.

suggests that opportunities for involvement not just of local and regional players, but also of civil society players, in implementing macro-regional strategies should be stepped up in accordance with the principles of partnership and transparency. Regular consultations of local authorities and civil society representatives should be introduced at all levels of governance of macro-regional strategy implementation;

New strategies

| 29. | proposes that positive experience with the existing Baltic Sea and Danube strategies be taken into account in work on a strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian region, and recommends, especially in this context, closer cooperation between the different macro-regional strategies; |
| --- | --- |

29.

proposes that positive experience with the existing Baltic Sea and Danube strategies be taken into account in work on a strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian region, and recommends, especially in this context, closer cooperation between the different macro-regional strategies;

| 30. | refers to its unanimously adopted opinion A strategy for the North Sea-Channel area (CdR 99/2010 fin), in which, in the light of the major challenges facing this area, it called urgently for the creation of a macro-regional strategy for the North Sea-Channel area, and regrets that the Commission has not yet published the promised communication on the implementation of an integrated maritime policy for the Greater North Sea; |
| --- | --- |

30.

refers to its unanimously adopted opinion A strategy for the North Sea-Channel area (CdR 99/2010 fin), in which, in the light of the major challenges facing this area, it called urgently for the creation of a macro-regional strategy for the North Sea-Channel area, and regrets that the Commission has not yet published the promised communication on the implementation of an integrated maritime policy for the Greater North Sea;

| 31. | similarly would welcome an assessment of the effectiveness of the ‘sea basin strategies’ and compare this with the experiences of the existing macro-regional strategies, before further sea basin strategies are developed; |
| --- | --- |

31.

similarly would welcome an assessment of the effectiveness of the ‘sea basin strategies’ and compare this with the experiences of the existing macro-regional strategies, before further sea basin strategies are developed;

| 32. | reiterates views expressed in previous CoR opinions on how to get different players to really engage in implementation of the macro-regional strategies: there is a need for transparent decision-making, comprehensive information-sharing, and development of a common modus operandi at all levels; |
| --- | --- |

32.

reiterates views expressed in previous CoR opinions on how to get different players to really engage in implementation of the macro-regional strategies: there is a need for transparent decision-making, comprehensive information-sharing, and development of a common modus operandi at all levels;

| 33. | calls on the European Commission and the Council to support the development of future macro-regional strategies and related action plans in close cooperation with all the relevant stakeholders. This should also provide for innovative governance systems that give local and regional authorities a real role of co-decision when framing and implementing strategies; |
| --- | --- |

33.

calls on the European Commission and the Council to support the development of future macro-regional strategies and related action plans in close cooperation with all the relevant stakeholders. This should also provide for innovative governance systems that give local and regional authorities a real role of co-decision when framing and implementing strategies;

| 34. | stresses that macro-regional strategies should continue to be geared to regional challenges that individual Member States are unable to meet or have serious difficulty meeting in their region, or which are so particular to that macro-region that they require special consideration within a broader EU policy framework. Macro-regional strategies should therefore not only address common regional interests, but also account for tailor made response strategies to reflect specific regional challenges. Efficient transport links within a macro-region are one of the basic conditions for cooperation, and the Committee believes this should be taken into account when developing new strategies; another matter of vital importance for the future of many European areas is the demographic challenge, the specific problems of which concern macro-regional geographical areas; |
| --- | --- |

34.

stresses that macro-regional strategies should continue to be geared to regional challenges that individual Member States are unable to meet or have serious difficulty meeting in their region, or which are so particular to that macro-region that they require special consideration within a broader EU policy framework. Macro-regional strategies should therefore not only address common regional interests, but also account for tailor made response strategies to reflect specific regional challenges. Efficient transport links within a macro-region are one of the basic conditions for cooperation, and the Committee believes this should be taken into account when developing new strategies; another matter of vital importance for the future of many European areas is the demographic challenge, the specific problems of which concern macro-regional geographical areas;

| 35. | agrees with the Commission on the need to seek appropriate methods of enhancing cooperation and regional integration and to continue to support existing cooperation arrangements which have proved useful and efficient, where macro-regional strategies are but one alternative; |
| --- | --- |

35.

agrees with the Commission on the need to seek appropriate methods of enhancing cooperation and regional integration and to continue to support existing cooperation arrangements which have proved useful and efficient, where macro-regional strategies are but one alternative;

| 36. | urges the Member States to assess development of new macro-regional strategies in view of the shared challenges and opportunities of the geographical area in question, taking into account the principles of social, economic and territorial cohesion and consequently focusing particularly on rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition and regions that suffer from severe, permanent demographic or natural disadvantages such as, for example, the northernmost regions with low population density and island, cross-border and upland regions. The local and regional level should be involved in discussion at an early stage when setting a strategy's objectives, as was the case when developing the Baltic Sea strategy, for example. Similarly, civil society involvement in this process must not be neglected either. Local and regional-level and civil society understanding of a region's needs and potential, as well as existing local cooperation networks, provide a solid foundation for framing and implementing a strategy; |
| --- | --- |

36.

urges the Member States to assess development of new macro-regional strategies in view of the shared challenges and opportunities of the geographical area in question, taking into account the principles of social, economic and territorial cohesion and consequently focusing particularly on rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition and regions that suffer from severe, permanent demographic or natural disadvantages such as, for example, the northernmost regions with low population density and island, cross-border and upland regions. The local and regional level should be involved in discussion at an early stage when setting a strategy's objectives, as was the case when developing the Baltic Sea strategy, for example. Similarly, civil society involvement in this process must not be neglected either. Local and regional-level and civil society understanding of a region's needs and potential, as well as existing local cooperation networks, provide a solid foundation for framing and implementing a strategy;

Non-EU countries and implementation of macro-regional strategies

| 37. | notes that the Council took account of the views expressed by the Committee in its opinion on the revised EU strategy for the Baltic Sea region (CdR1272/2012 fin) when recommending that action continue so as to make the most of the Northern Dimension and its partnerships in implementing the Baltic Sea strategy. The strategy for the Danube region is of key importance in boosting cooperation between 14 countries, consisting of EU Member States and third countries; |
| --- | --- |

37.

notes that the Council took account of the views expressed by the Committee in its opinion on the revised EU strategy for the Baltic Sea region (CdR1272/2012 fin) when recommending that action continue so as to make the most of the Northern Dimension and its partnerships in implementing the Baltic Sea strategy. The strategy for the Danube region is of key importance in boosting cooperation between 14 countries, consisting of EU Member States and third countries;

| 38. | stresses that macro-regional strategies should strengthen the position of the EU and the macro-region and their interaction with each other and with regions outside the EU. Whilst these may be EU strategies, many of their objectives will be impossible to meet without cooperation or some agreement on priorities with non-EU partners. Cooperation with regions outside the EU is critical to the work of both the Baltic Sea and the Danube strategies, not just for boosting the macro-region's economic competitiveness and cohesion, but also for developing the EU's external links. Along the same lines, involving third countries, with the ensuing implications in terms of both neighbourhood policy and enlargement policy, can, right from the start, be a key factor in the success of future macro-regional strategies; |
| --- | --- |

38.

stresses that macro-regional strategies should strengthen the position of the EU and the macro-region and their interaction with each other and with regions outside the EU. Whilst these may be EU strategies, many of their objectives will be impossible to meet without cooperation or some agreement on priorities with non-EU partners. Cooperation with regions outside the EU is critical to the work of both the Baltic Sea and the Danube strategies, not just for boosting the macro-region's economic competitiveness and cohesion, but also for developing the EU's external links. Along the same lines, involving third countries, with the ensuing implications in terms of both neighbourhood policy and enlargement policy, can, right from the start, be a key factor in the success of future macro-regional strategies;

Conclusions

| 39. | underlines that work on the strategy to date does not allow far-reaching conclusions to be drawn yet on the impact of this approach in terms of meeting the EU's horizontal and integrated objectives; |
| --- | --- |

39.

underlines that work on the strategy to date does not allow far-reaching conclusions to be drawn yet on the impact of this approach in terms of meeting the EU's horizontal and integrated objectives;

| 40. | points out that the new EU financing period from 2014 offers good prospects for more effective and productive work on the strategies. The Committee calls for targeted cooperation between different Member States and funding authorities, both at EU level and in national development efforts; |
| --- | --- |

40.

points out that the new EU financing period from 2014 offers good prospects for more effective and productive work on the strategies. The Committee calls for targeted cooperation between different Member States and funding authorities, both at EU level and in national development efforts;

| 41. | recommends that the Commission continue to consistently monitor implementation of macro-regional strategies but also sea basin strategies and to assess their added value for Europe as a whole, not just from the perspective of individual macro-regional strategies. |
| --- | --- |

41.

recommends that the Commission continue to consistently monitor implementation of macro-regional strategies but also sea basin strategies and to assess their added value for Europe as a whole, not just from the perspective of individual macro-regional strategies.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/23

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Action plan for a competitive and sustainable steel industry in Europe’

2014/C 114/05

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

| 1. | considers the steel industry to play an instrumental role in the overall economy of the European Union and to be a strategic sector of the highest order, with a direct impact on the economic, social and environmental development of all EU Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.

considers the steel industry to play an instrumental role in the overall economy of the European Union and to be a strategic sector of the highest order, with a direct impact on the economic, social and environmental development of all EU Member States;

| 2. | believes that the evolution of the European steel industry will also have a direct impact on local and regional development and that a competitive and sustainable steel industry is both a condition for and a key factor in the economic recovery of numerous regions across Europe; |
| --- | --- |

2.

believes that the evolution of the European steel industry will also have a direct impact on local and regional development and that a competitive and sustainable steel industry is both a condition for and a key factor in the economic recovery of numerous regions across Europe;

| 3. | thinks that the introduction of a policy to support a self-sufficient European steel industry is crucial for safeguarding the long-term security of supply within the European Union. To maintain its independence, the steel industry must show that it is prepared to meet the challenges of the future by innovating and adopting green thinking. Any EU support should merely increase the pace of the change process that the steel industry itself must undertake; |
| --- | --- |

3.

thinks that the introduction of a policy to support a self-sufficient European steel industry is crucial for safeguarding the long-term security of supply within the European Union. To maintain its independence, the steel industry must show that it is prepared to meet the challenges of the future by innovating and adopting green thinking. Any EU support should merely increase the pace of the change process that the steel industry itself must undertake;

| 4. | draws attention to the harsh economic climate that has exposed the European Union — whose annual total production capacity exceeds 217 million tonnes of steel and actual output accounts for 11% of world production — to the international problems of overcapacity and weak demand on the market; |
| --- | --- |

4.

draws attention to the harsh economic climate that has exposed the European Union — whose annual total production capacity exceeds 217 million tonnes of steel and actual output accounts for 11% of world production — to the international problems of overcapacity and weak demand on the market;

| 5. | draws attention, in view of the fact that the demand for steel in Europe ‘depends on the economic and financial status of a few key steel using industries — for example the construction and the automotive sectors’ (1), to its opinions on industrial policy (2) and on CARS 2020: An action plan for a competitive and sustainable automotive industry in Europe (3); |
| --- | --- |

5.

draws attention, in view of the fact that the demand for steel in Europe ‘depends on the economic and financial status of a few key steel using industries — for example the construction and the automotive sectors’ (1), to its opinions on industrial policy (2) and on CARS 2020: An action plan for a competitive and sustainable automotive industry in Europe (3);

| 6. | points out that construction is one of the major steel-using sectors and considers that sustainable and energy-efficient construction must be priorities in this type of construction, which could be referred to as the renovation of public building stocks and could for instance tie in with the European social housing agenda called for repeatedly by the CoR and the European Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

6.

points out that construction is one of the major steel-using sectors and considers that sustainable and energy-efficient construction must be priorities in this type of construction, which could be referred to as the renovation of public building stocks and could for instance tie in with the European social housing agenda called for repeatedly by the CoR and the European Parliament;

| 7. | observes that, following a marked slump in industrial activity in recent years, many of the 500 production sites spread across 23 Member States have significantly cut output, while others have closed down completely; it notes with regret the loss of some 40 000 jobs; |
| --- | --- |

7.

observes that, following a marked slump in industrial activity in recent years, many of the 500 production sites spread across 23 Member States have significantly cut output, while others have closed down completely; it notes with regret the loss of some 40 000 jobs;

| 8. | notes that this difficult economic situation has had a negative impact on economic and social cohesion in the regions concerned; |
| --- | --- |

8.

notes that this difficult economic situation has had a negative impact on economic and social cohesion in the regions concerned;

| 9. | recognises the need for a European strategy for the future of the steel industry in general; |
| --- | --- |

9.

recognises the need for a European strategy for the future of the steel industry in general;

| 10. | considers it vital to ensure the direct involvement of local and regional authorities in this process, respecting local circumstances and specialisations and respecting the fact that they are best placed to assess the economic and social challenges and the necessity and viability of further investments to create or preserve jobs as well as to identify possible resources of such investments; they are also more familiar with issues regarding environmental impact assessment; |
| --- | --- |

10.

considers it vital to ensure the direct involvement of local and regional authorities in this process, respecting local circumstances and specialisations and respecting the fact that they are best placed to assess the economic and social challenges and the necessity and viability of further investments to create or preserve jobs as well as to identify possible resources of such investments; they are also more familiar with issues regarding environmental impact assessment;

| 11. | believes that efforts to improve the EU's competitiveness must be based in the principles of transparency and good business conditions for undertakings. It is, inter alia, on the basis of skills, innovative capacity and quality that the European steel industry can stand out from the competition; |
| --- | --- |

11.

believes that efforts to improve the EU's competitiveness must be based in the principles of transparency and good business conditions for undertakings. It is, inter alia, on the basis of skills, innovative capacity and quality that the European steel industry can stand out from the competition;

| 12. | advocates a bold industrial policy which focuses on improving the competitiveness of the EU steel industry and, where possible, on protecting or expanding existing steel plants and jobs, mainly by making the most of processing and recycling, so as to ensure that the sector does not lose the steel working skills and know-how acquired by its workers over the decades; |
| --- | --- |

12.

advocates a bold industrial policy which focuses on improving the competitiveness of the EU steel industry and, where possible, on protecting or expanding existing steel plants and jobs, mainly by making the most of processing and recycling, so as to ensure that the sector does not lose the steel working skills and know-how acquired by its workers over the decades;

| 13. | accordingly, calls for the introduction of continuous vocational training agreements to enable workers employed at steel plants likely to be undergoing restructuring to upgrade their skills in the steel sector; |
| --- | --- |

13.

accordingly, calls for the introduction of continuous vocational training agreements to enable workers employed at steel plants likely to be undergoing restructuring to upgrade their skills in the steel sector;

| 14. | equally, calls for the creation of additional retraining schemes for workers affected by site closures or restructuring, by enabling the wider use of structural funds through a revision of the EU's Globalisation Adjustment Fund and by offering programmes tailored to individual needs and to regional circumstances, while maintaining and boosting workers' skills in this sector; |
| --- | --- |

14.

equally, calls for the creation of additional retraining schemes for workers affected by site closures or restructuring, by enabling the wider use of structural funds through a revision of the EU's Globalisation Adjustment Fund and by offering programmes tailored to individual needs and to regional circumstances, while maintaining and boosting workers' skills in this sector;

| 15. | calls for the creation of a system of financial assistance for areas affected by restructuring or plant closures, focusing on vocational re-training for workers and economic diversification and based on funding provided by public and private economic stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

15.

calls for the creation of a system of financial assistance for areas affected by restructuring or plant closures, focusing on vocational re-training for workers and economic diversification and based on funding provided by public and private economic stakeholders;

| 16. | stresses the need for all public authorities to adopt a coordinated approach for the formulation and implementation of restructuring measures in the steel sector; |
| --- | --- |

16.

stresses the need for all public authorities to adopt a coordinated approach for the formulation and implementation of restructuring measures in the steel sector;

| 17. | welcomes the establishment of a high-level roundtable on steel at European level, but regrets that only one meeting is scheduled annually; suggests that this roundtable include a representative of the Committee of the Regions, together with representatives of the local and regional authorities, in order to promote cooperation and the exchange of information and best practices among the main stakeholders in the EU Member States; |
| --- | --- |

17.

welcomes the establishment of a high-level roundtable on steel at European level, but regrets that only one meeting is scheduled annually; suggests that this roundtable include a representative of the Committee of the Regions, together with representatives of the local and regional authorities, in order to promote cooperation and the exchange of information and best practices among the main stakeholders in the EU Member States;

| 18. | believes that an evaluation of the action plan should be planned within twelve months of its adoption; |
| --- | --- |

18.

believes that an evaluation of the action plan should be planned within twelve months of its adoption;

| 19. | calls for the introduction of stronger social dialogue to tackle the crisis and for the close and direct involvement of the social partners in industrial policy in general and in steel sector policy in particular; |
| --- | --- |

19.

calls for the introduction of stronger social dialogue to tackle the crisis and for the close and direct involvement of the social partners in industrial policy in general and in steel sector policy in particular;

| 20. | notes that a general industrial model based on innovation and substantial investment in new technologies is a key condition for the sustainable growth of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

20.

notes that a general industrial model based on innovation and substantial investment in new technologies is a key condition for the sustainable growth of the European Union;

| 21. | notes that the European steel industry must offer innovative, quality products that address the needs of the market and set the European steel industry apart from its competitors; however, this approach will require substantial investment in high-cost production or processing methods and research and development. |
| --- | --- |

21.

notes that the European steel industry must offer innovative, quality products that address the needs of the market and set the European steel industry apart from its competitors; however, this approach will require substantial investment in high-cost production or processing methods and research and development.

| 22. | considers that support for innovation needs to be extended to all steel-related industries. Thus, EIB financial instruments should be established under Horizon 2020 to promote R&D&I cooperation between steel companies and the regions where they are based in order to promote sustainability and economic activity; |
| --- | --- |

22.

considers that support for innovation needs to be extended to all steel-related industries. Thus, EIB financial instruments should be established under Horizon 2020 to promote R&D&I cooperation between steel companies and the regions where they are based in order to promote sustainability and economic activity;

| 23. | reiterates its call for investment in skills and vocational training to encourage diversification, specialisation and innovation in the steel industry in order to make it more competitive in the future; |
| --- | --- |

23.

reiterates its call for investment in skills and vocational training to encourage diversification, specialisation and innovation in the steel industry in order to make it more competitive in the future;

| 24. | supports the Commission's effort to promote skills development measures and action targeting youth employment within the steel sector, but regrets that the Commission communication has not set out any measures to promote the transfer of skills within enterprises; |
| --- | --- |

24.

supports the Commission's effort to promote skills development measures and action targeting youth employment within the steel sector, but regrets that the Commission communication has not set out any measures to promote the transfer of skills within enterprises;

| 25. | welcomes the Action Plan's focus on promoting innovation for the development of cleaner and more resource- and energy-efficient technologies, in order to reduce costs and comply with the EU's 2030 climate policy framework; |
| --- | --- |

25.

welcomes the Action Plan's focus on promoting innovation for the development of cleaner and more resource- and energy-efficient technologies, in order to reduce costs and comply with the EU's 2030 climate policy framework;

| 26. | calls in the European Commission to give EU-level support for steel production using electric arc furnaces, since the CO2 emissions from this method are much lower than from steel production using iron ore; |
| --- | --- |

26.

calls in the European Commission to give EU-level support for steel production using electric arc furnaces, since the CO2 emissions from this method are much lower than from steel production using iron ore;

| 27. | reaffirms its support for the Commission's industrial ecology approach, which focuses on recycling materials and monitoring energy use; |
| --- | --- |

27.

reaffirms its support for the Commission's industrial ecology approach, which focuses on recycling materials and monitoring energy use;

| 28. | points out in this connection that steel is a highly recyclable product and that steel production which uses recycled scrap in place of virgin iron ore can reduce energy inputs by around 75% and save approximately 90% of raw materials inputs; |
| --- | --- |

28.

points out in this connection that steel is a highly recyclable product and that steel production which uses recycled scrap in place of virgin iron ore can reduce energy inputs by around 75% and save approximately 90% of raw materials inputs;

| 29. | reiterates its support for investment in innovation, better conditions for access to the market and to capital, human resources and skills as the pillars of a stronger industrial policy; |
| --- | --- |

29.

reiterates its support for investment in innovation, better conditions for access to the market and to capital, human resources and skills as the pillars of a stronger industrial policy;

| 30. | encourages the Commission to continue its assessment of its regulatory burden on the steel industry and its impact on competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

30.

encourages the Commission to continue its assessment of its regulatory burden on the steel industry and its impact on competitiveness;

| 31. | supports the Commission's efforts to launch a discussion on reducing the production costs of the European steel industry. The discussion should focus on innovation, energy-efficiency and environmental considerations; |
| --- | --- |

31.

supports the Commission's efforts to launch a discussion on reducing the production costs of the European steel industry. The discussion should focus on innovation, energy-efficiency and environmental considerations;

| 32. | stresses in particular the need to allow electricity-intensive industries to enter into long-term supply contracts — i.e., that cover a period of at least ten years and include revision clauses structured so as to guarantee regular supply under a long-term contractual framework and ensure effective cost-management and hence the competitiveness of the sector; |
| --- | --- |

32.

stresses in particular the need to allow electricity-intensive industries to enter into long-term supply contracts — i.e., that cover a period of at least ten years and include revision clauses structured so as to guarantee regular supply under a long-term contractual framework and ensure effective cost-management and hence the competitiveness of the sector;

| 33. | believes it necessary to develop freight networks, which are a key element for the regions, particularly remote and cross-border regions; |
| --- | --- |

33.

believes it necessary to develop freight networks, which are a key element for the regions, particularly remote and cross-border regions;

| 34. | welcomes the Commission's proposal to bolster the demand for EU-produced steel, both at home and abroad, in particular through targeted action to boost demand in the automotive and sustainable construction sectors; |
| --- | --- |

34.

welcomes the Commission's proposal to bolster the demand for EU-produced steel, both at home and abroad, in particular through targeted action to boost demand in the automotive and sustainable construction sectors;

| 35. | encourages the Commission to promote diversification of the steel industry, so as to limit its dependency on demand and to minimise the consequent risks; |
| --- | --- |

35.

encourages the Commission to promote diversification of the steel industry, so as to limit its dependency on demand and to minimise the consequent risks;

| 36. | supports the efforts to establish European standards for the sustainable production of steel products for the building industry and to introduce a quality label, the SustSteel Steel Construction Products Mark, which could help boost the added value and competitiveness of European products; |
| --- | --- |

36.

supports the efforts to establish European standards for the sustainable production of steel products for the building industry and to introduce a quality label, the SustSteel Steel Construction Products Mark, which could help boost the added value and competitiveness of European products;

| 37. | reiterates the importance of defending European standards in the fields of social policy, the environment, climate protection, safety at work and working conditions with a view to ensuring the EU's economic and social cohesion and the competitiveness of European enterprises on the global market; |
| --- | --- |

37.

reiterates the importance of defending European standards in the fields of social policy, the environment, climate protection, safety at work and working conditions with a view to ensuring the EU's economic and social cohesion and the competitiveness of European enterprises on the global market;

| 38. | supports the Commission's effort to take action in conjunction with third countries against unfair trading practices and, among other things, to encourage a level playing field; |
| --- | --- |

38.

supports the Commission's effort to take action in conjunction with third countries against unfair trading practices and, among other things, to encourage a level playing field;

| 39. | believes that ensuring free and open trade in steel and steel products is important for the sector in the long term and notes that, despite the Commission's efforts to liberalise international trade within the WTO, industry estimates are based on the premise that approximately 65% of the global steel market is subject to protectionist barriers of all kinds; |
| --- | --- |

39.

believes that ensuring free and open trade in steel and steel products is important for the sector in the long term and notes that, despite the Commission's efforts to liberalise international trade within the WTO, industry estimates are based on the premise that approximately 65% of the global steel market is subject to protectionist barriers of all kinds;

| 40. | shares the Commission's view that negotiations of bilateral trade agreements, in particular Free Trade Agreements (FTA), are a key instrument for achieving a level playing field for EU companies; |
| --- | --- |

40.

shares the Commission's view that negotiations of bilateral trade agreements, in particular Free Trade Agreements (FTA), are a key instrument for achieving a level playing field for EU companies;

| 41. | urges the Commission to adhere to the principle of the reciprocity of standards in negotiations on the agreements, at both bilateral level and at the level of the WTO; |
| --- | --- |

41.

urges the Commission to adhere to the principle of the reciprocity of standards in negotiations on the agreements, at both bilateral level and at the level of the WTO;

| 42. | encourages the Commission to not hesitate to employ all the force and determination needed to apply measures against the unfair trade practices of third countries and to modernise its trade protection instruments; |
| --- | --- |

42.

encourages the Commission to not hesitate to employ all the force and determination needed to apply measures against the unfair trade practices of third countries and to modernise its trade protection instruments;

| 43. | urges the Commission to verify in detail that the Surveillance 2 system ensures at least the same surveillance and monitoring guarantees against unfair subsidies dumping as the system of prior surveillance of imports of certain iron and steel products ((EU) No 1241/2009); |
| --- | --- |

43.

urges the Commission to verify in detail that the Surveillance 2 system ensures at least the same surveillance and monitoring guarantees against unfair subsidies dumping as the system of prior surveillance of imports of certain iron and steel products ((EU) No 1241/2009);

| 44. | voices its concern regarding the length of time — on average two years — that the European Commission needs to instigate anti-dumping measures whereas, in the case of the USA, this period is only six months, and calls on the Commission to take steps that will enable it to work more swiftly; |
| --- | --- |

44.

voices its concern regarding the length of time — on average two years — that the European Commission needs to instigate anti-dumping measures whereas, in the case of the USA, this period is only six months, and calls on the Commission to take steps that will enable it to work more swiftly;

| 45. | supports the Commission in its efforts to do everything in its power to guarantee freedom of access to primary and secondary raw materials markets, particularly markets for iron ore, coking coal and recyclable materials, and considers that such freedom of access is an absolute pre-condition for ensuring the competitiveness of the European steel industry in global terms; |
| --- | --- |

45.

supports the Commission in its efforts to do everything in its power to guarantee freedom of access to primary and secondary raw materials markets, particularly markets for iron ore, coking coal and recyclable materials, and considers that such freedom of access is an absolute pre-condition for ensuring the competitiveness of the European steel industry in global terms;

| 46. | sees higher productivity, favourable conditions for investment and efforts to innovate as important preconditions for the steel industry's development and long-term survival in the EU. Improving energy efficiency would also be a good way of reducing energy costs, which could help to increase competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

46.

sees higher productivity, favourable conditions for investment and efforts to innovate as important preconditions for the steel industry's development and long-term survival in the EU. Improving energy efficiency would also be a good way of reducing energy costs, which could help to increase competitiveness;

| 47. | points out that the Communication from the Commission does not mention logistics costs, especially with regard to maritime transport, the supply of primary raw materials, security of supply and economic development linked to port activities; |
| --- | --- |

47.

points out that the Communication from the Commission does not mention logistics costs, especially with regard to maritime transport, the supply of primary raw materials, security of supply and economic development linked to port activities;

| 48. | endorses the Commission's intention to improve the general conditions underpinning the growth potential of the EU's steel industry, including security of energy supply and competitive energy prices as well as encouraging more resource-efficient, low-carbon production; |
| --- | --- |

48.

endorses the Commission's intention to improve the general conditions underpinning the growth potential of the EU's steel industry, including security of energy supply and competitive energy prices as well as encouraging more resource-efficient, low-carbon production;

| 49. | supports all initiatives aimed at monitoring and controlling raw materials markets, including the scrap market, to combat illegal exports of scrap; |
| --- | --- |

49.

supports all initiatives aimed at monitoring and controlling raw materials markets, including the scrap market, to combat illegal exports of scrap;

| 50. | urges the Commission to carry out a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed measures for the European steel industry and to ensure that they are not in conflict with other European policies, particularly on environmental protection and sustainable development; |
| --- | --- |

50.

urges the Commission to carry out a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed measures for the European steel industry and to ensure that they are not in conflict with other European policies, particularly on environmental protection and sustainable development;

| 51. | considers that the Action Plan for a competitive and sustainable steel industry in Europe should not be seen as an end in itself, but that the measures it proposes must necessarily be accompanied by efforts on the part of industry to stimulate investment and create jobs at European plants; |
| --- | --- |

51.

considers that the Action Plan for a competitive and sustainable steel industry in Europe should not be seen as an end in itself, but that the measures it proposes must necessarily be accompanied by efforts on the part of industry to stimulate investment and create jobs at European plants;

| 52. | notes that the proposed Action Plan as it stands does not appear to run counter to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in that it complies with Article 173 TFEU, which stipulates that the EU has a supporting competence in industrial policy; |
| --- | --- |

52.

notes that the proposed Action Plan as it stands does not appear to run counter to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in that it complies with Article 173 TFEU, which stipulates that the EU has a supporting competence in industrial policy;

| 53. | insists that, in accordance with Article 173 TFEU, the European Commission exploit the full potential of the Lisbon Treaty where industrial policy is concerned, particularly by taking any useful initiative to promote coordination between Member States on industrial policy, through the establishment of guidelines and indicators, the organisation of exchange of best practice, and the preparation of the necessary elements for periodic monitoring and evaluation. |
| --- | --- |

53.

insists that, in accordance with Article 173 TFEU, the European Commission exploit the full potential of the Lisbon Treaty where industrial policy is concerned, particularly by taking any useful initiative to promote coordination between Member States on industrial policy, through the establishment of guidelines and indicators, the organisation of exchange of best practice, and the preparation of the necessary elements for periodic monitoring and evaluation.

Brussels, 28 November 2013.

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  COM(2013) 407 final.

1

(2)  CoR opinion of 11 April 2013 on A stronger European industry for growth and economic recovery, rapporteur: Claude Gewerc (PES/FR), CDR2255-2012_00_00_TRA_AC.

2

A stronger European industry for growth and economic recovery

(3)  CoR draft opinion (rapporteur: Christian Buchmann (EPP/AT)), CDR1997-2013_00_00_TRA_PA.

3

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/27

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Disability, sport and leisure’

2014/C 114/06

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Context classification

| 1. | draws attention to the fact that the estimated number of people with a disability in the EU is around 80 million persons, which means approximately 15% of the population. People with reduced mobility are estimated to represent more than 40%; |
| --- | --- |

1.

draws attention to the fact that the estimated number of people with a disability in the EU is around 80 million persons, which means approximately 15% of the population. People with reduced mobility are estimated to represent more than 40%;

| 2. | stresses that considering the higher risk of disability at older ages and the global increase in chronic health conditions, the number of people with a disability may increase. Hence, European regions will face further challenges in the future; |
| --- | --- |

2.

stresses that considering the higher risk of disability at older ages and the global increase in chronic health conditions, the number of people with a disability may increase. Hence, European regions will face further challenges in the future;

| 3. | underlines awareness that there exists no common definition of disability throughout the EU, and that legal definitions have been an issue of much debate and interpreted in many different ways. Disability is a complex phenomenon and a multidimensional experience, reflecting an interaction between a person's physical and intellectual characteristics and the characteristics of the society in which they live. It is therefore necessary to introduce concepts such as ‘people with a disability’; |
| --- | --- |

3.

underlines awareness that there exists no common definition of disability throughout the EU, and that legal definitions have been an issue of much debate and interpreted in many different ways. Disability is a complex phenomenon and a multidimensional experience, reflecting an interaction between a person's physical and intellectual characteristics and the characteristics of the society in which they live. It is therefore necessary to introduce concepts such as ‘people with a disability’;

| 4. | asserts a lack of knowledge and misconceptions about the true effects of disabilities and emphasises the need to focus on ‘abilities’ that can be explicitly seen when it comes to sports performance; |
| --- | --- |

4.

asserts a lack of knowledge and misconceptions about the true effects of disabilities and emphasises the need to focus on ‘abilities’ that can be explicitly seen when it comes to sports performance;

| 5. | recognises the value and importance of physical activity and sport for people with a disability and the fact that it can make an effective contribution to achieving the EU's strategic goals, including the Europe 2020 objectives. Substantial progress has been made in adaptive sport and sport for people with disabilities in the last few years. The most recent example was the London 2012 Paralympic Games, with the media going out of their way to cover and promote the paralympic movement; |
| --- | --- |

5.

recognises the value and importance of physical activity and sport for people with a disability and the fact that it can make an effective contribution to achieving the EU's strategic goals, including the Europe 2020 objectives. Substantial progress has been made in adaptive sport and sport for people with disabilities in the last few years. The most recent example was the London 2012 Paralympic Games, with the media going out of their way to cover and promote the paralympic movement;

| 6. | draws attention to the fact that sport indisputably contributes to a person's overall wellbeing and has a positive impact on the potential rehabilitation and habilitation of people with disabilities, and that the possibility of participating in sporting activities is, for people with disabilities, above all a fundamental human right; |
| --- | --- |

6.

draws attention to the fact that sport indisputably contributes to a person's overall wellbeing and has a positive impact on the potential rehabilitation and habilitation of people with disabilities, and that the possibility of participating in sporting activities is, for people with disabilities, above all a fundamental human right;

| 7. | points out that ‘sport for people with a disability’ covers a wide field of activity, ranging from elite sport to recreational sport concepts and from adapted physical education to rehabilitation sport approaches, going alongside or even beyond the complexity of defining the term ‘sport’. That is one of the reasons for the different definitions existing in the different European regions. There are various nuances in the area of ‘physical activity’ and ‘sport’, with the effect that physical activity is geared to sport, recreation, something that is good for one's health, etc. This is in any case the reason why people do it, although as a general rule a sports activity implies an improvement in health status, both physical and mental, for everybody; |
| --- | --- |

7.

points out that ‘sport for people with a disability’ covers a wide field of activity, ranging from elite sport to recreational sport concepts and from adapted physical education to rehabilitation sport approaches, going alongside or even beyond the complexity of defining the term ‘sport’. That is one of the reasons for the different definitions existing in the different European regions. There are various nuances in the area of ‘physical activity’ and ‘sport’, with the effect that physical activity is geared to sport, recreation, something that is good for one's health, etc. This is in any case the reason why people do it, although as a general rule a sports activity implies an improvement in health status, both physical and mental, for everybody;

| 8. | states awareness of considerable debates on the different terms and concepts related to and used by the sector. In this context the term used is ‘sport(s) for people with a disability’ aiming at a people-centred approach and addressing a generic scope; |
| --- | --- |

8.

states awareness of considerable debates on the different terms and concepts related to and used by the sector. In this context the term used is ‘sport(s) for people with a disability’ aiming at a people-centred approach and addressing a generic scope;

| 9. | reiterates the need to fully respect the principle of subsidiarity and the autonomy of sport's governing structures, including independent sports organisations. The recommendations made in the present opinion seek to act as a catalyst in order to increase the impact of action undertaken by Member States and local and regional authorities and to stimulate a change of perception among people with a disability towards their abilities in the community at large; |
| --- | --- |

9.

reiterates the need to fully respect the principle of subsidiarity and the autonomy of sport's governing structures, including independent sports organisations. The recommendations made in the present opinion seek to act as a catalyst in order to increase the impact of action undertaken by Member States and local and regional authorities and to stimulate a change of perception among people with a disability towards their abilities in the community at large;

Political background

| 10. | expresses its appreciation and support for references made by EU policies to the recognition of sport for people with a disability, including the Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (1), the Commission's Communication on Developing the European Dimension on Sport (2) and the EC's White Paper on Sport (3); |
| --- | --- |

10.

expresses its appreciation and support for references made by EU policies to the recognition of sport for people with a disability, including the Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (1), the Commission's Communication on Developing the European Dimension on Sport (2) and the EC's White Paper on Sport (3);

| 11. | regrets, however, the absence of any reference to people with disabilities in the European Commission's initial proposal for ERASMUS+, the new Union Programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport for 2014-2020; urges to this effect the inclusion in the new programme, currently still under negotiation, of a clear reference to the need to promote sustainable and inclusive growth by facilitating access to sports activities for persons with disabilities; |
| --- | --- |

11.

regrets, however, the absence of any reference to people with disabilities in the European Commission's initial proposal for ERASMUS+, the new Union Programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport for 2014-2020; urges to this effect the inclusion in the new programme, currently still under negotiation, of a clear reference to the need to promote sustainable and inclusive growth by facilitating access to sports activities for persons with disabilities;

| 12. | agrees that national, regional and local authorities can, to the extent of their own powers and budgets, play an important role in the development of sport for people with a disability, including promotion and investment in sport infrastructure and sustainable sporting activities and underlines the necessity of assuring project funds for those regions where the infrastructure of schools and other educational institutions is underdeveloped and there are no or limited possibilities for disabled children to practise sports; |
| --- | --- |

12.

agrees that national, regional and local authorities can, to the extent of their own powers and budgets, play an important role in the development of sport for people with a disability, including promotion and investment in sport infrastructure and sustainable sporting activities and underlines the necessity of assuring project funds for those regions where the infrastructure of schools and other educational institutions is underdeveloped and there are no or limited possibilities for disabled children to practise sports;

| 13. | when it comes to the use of public facilities, the public authorities must give due consideration to the question of sport for people with a disability to ensure that the requirement to establish equal living conditions for people with disabilities is taken into account. In this regard, accessibility is a fundamental issue; |
| --- | --- |

13.

when it comes to the use of public facilities, the public authorities must give due consideration to the question of sport for people with a disability to ensure that the requirement to establish equal living conditions for people with disabilities is taken into account. In this regard, accessibility is a fundamental issue;

| 14. | affirms the specific role of stakeholders active in sport for people with a disability in order to exploit the potential of sport for social inclusion, integration and equal opportunities; |
| --- | --- |

14.

affirms the specific role of stakeholders active in sport for people with a disability in order to exploit the potential of sport for social inclusion, integration and equal opportunities;

| 15. | points out that sport for people with a disability seems to often only be specifically referred to in the context of social inclusion. It calls for an extensive distinction between different scopes of sports for people with a disability that may refer to elite sports, leisure sports, physical education, education and training opportunities through sports, adapted physical activity, rehabilitation sports or sports activities with a specific therapeutic focus; |
| --- | --- |

15.

points out that sport for people with a disability seems to often only be specifically referred to in the context of social inclusion. It calls for an extensive distinction between different scopes of sports for people with a disability that may refer to elite sports, leisure sports, physical education, education and training opportunities through sports, adapted physical activity, rehabilitation sports or sports activities with a specific therapeutic focus;

| 16. | advocates better recognition of relevant sector representatives in all mainstream sport development and reporting activities supported by the EU institutions. Allocation of specific resources to enable such involvement, as well as for specialist training for technical professionals working in the field of sport, should be considered; |
| --- | --- |

16.

advocates better recognition of relevant sector representatives in all mainstream sport development and reporting activities supported by the EU institutions. Allocation of specific resources to enable such involvement, as well as for specialist training for technical professionals working in the field of sport, should be considered;

| 17. | calls for the development of a comprehensive policy document based on and linked to existing policies but specifically dedicated to the sector of sport for people with a disability, in order to prioritise the approach to fundamental issues inherent within the sector; |
| --- | --- |

17.

calls for the development of a comprehensive policy document based on and linked to existing policies but specifically dedicated to the sector of sport for people with a disability, in order to prioritise the approach to fundamental issues inherent within the sector;

Specific challenges: sport participation

| 18. | indicates that despite growing policy interest in promoting the participation of people with a disability in sports, participation rates are still too low. Among other things, this is due to limited access to sports infrastructure adapted to the needs of people with disabilities; |
| --- | --- |

18.

indicates that despite growing policy interest in promoting the participation of people with a disability in sports, participation rates are still too low. Among other things, this is due to limited access to sports infrastructure adapted to the needs of people with disabilities;

| 19. | notes that besides physical, socio-economic and communication barriers, participation in sports is affected by cultural barriers and psychological factors, including attitudes towards disability from mainstream sport providers and stakeholders. These attitudes are the result of ignorance and insufficient resources for dealing with a different situation. Information campaigns and training courses should be organised to ensure that people with a disability are accepted in sports activities. It is recommended that any measures for improved access should be established in due consultation with sector stakeholders, as different groups may require different support; |
| --- | --- |

19.

notes that besides physical, socio-economic and communication barriers, participation in sports is affected by cultural barriers and psychological factors, including attitudes towards disability from mainstream sport providers and stakeholders. These attitudes are the result of ignorance and insufficient resources for dealing with a different situation. Information campaigns and training courses should be organised to ensure that people with a disability are accepted in sports activities. It is recommended that any measures for improved access should be established in due consultation with sector stakeholders, as different groups may require different support;

| 20. | the improvement of accessibility, in terms of adequate physical access to sports facilities and better communication, indicates a crucial starting point in order to increase participation rates; |
| --- | --- |

20.

the improvement of accessibility, in terms of adequate physical access to sports facilities and better communication, indicates a crucial starting point in order to increase participation rates;

| 21. | calls for coordinated awareness-raising campaigns on existing sporting opportunities. Such campaigns could be set up at European level but must be brought down to the regional and local levels, where specific opportunities are available. The persons with a disability themselves should be addressed and informed. At its best such campaigns are established with support from the mainstream sport movement, national sport and disability sport authorities and disability organisations (in particular associations); in addition, it is important to organise information campaigns not just for people with a disability, but also for the general public, in order to help them understand, accept, integrate and learn how to help their peers with disabilities. People with disabilities must be empowered to the greatest extent possible, facilitated and supported to propose, promote and organise such events; |
| --- | --- |

21.

calls for coordinated awareness-raising campaigns on existing sporting opportunities. Such campaigns could be set up at European level but must be brought down to the regional and local levels, where specific opportunities are available. The persons with a disability themselves should be addressed and informed. At its best such campaigns are established with support from the mainstream sport movement, national sport and disability sport authorities and disability organisations (in particular associations); in addition, it is important to organise information campaigns not just for people with a disability, but also for the general public, in order to help them understand, accept, integrate and learn how to help their peers with disabilities. People with disabilities must be empowered to the greatest extent possible, facilitated and supported to propose, promote and organise such events;

| 22. | stresses that target groups may need to be addressed individually in view of their abilities, age or social situation; in particular, the young generation must be addressed and supported. Similarly, how the sports sector is organised in each Member State needs to be taken into account, as do any special local and regional features. Support should be given to the provision of reliable, accessible and regularly updated information, so that target groups can be systematically informed about sports to which they can have access. Facilitating and supporting the development of organised grassroots movements in this regard can facilitate the dissemination of such information and accessibility; |
| --- | --- |

22.

stresses that target groups may need to be addressed individually in view of their abilities, age or social situation; in particular, the young generation must be addressed and supported. Similarly, how the sports sector is organised in each Member State needs to be taken into account, as do any special local and regional features. Support should be given to the provision of reliable, accessible and regularly updated information, so that target groups can be systematically informed about sports to which they can have access. Facilitating and supporting the development of organised grassroots movements in this regard can facilitate the dissemination of such information and accessibility;

| 23. | a specially adapted transport network needs to be available locally and regionally to enable people with a disability to get to sports facilities and practise sport, at both amateur and competition level; |
| --- | --- |

23.

a specially adapted transport network needs to be available locally and regionally to enable people with a disability to get to sports facilities and practise sport, at both amateur and competition level;

| 24. | points out that parents play a major role in the empowerment of youngsters for sports participation, and that volunteers constitute the backbone of the sector. Therefore, there is a need to raise awareness about the importance of volunteer work and the setting-up of platforms for engaging and training volunteers, as well as measures for recognising and rewarding their contribution, must be envisaged; |
| --- | --- |

24.

points out that parents play a major role in the empowerment of youngsters for sports participation, and that volunteers constitute the backbone of the sector. Therefore, there is a need to raise awareness about the importance of volunteer work and the setting-up of platforms for engaging and training volunteers, as well as measures for recognising and rewarding their contribution, must be envisaged;

| 25. | recommends creating an information platform on EU sports facilities, together with a fully accessible webpage to inform people with disabilities about sports infrastructure, technical possibilities, etc., in the places where they live; |
| --- | --- |

25.

recommends creating an information platform on EU sports facilities, together with a fully accessible webpage to inform people with disabilities about sports infrastructure, technical possibilities, etc., in the places where they live;

| 26. | draws attention to the fact that some groups of people face double or triple discrimination when they are confronted not only with one disability, but with multiple disabilities, or when they are also from migrant or minority backgrounds or are victims of social exclusion due to homophobia or gender. Specific support and equal opportunities of access to sports for all needs to be assured; |
| --- | --- |

26.

draws attention to the fact that some groups of people face double or triple discrimination when they are confronted not only with one disability, but with multiple disabilities, or when they are also from migrant or minority backgrounds or are victims of social exclusion due to homophobia or gender. Specific support and equal opportunities of access to sports for all needs to be assured;

| 27. | notes that sport for people with a disability must not sit aside the mainstream sport system, and that mainstreaming, which is the sharing of responsibility for sports for people with a disability with mainstream sport organisations, already seems to be a key policy aim. Hence, it must be assured that the inclusion of sport for people with a disability progresses within mainstream sport and that the different organizational patterns, formulas and structures may be used in parallel according to the actual capacities of the people with disabilities and with a view to including them; |
| --- | --- |

27.

notes that sport for people with a disability must not sit aside the mainstream sport system, and that mainstreaming, which is the sharing of responsibility for sports for people with a disability with mainstream sport organisations, already seems to be a key policy aim. Hence, it must be assured that the inclusion of sport for people with a disability progresses within mainstream sport and that the different organizational patterns, formulas and structures may be used in parallel according to the actual capacities of the people with disabilities and with a view to including them;

| 28. | facilitating the inclusion of people with a disability in sport should be the responsibility of the individual sports federation for each particular branch or speciality, liaising with, and with due regard for the role of, the sports federations working primarily with people with disabilities, the vital role of which in this field must be consolidated; |
| --- | --- |

28.

facilitating the inclusion of people with a disability in sport should be the responsibility of the individual sports federation for each particular branch or speciality, liaising with, and with due regard for the role of, the sports federations working primarily with people with disabilities, the vital role of which in this field must be consolidated;

| 29. | sports federations should encourage sports bodies to take part in their assemblies without voting rights even if they are not members of the federation, if their aim is to promote sports activities for people with a disability; |
| --- | --- |

29.

sports federations should encourage sports bodies to take part in their assemblies without voting rights even if they are not members of the federation, if their aim is to promote sports activities for people with a disability;

| 30. | notes, on the basis of identified examples, that the approach to connect tourism with inclusive leisure sport opportunities constitutes a useful tool for establishing first contact with sports for people with a disability in order to raise participation rates and to raise awareness of their abilities towards the wider public; |
| --- | --- |

30.

notes, on the basis of identified examples, that the approach to connect tourism with inclusive leisure sport opportunities constitutes a useful tool for establishing first contact with sports for people with a disability in order to raise participation rates and to raise awareness of their abilities towards the wider public;

| 31. | include high-quality, updated information on sports activities for people with disabilities, together with information on transport and special access to sports facilities, as part of sports tourism advertising; |
| --- | --- |

31.

include high-quality, updated information on sports activities for people with disabilities, together with information on transport and special access to sports facilities, as part of sports tourism advertising;

Specific Challenges: Education

| 32. | recognises that adequate sport sector development for people with a disability calls for well-educated and trained professionals; |
| --- | --- |

32.

recognises that adequate sport sector development for people with a disability calls for well-educated and trained professionals;

| 33. | considers that even when stigma is absent, persons with a disability may still face exclusion because many people do not know how to accommodate persons with a disability and include them in sport activities and structures. It calls for concerted information through education and training initiatives addressed not only to those directly involved in sports provision but at a larger scale towards the general public, e.g. by making use of easily accessible online training tools. In this regard, general awareness regarding the rights, needs and abilities of people with a disability should be raised in parallel; |
| --- | --- |

33.

considers that even when stigma is absent, persons with a disability may still face exclusion because many people do not know how to accommodate persons with a disability and include them in sport activities and structures. It calls for concerted information through education and training initiatives addressed not only to those directly involved in sports provision but at a larger scale towards the general public, e.g. by making use of easily accessible online training tools. In this regard, general awareness regarding the rights, needs and abilities of people with a disability should be raised in parallel;

| 34. | stresses that all pupils should have access to physical and sports education and that no disability should be a barrier to inclusion in school sport programmes. PE at schools is where young people often get their first taste of and develop a passion for sports; youngsters with a disability are no different. In addition, the school sport environment provides the opportunity to educate pupils without a disability and makes them aware of the abilities of their class mates. In this regard, the introduction of ‘inclusive sports programmes’ shall be especially supported. The idea of reverse integration, meaning the inclusion of young sportsmen and women without a disability within sports for people with a disability, constitutes a good example to change attitudes towards the abilities of fellow participants. Similarly, initiatives such as mixed ability sport are to be supported and developed. To reach this goal, specific education and training for teachers in education centres, particularly PE teachers is essential, as is providing parents of disabled children with access to information on the various sporting activities available; |
| --- | --- |

34.

stresses that all pupils should have access to physical and sports education and that no disability should be a barrier to inclusion in school sport programmes. PE at schools is where young people often get their first taste of and develop a passion for sports; youngsters with a disability are no different. In addition, the school sport environment provides the opportunity to educate pupils without a disability and makes them aware of the abilities of their class mates. In this regard, the introduction of ‘inclusive sports programmes’ shall be especially supported. The idea of reverse integration, meaning the inclusion of young sportsmen and women without a disability within sports for people with a disability, constitutes a good example to change attitudes towards the abilities of fellow participants. Similarly, initiatives such as mixed ability sport are to be supported and developed. To reach this goal, specific education and training for teachers in education centres, particularly PE teachers is essential, as is providing parents of disabled children with access to information on the various sporting activities available;

| 35. | notes that the knowledge and skills of coaches are often not exploited due to lack of exchange and coordination between stakeholders in sport for people with a disability and in mainstream sport. It is proposed to introduce cooperative training initiatives between these organisations, with the support of training providers and public authorities; |
| --- | --- |

35.

notes that the knowledge and skills of coaches are often not exploited due to lack of exchange and coordination between stakeholders in sport for people with a disability and in mainstream sport. It is proposed to introduce cooperative training initiatives between these organisations, with the support of training providers and public authorities;

| 36. | recommends involving representatives of higher education more closely in adjustment processes to prevent the exclusion of people with disabilities. The purpose of such involvement would be to bring about changes in training for future PE teachers, enabling them to have a better understanding of the various health issues faced by their pupils; |
| --- | --- |

36.

recommends involving representatives of higher education more closely in adjustment processes to prevent the exclusion of people with disabilities. The purpose of such involvement would be to bring about changes in training for future PE teachers, enabling them to have a better understanding of the various health issues faced by their pupils;

| 37. | considers that often sports for people with a disability need to be given a better image, by promoting an elite sport for top sportsmen and women with a disability, and obtaining the same status as for elite able-bodied sportspeople. Awareness-raising about elite sports performed by athletes with a disability is widely considered to lead to a change in this perception. To this effect, the communication strategy related to the Paralympics Games and high level sporting events for people with a disability is very important; |
| --- | --- |

37.

considers that often sports for people with a disability need to be given a better image, by promoting an elite sport for top sportsmen and women with a disability, and obtaining the same status as for elite able-bodied sportspeople. Awareness-raising about elite sports performed by athletes with a disability is widely considered to lead to a change in this perception. To this effect, the communication strategy related to the Paralympics Games and high level sporting events for people with a disability is very important;

| 38. | acknowledges that sport for people with a disability is heavily dependent on volunteering. It recognises that qualitative training of volunteers must be further supported. In some regards, it needs to be adapted to the needs of its stakeholders. In addition, volunteer management is becoming increasingly important. Organisations providing sports for people with a disability need to improve through a process of implementing human resource management and quality development tools. Professionals will have to be trained if we want to improve quality. They are even more essential given the particular nature of the public concerned. The underlying aim should be to make this the work of professionals; |
| --- | --- |

38.

acknowledges that sport for people with a disability is heavily dependent on volunteering. It recognises that qualitative training of volunteers must be further supported. In some regards, it needs to be adapted to the needs of its stakeholders. In addition, volunteer management is becoming increasingly important. Organisations providing sports for people with a disability need to improve through a process of implementing human resource management and quality development tools. Professionals will have to be trained if we want to improve quality. They are even more essential given the particular nature of the public concerned. The underlying aim should be to make this the work of professionals;

| 39. | regrets that the potential of people with a disability is often underestimated. It underlines that sports can help people with a disability to strengthen their personal development and thereby contribute significantly towards their successful integration into work; |
| --- | --- |

39.

regrets that the potential of people with a disability is often underestimated. It underlines that sports can help people with a disability to strengthen their personal development and thereby contribute significantly towards their successful integration into work;

| 40. | supports the EU Guidelines on Dual Careers of Athletes (4), which underline that ‘it would amount to considerable progress for sport in general and disability sport in particular if measures in support of dual careers were applied equally for all athletes’. The CoR also fully shares the view expressed in the Guidelines that ‘as many sport disciplines for people with a disability are integrated in mainstream sport organisations, special attention is needed for this group so that equal treatment can be achieved and specific pathways can be developed if pathways for able-bodied athletes cannot be used’; |
| --- | --- |

40.

supports the EU Guidelines on Dual Careers of Athletes (4), which underline that ‘it would amount to considerable progress for sport in general and disability sport in particular if measures in support of dual careers were applied equally for all athletes’. The CoR also fully shares the view expressed in the Guidelines that ‘as many sport disciplines for people with a disability are integrated in mainstream sport organisations, special attention is needed for this group so that equal treatment can be achieved and specific pathways can be developed if pathways for able-bodied athletes cannot be used’;

| 41. | stresses that the sector should already seek the empowerment of its youngest sportsmen and women and accompany them in their personal development. In this regard, specific education initiatives for young sportsmen and women offered during sporting events should be supported; |
| --- | --- |

41.

stresses that the sector should already seek the empowerment of its youngest sportsmen and women and accompany them in their personal development. In this regard, specific education initiatives for young sportsmen and women offered during sporting events should be supported;

Specific challenges: health

| 42. | recognises the value of sport in health education and promotion, and underlines the specific relationship between adapted physical activities and rehabilitation for people with a disability as it concerns their physical and mental health; |
| --- | --- |

42.

recognises the value of sport in health education and promotion, and underlines the specific relationship between adapted physical activities and rehabilitation for people with a disability as it concerns their physical and mental health;

| 43. | supports the work developed by the EU Expert Group ‘Sport, Health and Participation’, mandated by the Council to propose measures to promote health-enhancing physical activity and participation in grassroots sport and to identify respective measures by mid-2013; the CoR underlines that adapted physical activity and sports as a therapeutic tool for people with a disability should be explicitly recognised and supported; |
| --- | --- |

43.

supports the work developed by the EU Expert Group ‘Sport, Health and Participation’, mandated by the Council to propose measures to promote health-enhancing physical activity and participation in grassroots sport and to identify respective measures by mid-2013; the CoR underlines that adapted physical activity and sports as a therapeutic tool for people with a disability should be explicitly recognised and supported;

| 44. | acknowledges the outcomes of the EU Expert Group ‘Anti-Doping’ mandated by the Council to draft EU comments to the revision of the World Anti-Doping Code of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the importance of ‘Good Governance’ in sport. The CoR recommends the further inclusion of stakeholders from the Paralympic movement; |
| --- | --- |

44.

acknowledges the outcomes of the EU Expert Group ‘Anti-Doping’ mandated by the Council to draft EU comments to the revision of the World Anti-Doping Code of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the importance of ‘Good Governance’ in sport. The CoR recommends the further inclusion of stakeholders from the Paralympic movement;

| 45. | considers that all funding instruments under the new Multi-Annual Financial Framework should include the issue of accessibility for persons with disabilities; |
| --- | --- |

45.

considers that all funding instruments under the new Multi-Annual Financial Framework should include the issue of accessibility for persons with disabilities;

Specific Challenges: Financial & Structural Support

| 46. | takes note of the sport related budget line proposed in the Erasmus+ programme, which is still under negotiation. Urges, however, the European Commission to explicitly refer to sport for people with disabilities in the Erasmus+ programme guide to beneficiaries and to acknowledge sport for this group as a priority within the programme's Sport Action; |
| --- | --- |

46.

takes note of the sport related budget line proposed in the Erasmus+ programme, which is still under negotiation. Urges, however, the European Commission to explicitly refer to sport for people with disabilities in the Erasmus+ programme guide to beneficiaries and to acknowledge sport for this group as a priority within the programme's Sport Action;

| 47. | suggests that the Commission should support specific actions for projects that support the promotion of sport for people with a disability at the local and regional levels; |
| --- | --- |

47.

suggests that the Commission should support specific actions for projects that support the promotion of sport for people with a disability at the local and regional levels;

| 48. | feels that the sector is characterised by a certain fragmentation between different EU instruments implementing similar objectives. Better alignment together with long-term funding commitments for at least the main sector representatives at the European level would greatly benefit the sector; |
| --- | --- |

48.

feels that the sector is characterised by a certain fragmentation between different EU instruments implementing similar objectives. Better alignment together with long-term funding commitments for at least the main sector representatives at the European level would greatly benefit the sector;

| 49. | encourages the use of EU Structural Funds for the development of inclusive and accessible sport infrastructures at the local and regional levels. Financing research in the field of technologies related to sport for people with disabilities through Horizon 2020 is also essential. It is essential to invest in research and innovation, primarily through universities and businesses in this sector. Many professionals are in fact already writing their doctoral theses in this field. A special effort needs to be made in the area of sport-based therapies such as equine therapy; |
| --- | --- |

49.

encourages the use of EU Structural Funds for the development of inclusive and accessible sport infrastructures at the local and regional levels. Financing research in the field of technologies related to sport for people with disabilities through Horizon 2020 is also essential. It is essential to invest in research and innovation, primarily through universities and businesses in this sector. Many professionals are in fact already writing their doctoral theses in this field. A special effort needs to be made in the area of sport-based therapies such as equine therapy;

| 50. | stimulates further and extended long-term support by EU institutions of inclusive sports events especially for the group of young people with a disability; |
| --- | --- |

50.

stimulates further and extended long-term support by EU institutions of inclusive sports events especially for the group of young people with a disability;

The role of local and regional authorities

| 51. | believes that local and regional authorities play a fundamental role in developing the European dimension of sport for people with a disability, within the limits of their institutional remit; |
| --- | --- |

51.

believes that local and regional authorities play a fundamental role in developing the European dimension of sport for people with a disability, within the limits of their institutional remit;

| 52. | stresses the need to strengthen the involvement of local and regional authorities on the basis of an agenda drawn up jointly by the EC, the Council and national authorities responsible for sports, people with a disability and disability sports so that they are included in mainstream sport. Local and regional authorities have the potential to bridge the gap between EU and local levels, in order to reach clubs, schools or parents' initiatives; |
| --- | --- |

52.

stresses the need to strengthen the involvement of local and regional authorities on the basis of an agenda drawn up jointly by the EC, the Council and national authorities responsible for sports, people with a disability and disability sports so that they are included in mainstream sport. Local and regional authorities have the potential to bridge the gap between EU and local levels, in order to reach clubs, schools or parents' initiatives;

| 53. | acknowledges that especially at the local and regional level experience and structured partnerships exist to promote the development of and participation in sports for people with a disability. It calls for the exchange of these good practices and expresses its own capacity to disseminate them with the respective support from relevant EU institutions and sector stakeholders. Translation of existing material constitutes a major challenge and should be supported. Introducing an awarding process for ‘outstanding practices’ should be considered; |
| --- | --- |

53.

acknowledges that especially at the local and regional level experience and structured partnerships exist to promote the development of and participation in sports for people with a disability. It calls for the exchange of these good practices and expresses its own capacity to disseminate them with the respective support from relevant EU institutions and sector stakeholders. Translation of existing material constitutes a major challenge and should be supported. Introducing an awarding process for ‘outstanding practices’ should be considered;

| 54. | supports the system of regional disability sport development officers. They could serve as a source for the exchange and implementation of good practice, for example by means of IT tools, and could make the link between European policies and regional realities. The promotion and implementation of European projects to exchange good practice will help us to come up with viable solutions for common problems and find out more about the needs of other regions and countries; |
| --- | --- |

54.

supports the system of regional disability sport development officers. They could serve as a source for the exchange and implementation of good practice, for example by means of IT tools, and could make the link between European policies and regional realities. The promotion and implementation of European projects to exchange good practice will help us to come up with viable solutions for common problems and find out more about the needs of other regions and countries;

Additional conclusions

| 55. | takes note of the first initiatives to promote a ‘European Week of Sports’ and underlines the need to include specific sports for people with a disability and to integrate them into mainstream sports activities. It stresses that, additionally, the establishment of an annual ‘European Day for Sport for People with a Disability’ should be envisaged; |
| --- | --- |

55.

takes note of the first initiatives to promote a ‘European Week of Sports’ and underlines the need to include specific sports for people with a disability and to integrate them into mainstream sports activities. It stresses that, additionally, the establishment of an annual ‘European Day for Sport for People with a Disability’ should be envisaged;

| 56. | notes a lack of comparable information from the regions about the sector, and calls for the establishment of reliable data collection processes. This should include commissioning a specific Eurobarometer Survey on Sport for People with a Disability, or at least the integration of more specific questions relating to the sector in future Eurobarometer Surveys on Sport and/or Disability; |
| --- | --- |

56.

notes a lack of comparable information from the regions about the sector, and calls for the establishment of reliable data collection processes. This should include commissioning a specific Eurobarometer Survey on Sport for People with a Disability, or at least the integration of more specific questions relating to the sector in future Eurobarometer Surveys on Sport and/or Disability;

| 57. | strongly encourages the establishment of a European Expert Group on Sport for People with a Disability that recognises the different remits of the sector and makes it possible to address and receive input from a wide range of sector stakeholders. It would be useful for this EU Expert Group to take the following measures:






  — | as regards definitions






  — | to suggest a common definition of the concepts of sport for people with physical disabilities, sport for people with intellectual disabilities and mixed ability sport, in order to make it easier to promote them; |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

57.

strongly encourages the establishment of a European Expert Group on Sport for People with a Disability that recognises the different remits of the sector and makes it possible to address and receive input from a wide range of sector stakeholders. It would be useful for this EU Expert Group to take the following measures:

—

as regards definitions

—

to suggest a common definition of the concepts of sport for people with physical disabilities, sport for people with intellectual disabilities and mixed ability sport, in order to make it easier to promote them;

| — | as regards technical measures






  — | to identify and collect key regional and local practices in order to encourage modelling and dissemination thereof; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

as regards technical measures

—

to identify and collect key regional and local practices in order to encourage modelling and dissemination thereof;

| — | to give to the political level the technical tools that are essential to increase their awareness and to enable the Committee of the Regions to achieve its aim of being a facilitator in this field where regional and local authorities play the leading roles; |
| --- | --- |

—

to give to the political level the technical tools that are essential to increase their awareness and to enable the Committee of the Regions to achieve its aim of being a facilitator in this field where regional and local authorities play the leading roles;

Brussels, 29 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  COM(2010) 636 final

1

(2)  COM(2011) 12 final

2

(3)  COM(2007) 391 final

3

(4)  http://ec.europa.eu/sport/library/documents/c3/dual-career-guidelines-final.pdf

4

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/33

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘State aids to fisheries and aquaculture’

2014/C 114/07

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | welcomes the review of the State Aids rules for Fisheries and Aquaculture, and the recent public consultation undertaken by the European Commission as part of this review; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the review of the State Aids rules for Fisheries and Aquaculture, and the recent public consultation undertaken by the European Commission as part of this review;

| 2. | underlines the importance of seeing the review within the context of (i) the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), (ii) the negotiations on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the other European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), and other relevant EU funding programmes to the fisheries and aquaculture sector, and (iii) the wider Modernisation of State Aid agenda led by DG Competition; |
| --- | --- |

2.

underlines the importance of seeing the review within the context of (i) the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), (ii) the negotiations on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the other European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), and other relevant EU funding programmes to the fisheries and aquaculture sector, and (iii) the wider Modernisation of State Aid agenda led by DG Competition;

| 3. | expresses strong support for the overarching aims of the reform of the CFP to move towards sustainable fishing, and welcomes the political agreement reached on this under the Irish EU Presidency of the Council of the EU; |
| --- | --- |

3.

expresses strong support for the overarching aims of the reform of the CFP to move towards sustainable fishing, and welcomes the political agreement reached on this under the Irish EU Presidency of the Council of the EU;

| 4. | reiterates that reform of the State Aid regulations for fisheries and aquaculture must be undertaken on the basis of supporting and facilitating delivery of the reform of the CFP as a fundamental underlying principle; similarly the negotiations on the EMFF must ensure that this fund is used to meet the CFP goals; |
| --- | --- |

4.

reiterates that reform of the State Aid regulations for fisheries and aquaculture must be undertaken on the basis of supporting and facilitating delivery of the reform of the CFP as a fundamental underlying principle; similarly the negotiations on the EMFF must ensure that this fund is used to meet the CFP goals;

| 5. | emphasises that the sustainability of the fisheries sector means the long-term viability and durability of the fishing stocks within EU waters, and the socio-economic future of the fishing communities across the EU, with a need to establish a balance in the development of both aspects; |
| --- | --- |

5.

emphasises that the sustainability of the fisheries sector means the long-term viability and durability of the fishing stocks within EU waters, and the socio-economic future of the fishing communities across the EU, with a need to establish a balance in the development of both aspects;

| 6. | draws attention to the paradox facing the EU, with on the one hand a high dependence on imports of fisheries and aquaculture products (around 60% of total consumption) to meet the demands and aspirations of consumers in the EU, and the other hand an essential need to re-establish and respect the MSY of EU fishing stocks to ensure availability for future generations; in this context, reiterates that aquaculture contributes to the supply of the same product as maritime fisheries using sustainable methods and without compromising the conservation of fishing stocks; furthermore, aquaculture ensures high employment levels, operating as a social buffer in times of crisis; |
| --- | --- |

6.

draws attention to the paradox facing the EU, with on the one hand a high dependence on imports of fisheries and aquaculture products (around 60% of total consumption) to meet the demands and aspirations of consumers in the EU, and the other hand an essential need to re-establish and respect the MSY of EU fishing stocks to ensure availability for future generations; in this context, reiterates that aquaculture contributes to the supply of the same product as maritime fisheries using sustainable methods and without compromising the conservation of fishing stocks; furthermore, aquaculture ensures high employment levels, operating as a social buffer in times of crisis;

| 7. | underlines the importance of efficiently targeting aid so that small-scale fleets, which account for the majority of the total EU fleet in terms of vessel numbers should receive a share of the CFP and EMFF that reflects their numeric and socioeconomic representation, on the proviso that they operate on the basis of sustainable fishing practices; |
| --- | --- |

7.

underlines the importance of efficiently targeting aid so that small-scale fleets, which account for the majority of the total EU fleet in terms of vessel numbers should receive a share of the CFP and EMFF that reflects their numeric and socioeconomic representation, on the proviso that they operate on the basis of sustainable fishing practices;

| 8. | underlines that a more sustainable use of public subsidies in the fisheries sector requires strong political will and action at all levels of governance within the EU, as is seen in the failure of the 2002 CFP reforms to deliver on the stated environmental, social and economic objectives, with only 22% of fish stocks at Maximum Sustainable Yields, 35% overexploited and 43% outside safe biological limits (source: IEEP study for European Parliament 2011); |
| --- | --- |

8.

underlines that a more sustainable use of public subsidies in the fisheries sector requires strong political will and action at all levels of governance within the EU, as is seen in the failure of the 2002 CFP reforms to deliver on the stated environmental, social and economic objectives, with only 22% of fish stocks at Maximum Sustainable Yields, 35% overexploited and 43% outside safe biological limits (source: IEEP study for European Parliament 2011);

| 9. | notes the European Court of Auditors Special Report No.12/2011 states that overcapacity of the fishing fleet continues to be one of the main reasons for the failure of the CFP in assuring a sustainable fishing activity; |
| --- | --- |

9.

notes the European Court of Auditors Special Report No.12/2011 states that overcapacity of the fishing fleet continues to be one of the main reasons for the failure of the CFP in assuring a sustainable fishing activity;

| 10. | recognises that achieving this goal of sustainability requires structural changes and diversification within the fisheries sector, and underlines that State Aid rules and measures must facilitate these changes, focusing in particular on supporting the development of the onshore economy (processing industry, sustainable aquaculture, local fish markets, new products, local supply chains etc.), new and sustainable forms of fishing in Europe's seas and oceans (highlighting in particular the role of small scale coastal fishing fleets and artisanal fishing, but also paying special attention to improvements in selectivity, energy efficiency, etc. of other segments of the fleet which contribute to the supply of fishery products in the European union, especially those for human consumption), and the wider marine and aquaculture economy. State Aid must not be used to support unsustainable fishing practices; |
| --- | --- |

10.

recognises that achieving this goal of sustainability requires structural changes and diversification within the fisheries sector, and underlines that State Aid rules and measures must facilitate these changes, focusing in particular on supporting the development of the onshore economy (processing industry, sustainable aquaculture, local fish markets, new products, local supply chains etc.), new and sustainable forms of fishing in Europe's seas and oceans (highlighting in particular the role of small scale coastal fishing fleets and artisanal fishing, but also paying special attention to improvements in selectivity, energy efficiency, etc. of other segments of the fleet which contribute to the supply of fishery products in the European union, especially those for human consumption), and the wider marine and aquaculture economy. State Aid must not be used to support unsustainable fishing practices;

| 11. | recognises the value and importance of the fisheries sector to the EU, noting the high concentration of employment in certain territories and regions of Europe, and the impact that restructuring of the fisheries sector has directly on these communities; |
| --- | --- |

11.

recognises the value and importance of the fisheries sector to the EU, noting the high concentration of employment in certain territories and regions of Europe, and the impact that restructuring of the fisheries sector has directly on these communities;

| 12. | understands that the pressures on rural, coastal and fishing communities are particularly acute in the context of the on-going socio-economic crisis facing Europe, and that this means targeted support at the territorial level is critically important for the long-term prosperity and viability of such communities; |
| --- | --- |

12.

understands that the pressures on rural, coastal and fishing communities are particularly acute in the context of the on-going socio-economic crisis facing Europe, and that this means targeted support at the territorial level is critically important for the long-term prosperity and viability of such communities;

| 13. | notes that the fisheries sector, like many other sectors, is subsidised, and that this presents a significant challenge — in terms of over dependency on public funding — and at the same time an opportunity, as it gives the European Commission, Member States and local/regional authorities, the ability to use public resources to drive through key reforms in the sector; |
| --- | --- |

13.

notes that the fisheries sector, like many other sectors, is subsidised, and that this presents a significant challenge — in terms of over dependency on public funding — and at the same time an opportunity, as it gives the European Commission, Member States and local/regional authorities, the ability to use public resources to drive through key reforms in the sector;

| 14. | reiterates the need to utilise all available resources as effectively as possible and calls for strong prioritisation to be given in the preparation of the Partnership Agreements and future Operational Programmes for the ESIFs to support coastal and fishing communities, set against the backdrop of a reformed State Aid regulatory framework that is sensitive and responsive to the economic needs of such communities; |
| --- | --- |

14.

reiterates the need to utilise all available resources as effectively as possible and calls for strong prioritisation to be given in the preparation of the Partnership Agreements and future Operational Programmes for the ESIFs to support coastal and fishing communities, set against the backdrop of a reformed State Aid regulatory framework that is sensitive and responsive to the economic needs of such communities;

| 15. | calls for flexibility in the use of the ESIFs to ensure resources are targeted at rural, coastal and fishing communities, and calls on the European Commission to make a clear commitment in the revision of the State Aid rules to ensure that these rules enable this to happen in practice rather than hinder this; |
| --- | --- |

15.

calls for flexibility in the use of the ESIFs to ensure resources are targeted at rural, coastal and fishing communities, and calls on the European Commission to make a clear commitment in the revision of the State Aid rules to ensure that these rules enable this to happen in practice rather than hinder this;

| 16. | argues that if mobilised effectively and efficiently, these resources provide an opportunity to transform the EU fishing and aquaculture industries, and help move towards a sustainable fishing and aquaculture sector, whilst supporting the wider aspirations of the Blue Growth Strategy to strengthen the marine and aquaculture economy and its links with the land-based economy; in particular adding value to fish products through developing the onshore economy, local markets, innovative products and consumer awareness (especially regarding issues such as short supply chains, seasonal products and the distinctiveness of the product); |
| --- | --- |

16.

argues that if mobilised effectively and efficiently, these resources provide an opportunity to transform the EU fishing and aquaculture industries, and help move towards a sustainable fishing and aquaculture sector, whilst supporting the wider aspirations of the Blue Growth Strategy to strengthen the marine and aquaculture economy and its links with the land-based economy; in particular adding value to fish products through developing the onshore economy, local markets, innovative products and consumer awareness (especially regarding issues such as short supply chains, seasonal products and the distinctiveness of the product);

| 17. | calls on the European Commission, Member States and other public authorities across Europe to seize the opportunity, and to use 2014-2020 as the period through which to drive forward real change; |
| --- | --- |

17.

calls on the European Commission, Member States and other public authorities across Europe to seize the opportunity, and to use 2014-2020 as the period through which to drive forward real change;

| 18. | notes that the de minimis and the block exemption regulations do not represent the whole picture for subsidies to the fisheries and aquaculture sector, as Member States have the possibility of establishing ‘notified’ aid schemes (requiring pre-approval by the European Commission); |
| --- | --- |

18.

notes that the de minimis and the block exemption regulations do not represent the whole picture for subsidies to the fisheries and aquaculture sector, as Member States have the possibility of establishing ‘notified’ aid schemes (requiring pre-approval by the European Commission);

| 19. | notes that the fisheries sector also benefits from fuel tax exemptions that provide a direct benefit in terms of operational costs of fishing vessels, estimated to be worth around EUR 1,5bn in the EU annually; whilst the de minimis aid also provides scope to provide fuel subsidies to vessels; |
| --- | --- |

19.

notes that the fisheries sector also benefits from fuel tax exemptions that provide a direct benefit in terms of operational costs of fishing vessels, estimated to be worth around EUR 1,5bn in the EU annually; whilst the de minimis aid also provides scope to provide fuel subsidies to vessels;

| 20. | highlights a study commissioned for DG Maritime Affairs in 2009 which estimated around EUR 718m would be available under the de minimis aid regulation, although actual figures on de minimis aid are difficult to obtain due to lack of effective monitoring at EU level; a further EUR 8m per annum is estimated to be granted under the fisheries block exemption regulation; |
| --- | --- |

20.

highlights a study commissioned for DG Maritime Affairs in 2009 which estimated around EUR 718m would be available under the de minimis aid regulation, although actual figures on de minimis aid are difficult to obtain due to lack of effective monitoring at EU level; a further EUR 8m per annum is estimated to be granted under the fisheries block exemption regulation;

| 21. | notes that the 2009 study for DG Maritime Affairs also highlighted a number of risks in the implementation of the de minimis regulation, including: (i) the potential detrimental impact on use of the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) in Member States where priority was given to de minimis support, (ii) the potential distortive effect of the variability in use of de minimis aid by different Member States, and (iii) the risk that de minimis aid would be used to support keep vessels active running counter to the wider reform objectives of reducing the size and scale of the fishing fleet; |
| --- | --- |

21.

notes that the 2009 study for DG Maritime Affairs also highlighted a number of risks in the implementation of the de minimis regulation, including: (i) the potential detrimental impact on use of the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) in Member States where priority was given to de minimis support, (ii) the potential distortive effect of the variability in use of de minimis aid by different Member States, and (iii) the risk that de minimis aid would be used to support keep vessels active running counter to the wider reform objectives of reducing the size and scale of the fishing fleet;

| 22. | welcomes the transparency brought to the de minimus aid by the inclusion of this data in the Member State's annual report on State aid as an important factor in ensuring the transparency of the scheme; |
| --- | --- |

22.

welcomes the transparency brought to the de minimus aid by the inclusion of this data in the Member State's annual report on State aid as an important factor in ensuring the transparency of the scheme;

| 23. | recognises that the European Commission must strike a balance in its efforts to reduce bureaucracy and streamline monitoring requirements whilst ensuring sufficient transparency and control and reiterates that the overarching goals of the CFP reforms provide sufficient justification for a robust and transparent monitoring of the use of State Aids within this sector; |
| --- | --- |

23.

recognises that the European Commission must strike a balance in its efforts to reduce bureaucracy and streamline monitoring requirements whilst ensuring sufficient transparency and control and reiterates that the overarching goals of the CFP reforms provide sufficient justification for a robust and transparent monitoring of the use of State Aids within this sector;

| 24. | recognises that there are calls for the current de minimis aid thresholds (EUR 30 000 to an undertaking over any period of three fiscal years) to be increased to give local and regional authorities greater flexibility to support interventions at the territorial level, considered particularly important given the high concentration of fishing in certain regions and communities, recognises that any review of the current de minimis aid threshold would need to take into account the need to respect competition and the common market; |
| --- | --- |

24.

recognises that there are calls for the current de minimis aid thresholds (EUR 30 000 to an undertaking over any period of three fiscal years) to be increased to give local and regional authorities greater flexibility to support interventions at the territorial level, considered particularly important given the high concentration of fishing in certain regions and communities, recognises that any review of the current de minimis aid threshold would need to take into account the need to respect competition and the common market;

| 25. | asserts, however, that there is a risk that increasing the de minimis thresholds could provide further scope for support for unsustainable fishing practices, thereby undermining the overarching objective of the CFP reforms to achieve sustainable fishing within the EU; although it is possible to prevent this risk in specific national cases in which the lack of sustainability is caused by factors beyond the production or catching sector; |
| --- | --- |

25.

asserts, however, that there is a risk that increasing the de minimis thresholds could provide further scope for support for unsustainable fishing practices, thereby undermining the overarching objective of the CFP reforms to achieve sustainable fishing within the EU; although it is possible to prevent this risk in specific national cases in which the lack of sustainability is caused by factors beyond the production or catching sector;

| 26. | calls on, therefore, the European Commission in its impact assessment for the revised regulations and as part of its evaluation of the consultation responses, to provide a detailed analysis of the potential impact (in terms of delivering the wider CFP reforms) of (i) keeping the current de minimis thresholds for the sector (ii) increasing the de minimis thresholds and (iii) reducing or abolishing de minimis thresholds altogether; |
| --- | --- |

26.

calls on, therefore, the European Commission in its impact assessment for the revised regulations and as part of its evaluation of the consultation responses, to provide a detailed analysis of the potential impact (in terms of delivering the wider CFP reforms) of (i) keeping the current de minimis thresholds for the sector (ii) increasing the de minimis thresholds and (iii) reducing or abolishing de minimis thresholds altogether;

| 27. | argues that this impact assessment should also look at the role played by de minimis aid measures as part of the broader suite of public interventions within the sector, in particular how they address ‘gaps’ in provision that cannot be filled by the new EMFF, the general block exemption regulation for the fisheries and aquaculture sector, and notified aid schemes for this sector; |
| --- | --- |

27.

argues that this impact assessment should also look at the role played by de minimis aid measures as part of the broader suite of public interventions within the sector, in particular how they address ‘gaps’ in provision that cannot be filled by the new EMFF, the general block exemption regulation for the fisheries and aquaculture sector, and notified aid schemes for this sector;

| 28. | underlines the need for a more effective use of the EMFF during the 2014-2020 period than has been the case with the EFF to date, given that the EMFF is a key funding mechanism through which support can be targeted at the fisheries and aquaculture sectors to deliver on the overarching goals of the CFP reforms; |
| --- | --- |

28.

underlines the need for a more effective use of the EMFF during the 2014-2020 period than has been the case with the EFF to date, given that the EMFF is a key funding mechanism through which support can be targeted at the fisheries and aquaculture sectors to deliver on the overarching goals of the CFP reforms;

| 29. | considers that there is merit in exploring the potential to shift support for the processing and marketing of fisheries and aquaculture products out of the sectoral de minimis/block exemption regulations and include this instead within the framework of the general de minimis/block exemption regulations; |
| --- | --- |

29.

considers that there is merit in exploring the potential to shift support for the processing and marketing of fisheries and aquaculture products out of the sectoral de minimis/block exemption regulations and include this instead within the framework of the general de minimis/block exemption regulations;

| 30. | argues that such a shift fits with the logic of the European Commission's objective to establish a more commercialised and business focused fisheries and aquaculture sector, and to explore ways of adding value to the fishing products, developing supply chains, the wider onshore economy, and new and innovative approaches; |
| --- | --- |

30.

argues that such a shift fits with the logic of the European Commission's objective to establish a more commercialised and business focused fisheries and aquaculture sector, and to explore ways of adding value to the fishing products, developing supply chains, the wider onshore economy, and new and innovative approaches;

| 31. | notes that shifting the support for onshore activities of the fisheries processing and sustainable aquaculture sectors into the general de minimis regulation would enable such measures to benefit from higher intervention thresholds of that regulation (currently EUR 200 000), helping to overcome barriers to investments in the onshore economy, and contributing to the desired aim of maximising the potential ‘added value’ to the local fishing communities of fish products; |
| --- | --- |

31.

notes that shifting the support for onshore activities of the fisheries processing and sustainable aquaculture sectors into the general de minimis regulation would enable such measures to benefit from higher intervention thresholds of that regulation (currently EUR 200 000), helping to overcome barriers to investments in the onshore economy, and contributing to the desired aim of maximising the potential ‘added value’ to the local fishing communities of fish products;

| 32. | calls on the European Commission to give consideration to this in the review of the State Aid regulations for fisheries and aquaculture, in particular assessing the potential economic benefits such an approach could have to the onshore economy and fishing communities, whilst also assessing the extent to which such a change could lead to ‘unintended consequences’ for example increasing unsustainable fishing practices; |
| --- | --- |

32.

calls on the European Commission to give consideration to this in the review of the State Aid regulations for fisheries and aquaculture, in particular assessing the potential economic benefits such an approach could have to the onshore economy and fishing communities, whilst also assessing the extent to which such a change could lead to ‘unintended consequences’ for example increasing unsustainable fishing practices;

| 33. | calls on the European Commission to revise the list of aid measures contained in the Block Exemption regulation to ensure these are in line with the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, and to ensure that there is no scope through either of the State Aid regulations (nor through the EMFF) to support unsustainable fishing practices; |
| --- | --- |

33.

calls on the European Commission to revise the list of aid measures contained in the Block Exemption regulation to ensure these are in line with the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, and to ensure that there is no scope through either of the State Aid regulations (nor through the EMFF) to support unsustainable fishing practices;

| 34. | highlights the scope of the Block Exemption regulation to support a range of aqua-environmental and conservation measures, and calls on the European Commission to maintain and extend the scope of the regulation to enable investments that protect, conserve and enhance the marine and maritime environment, including support for marine/aquaculture research, data collection support for the sector in specific national cases in which the lack of sustainability is caused by factors beyond the production or catching sector, etc.; |
| --- | --- |

34.

highlights the scope of the Block Exemption regulation to support a range of aqua-environmental and conservation measures, and calls on the European Commission to maintain and extend the scope of the regulation to enable investments that protect, conserve and enhance the marine and maritime environment, including support for marine/aquaculture research, data collection support for the sector in specific national cases in which the lack of sustainability is caused by factors beyond the production or catching sector, etc.;

| 35. | calls on Member States, local and regional authorities, and other stakeholders to look imaginatively at the opportunities presented by these regulations (and the EMFF) to ensure that all measures that enhance the sustainability of the fishing sector, aquaculture, the marine environment, and coastal communities, are optimised; |
| --- | --- |

35.

calls on Member States, local and regional authorities, and other stakeholders to look imaginatively at the opportunities presented by these regulations (and the EMFF) to ensure that all measures that enhance the sustainability of the fishing sector, aquaculture, the marine environment, and coastal communities, are optimised;

Brussels, 29 November 2013.

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/37

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture’

2014/C 114/08

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | welcomes the European Commission communication on Strategic Guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture, and would stress that aquaculture production must be treated as a strategic sector (on a par with other primary sector production areas) when it comes to responding to future challenges in the areas of food resources, natural resources and regional development; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the European Commission communication on Strategic Guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture, and would stress that aquaculture production must be treated as a strategic sector (on a par with other primary sector production areas) when it comes to responding to future challenges in the areas of food resources, natural resources and regional development;

| 2. | reiterates the importance of Blue growth and that a Europe-wide strategy to support the sustainable development of aquaculture is absolutely essential if the sector's employment objectives are to be met and its productivity increased in line with the Europa 2020 strategy for relaunching the EU's economy; |
| --- | --- |

2.

reiterates the importance of Blue growth and that a Europe-wide strategy to support the sustainable development of aquaculture is absolutely essential if the sector's employment objectives are to be met and its productivity increased in line with the Europa 2020 strategy for relaunching the EU's economy;

| 3. | calls for a key aim of the guidelines to be reducing illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing through a multi-level governance approach; |
| --- | --- |

3.

calls for a key aim of the guidelines to be reducing illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing through a multi-level governance approach;

| 4. | notes that it has championed aquaculture in a number of its opinions, calling for this policy to be recognised in its own right, and properly funded and promoted in order to enable it to develop into a strong alternative to traditional fisheries. The Committee should therefore be recognised as a key partner for promoting this policy; |
| --- | --- |

4.

notes that it has championed aquaculture in a number of its opinions, calling for this policy to be recognised in its own right, and properly funded and promoted in order to enable it to develop into a strong alternative to traditional fisheries. The Committee should therefore be recognised as a key partner for promoting this policy;

| 5. | draws attention to the FAO estimates that 47% of all fish for human consumption now comes from aquaculture and regrets the fact that EU aquaculture production amounts to a mere 2,3% in terms of volume and 4% in terms of value at world level (1); |
| --- | --- |

5.

draws attention to the FAO estimates that 47% of all fish for human consumption now comes from aquaculture and regrets the fact that EU aquaculture production amounts to a mere 2,3% in terms of volume and 4% in terms of value at world level (1);

| 6. | is deeply concerned that Europe, which used to lead production of farmed fish, now needs to import over 60% of its aquaculture products despite being perfectly capable of producing this food within the Union, while providing its people with jobs and complying with the highest standards; |
| --- | --- |

6.

is deeply concerned that Europe, which used to lead production of farmed fish, now needs to import over 60% of its aquaculture products despite being perfectly capable of producing this food within the Union, while providing its people with jobs and complying with the highest standards;

| 7. | recognises the need to unlock the potential of aquaculture and turn this stagnating sector into a blossoming branch of the economy; |
| --- | --- |

7.

recognises the need to unlock the potential of aquaculture and turn this stagnating sector into a blossoming branch of the economy;

| 8. | welcomes the recognition given to the need to reduce the gulf between the volume of seafood consumed in the EU and the volume of catches produced by fisheries activities in the EU, and to the role that the aquaculture sector should play in achieving this objective; |
| --- | --- |

8.

welcomes the recognition given to the need to reduce the gulf between the volume of seafood consumed in the EU and the volume of catches produced by fisheries activities in the EU, and to the role that the aquaculture sector should play in achieving this objective;

| 9. | stresses that, in the European sphere, sustainable development has become the sine qua non of any socio-economic growth policy and that it has to be the focus for political commitment and resources in all sectors; |
| --- | --- |

9.

stresses that, in the European sphere, sustainable development has become the sine qua non of any socio-economic growth policy and that it has to be the focus for political commitment and resources in all sectors;

| 10. | believes that the sustainable development of aquaculture is of strategic importance, given that it is of direct interest to all regions and local communities (even non coastal areas) and in the light of the interplay between environmental policy, marine and river water quality and the sector's economic performance; |
| --- | --- |

10.

believes that the sustainable development of aquaculture is of strategic importance, given that it is of direct interest to all regions and local communities (even non coastal areas) and in the light of the interplay between environmental policy, marine and river water quality and the sector's economic performance;

| 11. | notes that European aquaculture is not a uniform sector but is characterised by a variety of farming methods, including closed and open, extensive and intensive systems, on land, in lakes, ponds, inlets and tanks, inshore and offshore, and that it covers freshwater fish, marine fish and shellfish farming, stretching from the cold waters of Scandinavia to the warm sea basins of southern Europe. Nevertheless, regardless of these differences, European aquaculture needs support in order to become a competitive and valuable branch of the economy and a source of local employment, know-how and pride; |
| --- | --- |

11.

notes that European aquaculture is not a uniform sector but is characterised by a variety of farming methods, including closed and open, extensive and intensive systems, on land, in lakes, ponds, inlets and tanks, inshore and offshore, and that it covers freshwater fish, marine fish and shellfish farming, stretching from the cold waters of Scandinavia to the warm sea basins of southern Europe. Nevertheless, regardless of these differences, European aquaculture needs support in order to become a competitive and valuable branch of the economy and a source of local employment, know-how and pride;

| 12. | recognises the need for an awareness campaign to highlight this wealth and diversity and to promote greater transparency in aquaculture product labelling so as to distinguish between products from intensive farms and those from farms that are closer to natural conditions (e.g. offshore cages, etc.); |
| --- | --- |

12.

recognises the need for an awareness campaign to highlight this wealth and diversity and to promote greater transparency in aquaculture product labelling so as to distinguish between products from intensive farms and those from farms that are closer to natural conditions (e.g. offshore cages, etc.);

| 13. | takes the view that the EU should lead the way in the development of ecological and sustainable fish farming methods, pioneering the ‘blue revolution’ by applying technology and innovation to fish production, feeding, hatching and harvesting within the EU; |
| --- | --- |

13.

takes the view that the EU should lead the way in the development of ecological and sustainable fish farming methods, pioneering the ‘blue revolution’ by applying technology and innovation to fish production, feeding, hatching and harvesting within the EU;

| 14. | shares concern at the stagnation in EU aquaculture production, which is not yet benefiting sufficiently from the competitive advantage offered by the high quality and food hygiene standards of European seafood; |
| --- | --- |

14.

shares concern at the stagnation in EU aquaculture production, which is not yet benefiting sufficiently from the competitive advantage offered by the high quality and food hygiene standards of European seafood;

| 15. | recommends that the EU maintain the highest possible controls over imported aquaculture products, which often provide the raw material for subsequent processing by European companies and ensure a standardised framework of healthy and sanitary, labour and environmental conditions for both imported products and ‘made in the EU’ products; |
| --- | --- |

15.

recommends that the EU maintain the highest possible controls over imported aquaculture products, which often provide the raw material for subsequent processing by European companies and ensure a standardised framework of healthy and sanitary, labour and environmental conditions for both imported products and ‘made in the EU’ products;

| 16. | draws attention to the potential positive economic and social knock-on effects of sustained growth in the aquaculture sector (and in the related production chains), given the possibility of meeting the growing internal demand that is currently met by imports and sparking employment growth in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

16.

draws attention to the potential positive economic and social knock-on effects of sustained growth in the aquaculture sector (and in the related production chains), given the possibility of meeting the growing internal demand that is currently met by imports and sparking employment growth in the EU;

| 17. | welcomes the Commission's efforts to launch a process of voluntary cooperation, involving the Member States in the drafting of multiannual national strategic plans but nevertheless advocates that the creation of progress indicators not involve excessive red tape for businesses and local authorities; |
| --- | --- |

17.

welcomes the Commission's efforts to launch a process of voluntary cooperation, involving the Member States in the drafting of multiannual national strategic plans but nevertheless advocates that the creation of progress indicators not involve excessive red tape for businesses and local authorities;

| 18. | regrets the Commission's failure to mention the role that can be played by local and regional authorities in promoting the sustainable development of aquaculture, promoting for instance general knowledge of aquaculture products by means of information programmes in schools and promoting the consumption of local and seasonal products (short supply chains); |
| --- | --- |

18.

regrets the Commission's failure to mention the role that can be played by local and regional authorities in promoting the sustainable development of aquaculture, promoting for instance general knowledge of aquaculture products by means of information programmes in schools and promoting the consumption of local and seasonal products (short supply chains);

| 19. | recommends that the proposed Aquaculture Advisory Council make the most of the input of those regions in certain Member States that have developed expertise in the area of economic development; |
| --- | --- |

19.

recommends that the proposed Aquaculture Advisory Council make the most of the input of those regions in certain Member States that have developed expertise in the area of economic development;

| 20. | agrees on the potential importance for the sustainable development of aquaculture of upholding EU legislation in the realms of the environment, public health, consumer protection and environmental sustainability, which must be the basis for the coherent planning of common objectives under the multiannual national strategic plans; |
| --- | --- |

20.

agrees on the potential importance for the sustainable development of aquaculture of upholding EU legislation in the realms of the environment, public health, consumer protection and environmental sustainability, which must be the basis for the coherent planning of common objectives under the multiannual national strategic plans;

| 21. | also agrees on the need to do as much as possible to promote application of European environmental legislation without imposing unnecessary burdens on operators in the production chain; in this respect, the know-how of the producers themselves and of local and regional authorities could prove decisive in the context of the Aquaculture Advisory Council; |
| --- | --- |

21.

also agrees on the need to do as much as possible to promote application of European environmental legislation without imposing unnecessary burdens on operators in the production chain; in this respect, the know-how of the producers themselves and of local and regional authorities could prove decisive in the context of the Aquaculture Advisory Council;

| 22. | stresses the importance of the stakeholder consultations and hopes that these consultations will be repeated before the end of 2017 alongside the planned mid-term assessment of the national plans; |
| --- | --- |

22.

stresses the importance of the stakeholder consultations and hopes that these consultations will be repeated before the end of 2017 alongside the planned mid-term assessment of the national plans;

| 23. | endorses the priority areas identified by the Commission and the corresponding guidelines, which focus on the need to: a) cut red tape, b) facilitate access to space and water, c) boost the sector's competitiveness, and d) help to secure a level playing field by exploiting EU aquaculture's competitive advantages; |
| --- | --- |

23.

endorses the priority areas identified by the Commission and the corresponding guidelines, which focus on the need to: a) cut red tape, b) facilitate access to space and water, c) boost the sector's competitiveness, and d) help to secure a level playing field by exploiting EU aquaculture's competitive advantages;

| 24. | recalls that more than 90% of aquaculture businesses are SMEs whose overall profitability and potential for sustainable development depend on transparency, efficient administrative procedures and predictability. Without a clear framework, economic operators cannot make informed choices so as to invest in their activities and expand them, creating jobs and increasing output; |
| --- | --- |

24.

recalls that more than 90% of aquaculture businesses are SMEs whose overall profitability and potential for sustainable development depend on transparency, efficient administrative procedures and predictability. Without a clear framework, economic operators cannot make informed choices so as to invest in their activities and expand them, creating jobs and increasing output;

Simplifying administrative procedures

| 25. | deplores the fact that the barriers to setting up new aquaculture farm businesses, already identified in the 2002 communication and the corresponding CoR opinion, have not only persisted but have become even greater. The daunting two-to-three year procedure to establish a new aquaculture farm (compared with a mere six months in Norway, Europe's leader in this sector) puts many potential entrepreneurs off and sets the EU collectively at a disadvantage compared with its global competitors. Legislation that can reduce the average times and the differences between Member States is more necessary than ever; |
| --- | --- |

25.

deplores the fact that the barriers to setting up new aquaculture farm businesses, already identified in the 2002 communication and the corresponding CoR opinion, have not only persisted but have become even greater. The daunting two-to-three year procedure to establish a new aquaculture farm (compared with a mere six months in Norway, Europe's leader in this sector) puts many potential entrepreneurs off and sets the EU collectively at a disadvantage compared with its global competitors. Legislation that can reduce the average times and the differences between Member States is more necessary than ever;

| 26. | calls on the Commission to take into account maximum sustainable yield in its strategic guidelines. |
| --- | --- |

26.

calls on the Commission to take into account maximum sustainable yield in its strategic guidelines.

| 27. | agrees that it would be worthwhile for the Commission to work with the relevant authorities to pinpoint best practice and to secure improvements in administrative efficiency, using the data collected by the Member States; this kind of analysis should also be applied to procedures relating to the payment of Community subsidies to aquaculture companies; |
| --- | --- |

27.

agrees that it would be worthwhile for the Commission to work with the relevant authorities to pinpoint best practice and to secure improvements in administrative efficiency, using the data collected by the Member States; this kind of analysis should also be applied to procedures relating to the payment of Community subsidies to aquaculture companies;

| 28. | notes that in the EU it is often local and regional authorities that are in charge of licensing of fish farms and supporting aquaculture SMEs operating in their areas. Faced with stringent environmental protection laws and pressure from green NGOs and the tourism industry on the one hand, and the economic decline of traditional fisheries and growing unemployment on the other, local and regional authorities stand only to benefit from clear guidelines on the sustainable development of EU aquaculture; |
| --- | --- |

28.

notes that in the EU it is often local and regional authorities that are in charge of licensing of fish farms and supporting aquaculture SMEs operating in their areas. Faced with stringent environmental protection laws and pressure from green NGOs and the tourism industry on the one hand, and the economic decline of traditional fisheries and growing unemployment on the other, local and regional authorities stand only to benefit from clear guidelines on the sustainable development of EU aquaculture;

| 29. | points out that local and regional authorities have much to offer when it comes to promoting best administrative practice, starting by providing the information that the Member States have been asked to collect by the end of 2013; |
| --- | --- |

29.

points out that local and regional authorities have much to offer when it comes to promoting best administrative practice, starting by providing the information that the Member States have been asked to collect by the end of 2013;

Securing sustainable development and growth of aquaculture through coordinated spatial planning

| 30. | points out that aquaculture tends to be more vulnerable to pollution than fisheries, and that it is important to encourage the Member States to draw up risk maps and impact maps to cover inland areas, territorial waters and coastal areas; these maps could be sent to the European Agency for Maritime Safety and should contain information on infrastructure and usage that has a potential impact on water quality, efforts under way to mitigate the problem, monitoring campaigns, major new projects, etc.; |
| --- | --- |

30.

points out that aquaculture tends to be more vulnerable to pollution than fisheries, and that it is important to encourage the Member States to draw up risk maps and impact maps to cover inland areas, territorial waters and coastal areas; these maps could be sent to the European Agency for Maritime Safety and should contain information on infrastructure and usage that has a potential impact on water quality, efforts under way to mitigate the problem, monitoring campaigns, major new projects, etc.;

| 31. | recognises that the aquaculture sector would benefit from coordinated spatial planning, which is indispensable in the maritime context too as a means of reducing the number of conflicts between overlapping use claims, enhancing their sustainability, reducing uncertainty, facilitating investment and stepping up aquaculture business development; |
| --- | --- |

31.

recognises that the aquaculture sector would benefit from coordinated spatial planning, which is indispensable in the maritime context too as a means of reducing the number of conflicts between overlapping use claims, enhancing their sustainability, reducing uncertainty, facilitating investment and stepping up aquaculture business development;

| 32. | recommends making the most of the opportunity to involve coastal action groups at the regional planning phase. These groups can provide a means of involving the region in planning and resource management, and speak for a large number of regional stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

32.

recommends making the most of the opportunity to involve coastal action groups at the regional planning phase. These groups can provide a means of involving the region in planning and resource management, and speak for a large number of regional stakeholders;

| 33. | would underline the importance of cooperation between aquaculture and fisheries which, if developed in synergy, generate benefits for companies, coastal and island communities, given that the processing units no longer required by fisheries could be absorbed by the growing aquaculture sector; furthermore the cooperation between aquaculture and the processing and commercial activity, if also developed in synergy, can generate added value for aquaculture products; |
| --- | --- |

33.

would underline the importance of cooperation between aquaculture and fisheries which, if developed in synergy, generate benefits for companies, coastal and island communities, given that the processing units no longer required by fisheries could be absorbed by the growing aquaculture sector; furthermore the cooperation between aquaculture and the processing and commercial activity, if also developed in synergy, can generate added value for aquaculture products;

| 34. | calls on the Commission to require that, when drafting their multiannual national strategic plans, the Member States examine in depth the impact on aquaculture companies operating in coastal areas, the criteria for softening the impact and possible compensatory measures for these companies; |
| --- | --- |

34.

calls on the Commission to require that, when drafting their multiannual national strategic plans, the Member States examine in depth the impact on aquaculture companies operating in coastal areas, the criteria for softening the impact and possible compensatory measures for these companies;

| 35. | agrees on the importance of identifying those areas best suited to freshwater aquaculture, while hoping that the national best practice to be identified by the Member States will include elements relating to freshwater aquaculture; |
| --- | --- |

35.

agrees on the importance of identifying those areas best suited to freshwater aquaculture, while hoping that the national best practice to be identified by the Member States will include elements relating to freshwater aquaculture;

| 36. | agrees on the possibility of cutting red tape for entrepreneurs and highlighting the issue of the environmental impact of aquaculture companies as part of the spatial planning process; |
| --- | --- |

36.

agrees on the possibility of cutting red tape for entrepreneurs and highlighting the issue of the environmental impact of aquaculture companies as part of the spatial planning process;

| 37. | would like to see the inclusion in the strategic guidelines of reference to the importance in the context of coordinated planning for coastal areas of making more of brackish water environments (marshland and lagoons), which can make a significant contribution to social and economic resilience in periods of crisis while also boosting aquaculture production in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

37.

would like to see the inclusion in the strategic guidelines of reference to the importance in the context of coordinated planning for coastal areas of making more of brackish water environments (marshland and lagoons), which can make a significant contribution to social and economic resilience in periods of crisis while also boosting aquaculture production in the EU;

Enhancing the competitiveness of EU aquaculture

| 38. | agrees with the assessment of the positive impact that more efficient market organisation and more structured producers' organisations can have on aquaculture businesses; |
| --- | --- |

38.

agrees with the assessment of the positive impact that more efficient market organisation and more structured producers' organisations can have on aquaculture businesses;

| 39. | calls on the Commission to continue its direct consultation of producers' organisations operating in the aquaculture sector, which is aimed at highlighting the main obstacles to development encountered by those organisations and any solutions that may have been found; |
| --- | --- |

39.

calls on the Commission to continue its direct consultation of producers' organisations operating in the aquaculture sector, which is aimed at highlighting the main obstacles to development encountered by those organisations and any solutions that may have been found;

| 40. | recognises that the production and marketing plans put in place by producers' organisations are key tools when it comes to improving the competitiveness of aquaculture companies (in combination with production chain agreements, inter-professional agreements and branding policies) and to responding effectively to consumers' growing expectations regarding the quality and diversity of food products; |
| --- | --- |

40.

recognises that the production and marketing plans put in place by producers' organisations are key tools when it comes to improving the competitiveness of aquaculture companies (in combination with production chain agreements, inter-professional agreements and branding policies) and to responding effectively to consumers' growing expectations regarding the quality and diversity of food products;

| 41. | underlines the role that local and regional authorities and their agencies (active in carrying out research and running trials) can play both in promoting market-oriented research, innovation and knowledge transfer and in enabling Member States to seek and secure synergies between the various national research programmes; |
| --- | --- |

41.

underlines the role that local and regional authorities and their agencies (active in carrying out research and running trials) can play both in promoting market-oriented research, innovation and knowledge transfer and in enabling Member States to seek and secure synergies between the various national research programmes;

| 42. | would encourage the Commission to continue to pay close attention to the extremely serious problem for extensive aquaculture and biodiversity that is posed by fish-eating birds and other fish-eating animal species (e.g. European Otter) and to assess the effectiveness of any derogation provisions that Member States might have applied to the Birds Conservation and Habitats Directive; additionally it should also be immediately examined if the strict protection of fish-eating, ‘problematic animal species’ in specific regions seems to still be compliant with EU law at all, in order to be able to easily justify, on the basis of modified classifications, the necessary exceptions in the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

42.

would encourage the Commission to continue to pay close attention to the extremely serious problem for extensive aquaculture and biodiversity that is posed by fish-eating birds and other fish-eating animal species (e.g. European Otter) and to assess the effectiveness of any derogation provisions that Member States might have applied to the Birds Conservation and Habitats Directive; additionally it should also be immediately examined if the strict protection of fish-eating, ‘problematic animal species’ in specific regions seems to still be compliant with EU law at all, in order to be able to easily justify, on the basis of modified classifications, the necessary exceptions in the Member States;

| 43. | deems it highly appropriate that Member States and local and regional authorities should support and develop education and training programmes adapted to aquaculture market needs and provide information on current supply and the growth policies being pursued; |
| --- | --- |

43.

deems it highly appropriate that Member States and local and regional authorities should support and develop education and training programmes adapted to aquaculture market needs and provide information on current supply and the growth policies being pursued;

| 44. | would argue when it comes to knowledge transfer, best practice and innovation, that the Commission could proceed both by establishing the planned European market observatory and by encouraging Member States to steer their future operational programmes towards broader support for those aquaculture companies (especially collective enterprises) that are involved in knowledge transfer and innovation; |
| --- | --- |

44.

would argue when it comes to knowledge transfer, best practice and innovation, that the Commission could proceed both by establishing the planned European market observatory and by encouraging Member States to steer their future operational programmes towards broader support for those aquaculture companies (especially collective enterprises) that are involved in knowledge transfer and innovation;

Promoting a level playing field for EU operators by exploiting their competitive advantages

| 45. | recognises the need for consumers to be kept up to date on the quality of all aquaculture products, European and other; proper information can only serve to make the sector more competitive; |
| --- | --- |

45.

recognises the need for consumers to be kept up to date on the quality of all aquaculture products, European and other; proper information can only serve to make the sector more competitive;

| 46. | believes, when it comes to labelling and optional certification systems, that multiannual national strategic plans provide an up to date picture, a detailed overview of the state of play, as well as promote uniformity at EU level; |
| --- | --- |

46.

believes, when it comes to labelling and optional certification systems, that multiannual national strategic plans provide an up to date picture, a detailed overview of the state of play, as well as promote uniformity at EU level;

| 47. | hopes that the strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of aquaculture in the EU will stress the role that can be played by producers' organisations and coastal action groups in working together to promote aquaculture production and the regions where it takes place; these are areas in which the regions can lend practical support; |
| --- | --- |

47.

hopes that the strategic guidelines for the sustainable development of aquaculture in the EU will stress the role that can be played by producers' organisations and coastal action groups in working together to promote aquaculture production and the regions where it takes place; these are areas in which the regions can lend practical support;

| 48. | considers, when it comes to the traceability of products and short food supply chains, that the Member States and the regions should capitalise on the positive experience garnered by the farming sector and promote its application to aquaculture companies so as to boost their competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

48.

considers, when it comes to the traceability of products and short food supply chains, that the Member States and the regions should capitalise on the positive experience garnered by the farming sector and promote its application to aquaculture companies so as to boost their competitiveness;

| 49. | considers that local management plans for fisheries should be examined with a view to generating potential synergies with the aquaculture sector, given that they tackle issues such as nursery areas, the seasonal nature of production, market outlets, processing units formerly active in the fisheries sector, etc.; |
| --- | --- |

49.

considers that local management plans for fisheries should be examined with a view to generating potential synergies with the aquaculture sector, given that they tackle issues such as nursery areas, the seasonal nature of production, market outlets, processing units formerly active in the fisheries sector, etc.;

| 50. | would stress the importance of devoting as much attention as possible to the contribution that demand for organic produce, which is growing constantly, can make in terms of sectoral growth; |
| --- | --- |

50.

would stress the importance of devoting as much attention as possible to the contribution that demand for organic produce, which is growing constantly, can make in terms of sectoral growth;

| 51. | endorses the parcelling out of targets (for the Member States, the Commission, and the Aquaculture Advisory Council); the target for Member States could also include making more of the local public/private partnerships that set up coastal action groups, which can contribute to the sustainable development of the aquaculture sector; |
| --- | --- |

51.

endorses the parcelling out of targets (for the Member States, the Commission, and the Aquaculture Advisory Council); the target for Member States could also include making more of the local public/private partnerships that set up coastal action groups, which can contribute to the sustainable development of the aquaculture sector;

New governance to support EU aquaculture

| 52. | congratulates the Commission on having heeded the Committee's recommendation (put forward in CdR20/2003) to set up a separate Aquaculture Advisory Committee to provide decision makers with information. Also reiterates that the Committee ‘is willing to serve as a forum and as a guarantor for ensuring public involvement and information on aquaculture issues, so as to contribute [...] to better governance in the aquaculture sector’ (2). |
| --- | --- |

52.

congratulates the Commission on having heeded the Committee's recommendation (put forward in CdR20/2003) to set up a separate Aquaculture Advisory Committee to provide decision makers with information. Also reiterates that the Committee ‘is willing to serve as a forum and as a guarantor for ensuring public involvement and information on aquaculture issues, so as to contribute [...] to better governance in the aquaculture sector’ (2).

Brussels, 29 November 2013.

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  Facts and figures on the Common Fisheries Policy 2012.

1

acts and figures on the Common Fisheries Policy 2012

(2)  OJ C 141, 29.5.2010, pp. 37–44.

2

---

III Preparatory acts

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

104th plenary session, 28—29 November 2013

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/42

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Researchers, students, volunteers and other groups of third-country nationals’

2014/C 114/09

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Frame of reference

| 1. | points out that the Lisbon Treaty strengthens the role of the European Union regarding policy on the immigration of third country nationals aiming at the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third country nationals residing legally in Member States, and the prevention of illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings. To this end, the treaty states that the European Parliament and the Council shall adopt measures relating for instance to conditions of entry, residence and free movement within the EU, and set standards on the granting by the Member States of long-term visas and residence permits, including measures concerning family reunification. As regards the integration of third country nationals, the treaty states specifically that the EU may establish measures to support the Member States but that it does not aim to harmonise the Member States' legislative and regulatory provisions; |
| --- | --- |

1.

points out that the Lisbon Treaty strengthens the role of the European Union regarding policy on the immigration of third country nationals aiming at the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third country nationals residing legally in Member States, and the prevention of illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings. To this end, the treaty states that the European Parliament and the Council shall adopt measures relating for instance to conditions of entry, residence and free movement within the EU, and set standards on the granting by the Member States of long-term visas and residence permits, including measures concerning family reunification. As regards the integration of third country nationals, the treaty states specifically that the EU may establish measures to support the Member States but that it does not aim to harmonise the Member States' legislative and regulatory provisions;

| 2. | notes that the Member States remain responsible for determining the number of third-country immigrants accepted for work. In most Member States, migrant integration is primarily the responsibility of the national authorities. Regional and local authorities however take prime responsibility for implementing integration policies in areas such as education, health, housing and the labour market; |
| --- | --- |

2.

notes that the Member States remain responsible for determining the number of third-country immigrants accepted for work. In most Member States, migrant integration is primarily the responsibility of the national authorities. Regional and local authorities however take prime responsibility for implementing integration policies in areas such as education, health, housing and the labour market;

| 3. | recalls that the Stockholm Programme, which sets out the priorities for the EU in the areas of justice, freedom and security for the 2010-2014 period, recognises the positive contribution which well-managed migration flows can make to building a fair and inclusive society and a competitive economy, and stresses how important the effective social, economic and cultural integration of legal migrants is to secure the positive effects of migration both for migrants and for the host societies; |
| --- | --- |

3.

recalls that the Stockholm Programme, which sets out the priorities for the EU in the areas of justice, freedom and security for the 2010-2014 period, recognises the positive contribution which well-managed migration flows can make to building a fair and inclusive society and a competitive economy, and stresses how important the effective social, economic and cultural integration of legal migrants is to secure the positive effects of migration both for migrants and for the host societies;

| 4. | recalls that the new European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals takes the view that immigration has a positive impact on EU development and proposes measures to improve migrant integration. The European Commission views integration as an on-going process that is the shared responsibility of the various tiers of authority, and which demands long-term commitment, in step with developments, and constant cooperation between stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

4.

recalls that the new European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals takes the view that immigration has a positive impact on EU development and proposes measures to improve migrant integration. The European Commission views integration as an on-going process that is the shared responsibility of the various tiers of authority, and which demands long-term commitment, in step with developments, and constant cooperation between stakeholders;

| 5. | considers that one challenge currently facing the EU is its ageing population, which, in combination with the current global economic crisis, is leading to a shortage of skilled human resources, with the immediate effect of reducing Europe's economic clout and its competitiveness, creativity and capacity for innovation. Against this backdrop, the admission of third country nationals for research, studies, training, voluntary service, exchange programmes and au pairing helps to meet the demand for human capital; |
| --- | --- |

5.

considers that one challenge currently facing the EU is its ageing population, which, in combination with the current global economic crisis, is leading to a shortage of skilled human resources, with the immediate effect of reducing Europe's economic clout and its competitiveness, creativity and capacity for innovation. Against this backdrop, the admission of third country nationals for research, studies, training, voluntary service, exchange programmes and au pairing helps to meet the demand for human capital;

| 6. | points out that Europe's Member States are experiencing a workforce shortage in a number of sectors and that there are posts that cannot be filled by appropriately qualified national or EU workers, particularly in certain areas such as the health sector, and in science and technology; |
| --- | --- |

6.

points out that Europe's Member States are experiencing a workforce shortage in a number of sectors and that there are posts that cannot be filled by appropriately qualified national or EU workers, particularly in certain areas such as the health sector, and in science and technology;

| 7. | recalls that bolstering human capital was laid down as a clear political goal of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

7.

recalls that bolstering human capital was laid down as a clear political goal of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU;

| 8. | notes that Directive 2005/71/EC provides for a fast track procedure for the admission of third-country researchers who have signed a hosting agreement with a research organisation approved by the Member State. The hosting agreement confirms that there is a valid research project and that the researcher has the necessary scientific skills to carry it out as well as sufficient income and health insurance. In addition, it enables researchers to stay in another Member State in connection with their research project and also teach, in accordance with national legislation; |
| --- | --- |

8.

notes that Directive 2005/71/EC provides for a fast track procedure for the admission of third-country researchers who have signed a hosting agreement with a research organisation approved by the Member State. The hosting agreement confirms that there is a valid research project and that the researcher has the necessary scientific skills to carry it out as well as sufficient income and health insurance. In addition, it enables researchers to stay in another Member State in connection with their research project and also teach, in accordance with national legislation;

| 9. | notes that Directive 2004/114/EC lays down mandatory rules for the admission of third-country national students. The application of the directive to school pupils, volunteers and unpaid trainees is left to the discretion of the Member States. Providing they fulfil the conditions, students have the right to a residence permit and certain rights concerning employment, and may travel between Member States for their studies; |
| --- | --- |

9.

notes that Directive 2004/114/EC lays down mandatory rules for the admission of third-country national students. The application of the directive to school pupils, volunteers and unpaid trainees is left to the discretion of the Member States. Providing they fulfil the conditions, students have the right to a residence permit and certain rights concerning employment, and may travel between Member States for their studies;

| 10. | notes that there is no directive on the admission of paid trainees and au pairs. Neither do all the Member States have a single or similar legal framework to govern the work of such persons. Furthermore, the vast majority of the Member States have not adopted the International Labour Organisation's Domestic Workers Convention, which enters into force in September 2013; |
| --- | --- |

10.

notes that there is no directive on the admission of paid trainees and au pairs. Neither do all the Member States have a single or similar legal framework to govern the work of such persons. Furthermore, the vast majority of the Member States have not adopted the International Labour Organisation's Domestic Workers Convention, which enters into force in September 2013;

| 11. | indicates that this opinion is based on previous CoR opinions and its aim is to present the CoR's views on how the entry and residence of third country nationals within EU territory for the purposes of research, study, pupil exchange, remunerated or unremunerated training, voluntary service or au pairing is to be regulated. The opinion also contains proposals designed to promote more active involvement of local and regional authorities and the effective implementation of the directive; |
| --- | --- |

11.

indicates that this opinion is based on previous CoR opinions and its aim is to present the CoR's views on how the entry and residence of third country nationals within EU territory for the purposes of research, study, pupil exchange, remunerated or unremunerated training, voluntary service or au pairing is to be regulated. The opinion also contains proposals designed to promote more active involvement of local and regional authorities and the effective implementation of the directive;

Basic principles

| 12. | believes that policies for integrating migrants must be compatible with fundamental European values such as respect for human rights and diversity, combating discrimination and promoting equal opportunities and tolerance. They must also be consistent with basic EU policies on cohesion, employment, development, external relations and freedom, security and justice; |
| --- | --- |

12.

believes that policies for integrating migrants must be compatible with fundamental European values such as respect for human rights and diversity, combating discrimination and promoting equal opportunities and tolerance. They must also be consistent with basic EU policies on cohesion, employment, development, external relations and freedom, security and justice;

| 13. | believes that applying the principle of equal treatment is decisive for the quality of democratic systems, and is a key achievement and integral part of European Union culture; |
| --- | --- |

13.

believes that applying the principle of equal treatment is decisive for the quality of democratic systems, and is a key achievement and integral part of European Union culture;

Method

| 14. | believes multilevel governance to be the most appropriate method for achieving optimum results concerning the entry and residence of third country nationals. This approach must be compatible with the subsidiarity principle governing cooperation between the EU, Member States and local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

14.

believes multilevel governance to be the most appropriate method for achieving optimum results concerning the entry and residence of third country nationals. This approach must be compatible with the subsidiarity principle governing cooperation between the EU, Member States and local and regional authorities;

| 15. | believes that to achieve definite results, every initiative relating to immigration should be based on strategies, goals and common links with third countries. Efforts to make the EU attractive and more accessible to third country nationals must be made within the context of the EU's dialogue with third countries and in line with the aims of its foreign policy and policy on immigration, and reflecting the new global approach to migration and mobility (GAMM); |
| --- | --- |

15.

believes that to achieve definite results, every initiative relating to immigration should be based on strategies, goals and common links with third countries. Efforts to make the EU attractive and more accessible to third country nationals must be made within the context of the EU's dialogue with third countries and in line with the aims of its foreign policy and policy on immigration, and reflecting the new global approach to migration and mobility (GAMM);

Improving the legislative framework and addressing shortcomings

| 16. | considers that the shortcomings of the existing legislative framework need to be addressed, in order to encourage third country researchers and students to move to the EU. A greater influx of highly-skilled human resources from third countries will help to meet the Union's needs; |
| --- | --- |

16.

considers that the shortcomings of the existing legislative framework need to be addressed, in order to encourage third country researchers and students to move to the EU. A greater influx of highly-skilled human resources from third countries will help to meet the Union's needs;

| 17. | welcomes the European Commission's proposal for a directive (COM(2013) 151) on improving the legal framework applying to third country nationals wishing to come and stay temporarily in the EU for a period of more than three months, for the purposes of research and studies or to gain experience and/or to take part in various activities so as to improve their skills and capabilities, for instance as researchers, students, volunteers, remunerated or unremunerated trainees or au pairs; |
| --- | --- |

17.

welcomes the European Commission's proposal for a directive (COM(2013) 151) on improving the legal framework applying to third country nationals wishing to come and stay temporarily in the EU for a period of more than three months, for the purposes of research and studies or to gain experience and/or to take part in various activities so as to improve their skills and capabilities, for instance as researchers, students, volunteers, remunerated or unremunerated trainees or au pairs;

| 18. | supports the efforts made by the EU to remain a key magnet for students and researchers. The European Union retains considerable potential when it comes to the skills and infrastructure necessary for developing international centres of excellence in various fields of research and branches of science. However, if the EU wants to remain competitive at international level, the Member States must step up economic and scientific cooperation and at the same time adopt common programmes and objectives. Bearing in mind, moreover, that other parts of the world are becoming ever more attractive to students, researchers and other highly-qualified third-country migrant workers, the EU should effectively and directly address the weaknesses that have been pinpointed in attracting certain groups to Europe; |
| --- | --- |

18.

supports the efforts made by the EU to remain a key magnet for students and researchers. The European Union retains considerable potential when it comes to the skills and infrastructure necessary for developing international centres of excellence in various fields of research and branches of science. However, if the EU wants to remain competitive at international level, the Member States must step up economic and scientific cooperation and at the same time adopt common programmes and objectives. Bearing in mind, moreover, that other parts of the world are becoming ever more attractive to students, researchers and other highly-qualified third-country migrant workers, the EU should effectively and directly address the weaknesses that have been pinpointed in attracting certain groups to Europe;

| 19. | considers a directive to be the appropriate legislative means to tackle the shortcomings of the existing regime, and to secure a cohesive legislative framework. The directive allows for the introduction of common binding rules on admission conditions, procedures and authorisations, while at the same time providing the Member States with the necessary degree of flexibility in terms of implementation; |
| --- | --- |

19.

considers a directive to be the appropriate legislative means to tackle the shortcomings of the existing regime, and to secure a cohesive legislative framework. The directive allows for the introduction of common binding rules on admission conditions, procedures and authorisations, while at the same time providing the Member States with the necessary degree of flexibility in terms of implementation;

| 20. | regrets that the European Commission makes no direct mention of the adoption of a ‘bottom-up’ model and that the impact assessment carried out gives no consideration to the specific impact that policy on the entry and residence of third country nationals has at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

20.

regrets that the European Commission makes no direct mention of the adoption of a ‘bottom-up’ model and that the impact assessment carried out gives no consideration to the specific impact that policy on the entry and residence of third country nationals has at local and regional level;

| 21. | welcomes the establishment of a common framework for all the above-mentioned categories of third-country nationals. An effective system that attracts talented migrants must be based on common simplified admission conditions and requirements; |
| --- | --- |

21.

welcomes the establishment of a common framework for all the above-mentioned categories of third-country nationals. An effective system that attracts talented migrants must be based on common simplified admission conditions and requirements;

| 22. | recognises the need to create a transparent and coordinated legal framework to govern conditions for the entry and residence of third country nationals in order to make the European Union more attractive and accessible to third country nationals. EU legislation must cover conditions for entry and residence, long-term visas and residence permits, the rights of third country nationals residing legally in an EU country and the conditions governing their movements within the EU; |
| --- | --- |

22.

recognises the need to create a transparent and coordinated legal framework to govern conditions for the entry and residence of third country nationals in order to make the European Union more attractive and accessible to third country nationals. EU legislation must cover conditions for entry and residence, long-term visas and residence permits, the rights of third country nationals residing legally in an EU country and the conditions governing their movements within the EU;

| 23. | is pleased that the common provisions of the directives apply to remunerated trainees and au pairs, and considers that securing a legal status for these two groups will provide the necessary safeguards for the fair treatment of these third country nationals; |
| --- | --- |

23.

is pleased that the common provisions of the directives apply to remunerated trainees and au pairs, and considers that securing a legal status for these two groups will provide the necessary safeguards for the fair treatment of these third country nationals;

| 24. | endorses the introduction of procedural guarantees on the granting or otherwise of authorisation (Article 29); |
| --- | --- |

24.

endorses the introduction of procedural guarantees on the granting or otherwise of authorisation (Article 29);

| 25. | takes a positive view of the establishment of provisions bolstering mobility within the EU for all categories, while more favourable rules are introduced for beneficiaries of EU mobility programmes such as Erasmus Mundus or Marie Curie (Article 29); |
| --- | --- |

25.

takes a positive view of the establishment of provisions bolstering mobility within the EU for all categories, while more favourable rules are introduced for beneficiaries of EU mobility programmes such as Erasmus Mundus or Marie Curie (Article 29);

| 26. | agrees with the simplification of the procedures for obtaining residence permits, and welcomes the mandatory provision of information by the Member States on entry and residence conditions (Article 30); |
| --- | --- |

26.

agrees with the simplification of the procedures for obtaining residence permits, and welcomes the mandatory provision of information by the Member States on entry and residence conditions (Article 30);

| 27. | endorses application of the proportionality principle to the charging of fees for the processing of applications (Article 31); |
| --- | --- |

27.

endorses application of the proportionality principle to the charging of fees for the processing of applications (Article 31);

| 28. | is pleased that the directive recognises the right for all categories to treatment equal with nationals of the host Member State as regards access to goods and services, with the exception of procedures for obtaining housing (Article 21(2)); |
| --- | --- |

28.

is pleased that the directive recognises the right for all categories to treatment equal with nationals of the host Member State as regards access to goods and services, with the exception of procedures for obtaining housing (Article 21(2));

| 29. | endorses the provisions giving students the right to work for at least 20 hours a week in the host country, giving researchers' family members access to the labour market and, once they have completed their studies, allowing researchers and students to stay in the Member State for a maximum total period of 12 months in order to look for work; |
| --- | --- |

29.

endorses the provisions giving students the right to work for at least 20 hours a week in the host country, giving researchers' family members access to the labour market and, once they have completed their studies, allowing researchers and students to stay in the Member State for a maximum total period of 12 months in order to look for work;

| 30. | agrees with the provisions (Articles 32 and 33) concerning the collection of the statistics needed to determine the volume of third country nationals who will receive authorisations on the basis of the new directive; |
| --- | --- |

30.

agrees with the provisions (Articles 32 and 33) concerning the collection of the statistics needed to determine the volume of third country nationals who will receive authorisations on the basis of the new directive;

| 31. | considers it significant that the restrictions of Directive 2011/98/ΕC on the single permit relating to social security are not applied to researchers; |
| --- | --- |

31.

considers it significant that the restrictions of Directive 2011/98/ΕC on the single permit relating to social security are not applied to researchers;

Proposals for achieving the objectives

| 32. | believes that there must be an integrated approach to achieving the directive's objectives, the ultimate aim of which is to develop a competitive European economy within the international environment. Efforts to attract human capital from third countries must not be limited to entry and residence conditions for third country nationals, but should also promote the necessary measures to support their integration within local communities and could include a wide range of policies, such as education, employment, public health, and economic, social and territorial cohesion; |
| --- | --- |

32.

believes that there must be an integrated approach to achieving the directive's objectives, the ultimate aim of which is to develop a competitive European economy within the international environment. Efforts to attract human capital from third countries must not be limited to entry and residence conditions for third country nationals, but should also promote the necessary measures to support their integration within local communities and could include a wide range of policies, such as education, employment, public health, and economic, social and territorial cohesion;

| 33. | encourages the Member States to provide the appropriate legal framework in order to guarantee the equitable treatment of remunerated trainees and au pairs and urges them to adopt the International Labour Organisation's Convention on Domestic Workers; |
| --- | --- |

33.

encourages the Member States to provide the appropriate legal framework in order to guarantee the equitable treatment of remunerated trainees and au pairs and urges them to adopt the International Labour Organisation's Convention on Domestic Workers;

| 34. | considers application of multilevel governance to be an essential precondition for successful regulation of the entry of third country nationals and their residence in EU territory. The Committee would also draw attention to the fact that if the policy of attracting talented migrants is to be successful, local and regional authorities must be actively involved in promoting the mobility of the groups covered by the proposed directive. The definition of entry and residence conditions for third country nationals in the EU and by extension their reception and integration in Member States is an important area of action and interest for local and regional authorities. Regional authorities play a decisive role in creating the right conditions for third-country nationals to access information and services relating to education, healthcare, employment, housing and other public services; |
| --- | --- |

34.

considers application of multilevel governance to be an essential precondition for successful regulation of the entry of third country nationals and their residence in EU territory. The Committee would also draw attention to the fact that if the policy of attracting talented migrants is to be successful, local and regional authorities must be actively involved in promoting the mobility of the groups covered by the proposed directive. The definition of entry and residence conditions for third country nationals in the EU and by extension their reception and integration in Member States is an important area of action and interest for local and regional authorities. Regional authorities play a decisive role in creating the right conditions for third-country nationals to access information and services relating to education, healthcare, employment, housing and other public services;

| 35. | is convinced that a coherent European approach must be accompanied by an appropriate cost analysis, to ensure that account is taken of the economic cost and administrative burden that applying the new provisions may impose on the Member States and regional and local authorities. The CoR notes that the regional and local authorities are the linchpins enabling immigrants to develop a strong and constructive connection with the host society. This role can entail additional cost to regions and municipalities who are often called upon to rise to the challenges of integration, which is particularly difficult but even more necessary at a time of economic recession and severe budgetary austerity. |
| --- | --- |

35.

is convinced that a coherent European approach must be accompanied by an appropriate cost analysis, to ensure that account is taken of the economic cost and administrative burden that applying the new provisions may impose on the Member States and regional and local authorities. The CoR notes that the regional and local authorities are the linchpins enabling immigrants to develop a strong and constructive connection with the host society. This role can entail additional cost to regions and municipalities who are often called upon to rise to the challenges of integration, which is particularly difficult but even more necessary at a time of economic recession and severe budgetary austerity.

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Recital 6

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| This Directive should also aim at fostering people-to-people contacts and mobility, as important elements of the Union’s external policy, notably vis-à-vis the countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy or the Union’s strategic partners. It should allow for a better contribution to the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility and its Mobility Partnerships which offer a concrete framework for dialogue and cooperation between the Member States and third countries in facilitating and organizing legal migration. | This Directive should also aim at fostering people-to-people contacts and mobility, as important elements of the Union’s external policy, notably vis-à-vis the countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy or the Union’s strategic partners. It should allow for a better contribution to the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility and its Mobility Partnerships which offer a concrete framework for dialogue and cooperation between the Member States and third countries. This cooperation, which also involves local authorities and civil society actors, is a key for development and contributes to
  in facilitating and organizing legal migration. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

This Directive should also aim at fostering people-to-people contacts and mobility, as important elements of the Union’s external policy, notably vis-à-vis the countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy or the Union’s strategic partners. It should allow for a better contribution to the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility and its Mobility Partnerships which offer a concrete framework for dialogue and cooperation between the Member States and third countries in facilitating and organizing legal migration.

This Directive should also aim at fostering people-to-people contacts and mobility, as important elements of the Union’s external policy, notably vis-à-vis the countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy or the Union’s strategic partners. It should allow for a better contribution to the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility and its Mobility Partnerships which offer a concrete framework for dialogue and cooperation between the Member States and third countries. This cooperation, which also involves local authorities and civil society actors, is a key for development and contributes to
  in facilitating and organizing legal migration.

Reason

See point 34 of the opinion.

Amendment 2

Recital 32

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Union immigration rules and Union programmes including mobility measures should complement each other more. Third-country national researchers and students covered by such Union programmes should be entitled to move to the Member States foreseen on the basis of the authorisation granted by the first Member State, as long as the full list of those Member States is known before entry into the Union. Such an authorisation should allow them to exercise mobility without the need to provide any additional information or to complete any other application procedures. Member States are encouraged to facilitate the intra-Union mobility of third-country national volunteers where volunteering programmes cover more than one Member State. | Union immigration rules and Union programmes including mobility measures should complement each other more. Third-country national researchers and students covered by such Union programmes should be entitled to move to the Member States foreseen on the basis of the authorisation granted by the first Member State, as long as the full list of those Member States is known before entry into the Union. Such an authorisation should allow them to exercise mobility without the need to provide any additional information or to complete any other application procedures. Member States and their public authorities at all levels are encouraged to facilitate the intra-Union mobility of third-country national volunteers where volunteering programmes cover more than one Member State. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Union immigration rules and Union programmes including mobility measures should complement each other more. Third-country national researchers and students covered by such Union programmes should be entitled to move to the Member States foreseen on the basis of the authorisation granted by the first Member State, as long as the full list of those Member States is known before entry into the Union. Such an authorisation should allow them to exercise mobility without the need to provide any additional information or to complete any other application procedures. Member States are encouraged to facilitate the intra-Union mobility of third-country national volunteers where volunteering programmes cover more than one Member State.

Union immigration rules and Union programmes including mobility measures should complement each other more. Third-country national researchers and students covered by such Union programmes should be entitled to move to the Member States foreseen on the basis of the authorisation granted by the first Member State, as long as the full list of those Member States is known before entry into the Union. Such an authorisation should allow them to exercise mobility without the need to provide any additional information or to complete any other application procedures. Member States and their public authorities at all levels are encouraged to facilitate the intra-Union mobility of third-country national volunteers where volunteering programmes cover more than one Member State.

Reason

See point 34 of the opinion.

Amendment 3

Recital 35

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to the competence of the Member States to regulate the volumes of admission of third-country nationals for the purpose of work. | The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to the competence of the Member States to regulate the volumes of admission of third-country nationals for the purpose of work taking into account the conditions in the job market at the local and regional level. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to the competence of the Member States to regulate the volumes of admission of third-country nationals for the purpose of work.

The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to the competence of the Member States to regulate the volumes of admission of third-country nationals for the purpose of work taking into account the conditions in the job market at the local and regional level.

Reason

See point 34 of the opinion.

Amendment 4

Article 14

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Specific conditions for au-pairs
  A third-country national who applies to be admitted for the purpose of working as an au-pair shall, in addition to the general conditions laid down in Article 6:






  (a) | be at least 17 but not more than 30 or, except in individually justified cases, more than 30 years of age; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Specific conditions for au-pairs

A third-country national who applies to be admitted for the purpose of working as an au-pair shall, in addition to the general conditions laid down in Article 6:

(a)

be at least 17 but not more than 30 or, except in individually justified cases, more than 30 years of age;

| (b) | provide evidence that the host family accepts responsibility for him/her throughout his/her period of presence in the territory of the Member State concerned, in particular with regard to subsistence, accommodation, healthcare, maternity or accident risks; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

provide evidence that the host family accepts responsibility for him/her throughout his/her period of presence in the territory of the Member State concerned, in particular with regard to subsistence, accommodation, healthcare, maternity or accident risks;

| (c) | produce an agreement between the au-pair and the host family defining his/her rights and obligations, including specifications about the pocket money to be received and adequate arrangements allowing him/her to attend courses, and participation in day-to-day family duties. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

produce an agreement between the au-pair and the host family defining his/her rights and obligations, including specifications about the pocket money to be received and adequate arrangements allowing him/her to attend courses, and participation in day-to-day family duties.

Specific conditions for au-pairs

A third-country national who applies to be admitted for the purpose of working as an au-pair shall, in addition to the general conditions laid down in Article 6:

| (a) | be at least 17 but not more than 30 or, except in individually justified cases, more than 30 years of age; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

be at least 17 but not more than 30 or, except in individually justified cases, more than 30 years of age;

| (b) | provide evidence that the host family accepts responsibility for him/her throughout his/her period of presence in the territory of the Member State concerned, in particular with regard to subsistence, accommodation, healthcare, maternity or accident risks; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

provide evidence that the host family accepts responsibility for him/her throughout his/her period of presence in the territory of the Member State concerned, in particular with regard to subsistence, accommodation, healthcare, maternity or accident risks;

| (c) | produce an agreement between the au-pair and the host family defining his/her rights and obligations, including specifications about the pocket money to be received and adequate arrangements allowing him/her to attend courses, and participation in day-to-day family duties. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

produce an agreement between the au-pair and the host family defining his/her rights and obligations, including specifications about the pocket money to be received and adequate arrangements allowing him/her to attend courses, and participation in day-to-day family duties.

| (d) | the agreement between the au pair and the host family shall provide for at least one full free day per week. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the agreement between the au pair and the host family shall provide for at least one full free day per week.

Reason

The suggested amendment aims to guarantee equal treatment between au-pairs and other workers in terms of weekly rest periods by ensuring that au pairs have at least one full day of weekly rest.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/48

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘European Union Solidarity Fund’

2014/C 114/10

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | regards the European Union Solidarity Fund (hereafter ‘the fund’) as the main instrument with which the Union can respond to serious disasters occurring within Member States or countries negotiating accession, thus demonstrating its solidarity with disaster-stricken countries, regions and municipalities (Article 222 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)); |
| --- | --- |

1.

regards the European Union Solidarity Fund (hereafter ‘the fund’) as the main instrument with which the Union can respond to serious disasters occurring within Member States or countries negotiating accession, thus demonstrating its solidarity with disaster-stricken countries, regions and municipalities (Article 222 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU));

| 2. | notes that the existing fund has generally proved a success, though it could be made to work better, especially by simplifying the red tape involved in releasing fund resources so as to substantially cut the time lapse between a disaster and the provision of assistance. The fund's rules could be more transparent and it could respond better to the needs of affected areas; |
| --- | --- |

2.

notes that the existing fund has generally proved a success, though it could be made to work better, especially by simplifying the red tape involved in releasing fund resources so as to substantially cut the time lapse between a disaster and the provision of assistance. The fund's rules could be more transparent and it could respond better to the needs of affected areas;

| 3. | regrets that the European Commission proposes that the maximum annual allocation for the fund remains unchanged since 2002 at EUR 500 million (2011 prices) which puts at risk that assistance is available for all major disasters, especially given the ever increasing frequency of these; |
| --- | --- |

3.

regrets that the European Commission proposes that the maximum annual allocation for the fund remains unchanged since 2002 at EUR 500 million (2011 prices) which puts at risk that assistance is available for all major disasters, especially given the ever increasing frequency of these;

Subsidiarity and proportionality

| 4. | considers the current regulations and the proposed changes to be compatible with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles; |
| --- | --- |

4.

considers the current regulations and the proposed changes to be compatible with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles;

Relevance at local and regional level

| 5. | stresses the fact that major natural disasters have a devastating effect, especially on the municipalities and regions they afflict, often severely damaging core infrastructure and natural and cultural heritage in stricken areas; |
| --- | --- |

5.

stresses the fact that major natural disasters have a devastating effect, especially on the municipalities and regions they afflict, often severely damaging core infrastructure and natural and cultural heritage in stricken areas;

| 6. | notes that local and regional authorities usually own the damaged infrastructure and are therefore responsible for its repair. They are also responsible for rescue services, providing temporary accommodation for those evacuated and for cleaning up affected areas; |
| --- | --- |

6.

notes that local and regional authorities usually own the damaged infrastructure and are therefore responsible for its repair. They are also responsible for rescue services, providing temporary accommodation for those evacuated and for cleaning up affected areas;

| 7. | therefore takes the view that, although Member States and accession countries are the prime recipients of assistance from the fund, this support is in the end intended to fund measures at regional and local level; |
| --- | --- |

7.

therefore takes the view that, although Member States and accession countries are the prime recipients of assistance from the fund, this support is in the end intended to fund measures at regional and local level;

| 8. | stresses that the most important thing for regional and local authorities is the swiftness of the fund's reaction and the targeting of available funding so as to cover real needs as fully as possible; |
| --- | --- |

8.

stresses that the most important thing for regional and local authorities is the swiftness of the fund's reaction and the targeting of available funding so as to cover real needs as fully as possible;

| 9. | for this reason, warmly welcomes the Commission's proposals, which help to speed up and better target fund assistance, and sets out a number of important recommendations for local and regional authorities in particular; |
| --- | --- |

9.

for this reason, warmly welcomes the Commission's proposals, which help to speed up and better target fund assistance, and sets out a number of important recommendations for local and regional authorities in particular;

| 10. | draws attention to the need to take into account the particular situation of the outermost regions, which are more vulnerable to extreme weather; |
| --- | --- |

10.

draws attention to the need to take into account the particular situation of the outermost regions, which are more vulnerable to extreme weather;

Scope of the fund (Article 2)

| 11. | welcomes clarification of the scope of the fund, which removes the current legal uncertainty and so prevents submission of applications that do not meet the conditions; |
| --- | --- |

11.

welcomes clarification of the scope of the fund, which removes the current legal uncertainty and so prevents submission of applications that do not meet the conditions;

Mobilisation of the fund in the case of extraordinary regional disasters (Article 2)

| 12. | welcomes the Commission's attempt to simplify the definition of a regional disaster by introducing a clear criterion based on GDP. This new definition will make it easier for the Commission to assess applications and will help to improve transparency and efficacy. It will be easier for potential applicants to judge whether a particular disaster entitles them to assistance; |
| --- | --- |

12.

welcomes the Commission's attempt to simplify the definition of a regional disaster by introducing a clear criterion based on GDP. This new definition will make it easier for the Commission to assess applications and will help to improve transparency and efficacy. It will be easier for potential applicants to judge whether a particular disaster entitles them to assistance;

| 13. | proposes that the figure for eligibility for assistance in the event of regional natural disasters be set at 1,0% of regional GDP for the NUTS 2 concerned. In the Committee's opinion, this criterion would better reflect the intention of providing more or less the same volume of aid for regional natural disasters; |
| --- | --- |

13.

proposes that the figure for eligibility for assistance in the event of regional natural disasters be set at 1,0% of regional GDP for the NUTS 2 concerned. In the Committee's opinion, this criterion would better reflect the intention of providing more or less the same volume of aid for regional natural disasters;

| 14. | considers that the indicators quoted should be adjusted for natural disasters occurring in any of the islands in the NUTS 2 archipelago regions to prevent any purely regional consideration from making the fund inoperative in such cases; |
| --- | --- |

14.

considers that the indicators quoted should be adjusted for natural disasters occurring in any of the islands in the NUTS 2 archipelago regions to prevent any purely regional consideration from making the fund inoperative in such cases;

Defining the regional criterion for mobilisation of the fund at NUTS 3 level (Article 2)

| 15. | points out that, given the ever greater concentration of disasters in areas that largely do not coincide with areas defined (in some Member States merely administratively) as NUTS 2, but that exceed the borders of a number of such regions, focussing the regional criterion only on NUTS 2 areas risks a lack of objectivity; |
| --- | --- |

15.

points out that, given the ever greater concentration of disasters in areas that largely do not coincide with areas defined (in some Member States merely administratively) as NUTS 2, but that exceed the borders of a number of such regions, focussing the regional criterion only on NUTS 2 areas risks a lack of objectivity;

| 16. | proposes introducing a criterion for regional disasters at NUTS 3 level for instances in which a number of neighbouring NUTS 3 regions are afflicted that together form an area corresponding in size to a NUTS 2 area (min. 800 000 population). In this case, the consequent GDP level should be calculated from the weighted average of the NUTS 3 regions concerned; |
| --- | --- |

16.

proposes introducing a criterion for regional disasters at NUTS 3 level for instances in which a number of neighbouring NUTS 3 regions are afflicted that together form an area corresponding in size to a NUTS 2 area (min. 800 000 population). In this case, the consequent GDP level should be calculated from the weighted average of the NUTS 3 regions concerned;

Exceptional crossborder natural disasters (Article 2)

| 17. | points out that many disasters are crossborder and that in these cases EU intervention would have considerable added value and would send a clear, positive message to citizens; |
| --- | --- |

17.

points out that many disasters are crossborder and that in these cases EU intervention would have considerable added value and would send a clear, positive message to citizens;

| 18. | proposes that the criterion for NUTS 3 level set out above should be used in defining exceptional crossborder national disasters in which neighbouring NUTS 3 regions could be from several countries; |
| --- | --- |

18.

proposes that the criterion for NUTS 3 level set out above should be used in defining exceptional crossborder national disasters in which neighbouring NUTS 3 regions could be from several countries;

Definitions of eligible operations (Article 3)

| 19. | welcomes the possibility of the fund being used not only for ‘immediate’ operations, but also for those directly related to the disaster that might be longer term in nature; |
| --- | --- |

19.

welcomes the possibility of the fund being used not only for ‘immediate’ operations, but also for those directly related to the disaster that might be longer term in nature;

| 20. | points out that, following a disaster, the local and regional levels have a real need to restore infrastructure to a level where it can better withstand disasters in future and in some cases to relocate such infrastructure to a more suitable place; |
| --- | --- |

20.

points out that, following a disaster, the local and regional levels have a real need to restore infrastructure to a level where it can better withstand disasters in future and in some cases to relocate such infrastructure to a more suitable place;

| 21. | proposes that the fund's eligible operations be more precisely defined and that they include the possibility of funding not only the repair of infrastructure, but also its restoration to a standard where it is better able to withstand natural disasters in future. The Committee also proposes that the fund's eligible operations include relocation of infrastructure currently in a location at risk of further natural disasters; |
| --- | --- |

21.

proposes that the fund's eligible operations be more precisely defined and that they include the possibility of funding not only the repair of infrastructure, but also its restoration to a standard where it is better able to withstand natural disasters in future. The Committee also proposes that the fund's eligible operations include relocation of infrastructure currently in a location at risk of further natural disasters;

Technical assistance (Article 3)

| 22. | points out that, for some local and regional authorities, the use of outside technical assistance is often vital in coping with a disaster and the work needed to restore the area; |
| --- | --- |

22.

points out that, for some local and regional authorities, the use of outside technical assistance is often vital in coping with a disaster and the work needed to restore the area;

| 23. | proposes making expenditure on outside technical assistance an eligible expenditure of the fund up to a maximum of 2% of the total fund contribution; |
| --- | --- |

23.

proposes making expenditure on outside technical assistance an eligible expenditure of the fund up to a maximum of 2% of the total fund contribution;

Time limit to submit applications (Article 4)

| 24. | points out that preparation of applications, especially assessing damage and collecting evidence to back up applications, is very time-consuming for the public bodies responsible at a time when they are mounting a necessary response to a disaster. The situation is all the more demanding with disasters that unfold gradually, such as not only drought, but also, for example, floods, which sometimes last several weeks or even months, with any assessment of damage only possible once the water has subsided. The seriousness of the disaster can thus only be ascertained afterwards; |
| --- | --- |

24.

points out that preparation of applications, especially assessing damage and collecting evidence to back up applications, is very time-consuming for the public bodies responsible at a time when they are mounting a necessary response to a disaster. The situation is all the more demanding with disasters that unfold gradually, such as not only drought, but also, for example, floods, which sometimes last several weeks or even months, with any assessment of damage only possible once the water has subsided. The seriousness of the disaster can thus only be ascertained afterwards;

| 25. | therefore welcomes the Commission's proposal catering for slowly unfolding disasters; |
| --- | --- |

25.

therefore welcomes the Commission's proposal catering for slowly unfolding disasters;

| 26. | at the same time points out that the proposal for legislation retains the current provisions where other natural disasters are concerned and does not address difficulties in preparing applications relating to flooding of long duration; |
| --- | --- |

26.

at the same time points out that the proposal for legislation retains the current provisions where other natural disasters are concerned and does not address difficulties in preparing applications relating to flooding of long duration;

| 27. | for this reason proposes, for these lengthy floods, introducing the option of submitting applications within ten weeks of the threat of a natural disaster ceasing (for example, with the repeal of a state of emergency declared by a Member State or regional authority, etc.); |
| --- | --- |

27.

for this reason proposes, for these lengthy floods, introducing the option of submitting applications within ten weeks of the threat of a natural disaster ceasing (for example, with the repeal of a state of emergency declared by a Member State or regional authority, etc.);

Provisions encouraging disaster prevention (Article 4)

| 28. | agrees with the Commission that adopting urgent essential prevention measures in the event of natural disaster is absolutely crucial and such measures must be constantly improved; |
| --- | --- |

28.

agrees with the Commission that adopting urgent essential prevention measures in the event of natural disaster is absolutely crucial and such measures must be constantly improved;

| 29. | expresses concern that the obligation to include information about the prevention of disaster risk in the application may not only constitute an increased administrative burden for the applicant, but also cause a delay in drafting and submitting the application. This would be at odds with the original aim of simplifying the red tape involved in mobilising this fund; |
| --- | --- |

29.

expresses concern that the obligation to include information about the prevention of disaster risk in the application may not only constitute an increased administrative burden for the applicant, but also cause a delay in drafting and submitting the application. This would be at odds with the original aim of simplifying the red tape involved in mobilising this fund;

| 30. | proposes that applicants only be required, when preparing their application, to provide a brief description of the implementation of Union legislation (Article 4(1)(e)) and that the requirement for additional information (Article 4(1)(f)) be dropped, since it is included in the report on the implementation of the contribution from the fund; |
| --- | --- |

30.

proposes that applicants only be required, when preparing their application, to provide a brief description of the implementation of Union legislation (Article 4(1)(e)) and that the requirement for additional information (Article 4(1)(f)) be dropped, since it is included in the report on the implementation of the contribution from the fund;

Introduction of advance payments (Article 4a)

| 31. | welcomes the Commission's proposal to introduce the possibility of advance payments to enable the fund to respond rapidly, but suggests that the system of advance payments operate outside the Multiannual Financial Framework and the structural funds specifically proposed; |
| --- | --- |

31.

welcomes the Commission's proposal to introduce the possibility of advance payments to enable the fund to respond rapidly, but suggests that the system of advance payments operate outside the Multiannual Financial Framework and the structural funds specifically proposed;

Extending time limits for use of contributions from the fund (Article 8)

| 32. | welcomes the Commission's intention to speed up the administrative process of approving assistance from the fund so that it reaches stricken areas more swiftly, but points out in this regard that the actual period available for using this contribution is shorter; |
| --- | --- |

32.

welcomes the Commission's intention to speed up the administrative process of approving assistance from the fund so that it reaches stricken areas more swiftly, but points out in this regard that the actual period available for using this contribution is shorter;

| 33. | proposes extending to 24 months the time limit for using the contribution from the fund, especially since repair to essential infrastructure and the restoration of essential services and supplies can be lengthy given the need to provide the necessary documentation and to follow regulations on public tenders; |
| --- | --- |

33.

proposes extending to 24 months the time limit for using the contribution from the fund, especially since repair to essential infrastructure and the restoration of essential services and supplies can be lengthy given the need to provide the necessary documentation and to follow regulations on public tenders;

Use of simplification tools

| 34. | European bodies and national, regional and local authorities have made repeated calls for the need to simplify management as much as possible to allow for performance orientation (1). This simplification is all the more necessary in the case of the Solidarity Fund which operates in situations of extreme emergency and which includes in its admissible costs those intended for meeting immediate personal needs. It would thus be desirable to include the use of unit costs in expenditure not intended for restoring infrastructures but for meeting the needs of the individuals affected. |
| --- | --- |

34.

European bodies and national, regional and local authorities have made repeated calls for the need to simplify management as much as possible to allow for performance orientation (1). This simplification is all the more necessary in the case of the Solidarity Fund which operates in situations of extreme emergency and which includes in its admissible costs those intended for meeting immediate personal needs. It would thus be desirable to include the use of unit costs in expenditure not intended for restoring infrastructures but for meeting the needs of the individuals affected.

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Recital 11

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The Fund should contribute to the restoration of infrastructure to working order, to the cleaning up of disaster stricken zones and to the costs of the rescue services and for temporary accommodation for the population concerned during the whole implementation period. The time-span during which the accommodation of people made homeless by the disaster may be considered temporary should also be defined. | The Fund should contribute to the restoration of infrastructure to working order or to a state in which it will be better able to withstand natural disasters, including relocation, to the cleaning up of disaster stricken zones and to the costs of the rescue services and for temporary accommodation for the population concerned during the whole implementation period. The time-span during which the accommodation of people made homeless by the disaster may be considered temporary should also be defined. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

The Fund should contribute to the restoration of infrastructure to working order, to the cleaning up of disaster stricken zones and to the costs of the rescue services and for temporary accommodation for the population concerned during the whole implementation period. The time-span during which the accommodation of people made homeless by the disaster may be considered temporary should also be defined.

The Fund should contribute to the restoration of infrastructure to working order or to a state in which it will be better able to withstand natural disasters, including relocation, to the cleaning up of disaster stricken zones and to the costs of the rescue services and for temporary accommodation for the population concerned during the whole implementation period. The time-span during which the accommodation of people made homeless by the disaster may be considered temporary should also be defined.

Reason

Echoes the recommendation for amendment 7 to Article 3 paragraph 2.

Amendment 2

Recital 13

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| It should also be specified that eligible operations should not include expenditure for technical assistance. | It should also be specified that eligible operations should not include expenditure for technical assistance. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

It should also be specified that eligible operations should not include expenditure for technical assistance.

It should also be specified that eligible operations should not include expenditure for technical assistance.

Reason

For some local and regional authorities, the use of outside technical assistance is often vital in coping with a disaster and the work needed to restore the area. The Committee of the Regions proposes making expenditure on outside technical assistance an eligible expenditure of the fund up to a maximum of 2% of the total fund contribution. An amendment to Article 3(5) is proposed in this connection.

Amendment 3

Recital 15

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Certain types of natural disaster, such as droughts, are developing over a longer period of time before their disastrous effects are felt. Provision should be made to allow the use of the Fund also in such cases. | For c
  Certain types of natural disaster, such as droughts, that are developing over a longer period of time before their disastrous effects are felt, or floods that are in the nature of sustained disasters,
  . P
  provision should be made to allow the use of the Fund also in such cases. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

Certain types of natural disaster, such as droughts, are developing over a longer period of time before their disastrous effects are felt. Provision should be made to allow the use of the Fund also in such cases.

For c
  Certain types of natural disaster, such as droughts, that are developing over a longer period of time before their disastrous effects are felt, or floods that are in the nature of sustained disasters,
  . P
  provision should be made to allow the use of the Fund also in such cases.

Reason

The preparation of applications, especially assessing damage and collecting evidence to back up applications, is very time-consuming for the public bodies responsible at a time when they are mounting a necessary response to a disaster. The situation is all the more demanding with disasters that unfold gradually, such as not only drought, but also, for example, floods, which sometimes last several weeks or even months, with any assessment of damage only possible once the water has subsided. The seriousness of the disaster can thus only be ascertained afterwards. Although the proposal for a regulation takes account of slowly unfolding disasters, it retains the current provisions where other natural disasters are concerned and does not address difficulties in preparing applications relating to flooding of long duration. The addition of a new paragraph to Article 4 is therefore proposed.

Amendment 4

Article 2(3)

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘regional natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union at NUTS 2 level, in direct damage in excess of 1,5 % of the region's gross domestic product (GDP). Where the disaster concerns several regions at NUTS 2 level, the threshold shall be applied to the weighted average GDP of those regions. | For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘regional natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union at NUTS 2 level, or at the level of several directly neighbouring NUTS 3 regions that together form an area possessing the minimum characteristics of a NUTS 2 region, in direct damage in excess of 1,5 %
  1,0 % of the region's gross domestic product (GDP). Where the disaster concerns several regions at NUTS 2 or NUTS 3 level, the threshold shall be applied to the weighted average GDP of those regions. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘regional natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union at NUTS 2 level, in direct damage in excess of 1,5 % of the region's gross domestic product (GDP). Where the disaster concerns several regions at NUTS 2 level, the threshold shall be applied to the weighted average GDP of those regions.

For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘regional natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union at NUTS 2 level, or at the level of several directly neighbouring NUTS 3 regions that together form an area possessing the minimum characteristics of a NUTS 2 region, in direct damage in excess of 1,5 %
  1,0 % of the region's gross domestic product (GDP). Where the disaster concerns several regions at NUTS 2 or NUTS 3 level, the threshold shall be applied to the weighted average GDP of those regions.

Reason

The main reason for setting the threshold for regional natural disasters at 1,5% was to arrive at almost identical outcomes to decisions taken in the past based on relatively imprecise criteria. When this criterion was used, however, no assistance was provided in the case of two regional natural disasters for which applications were in fact accepted (a volcano eruption in Sicily in 2003 causing damage equivalent to 1,36% of regional GDP and floods in the Rhône delta in 2004 with damage at 1,05% of GDP). With such high thresholds it will be impossible to secure the outcomes that the public and the victims of disasters expect. The Committee therefore proposes lowering the threshold to 1,0%.

The proposal for a regulation uses NUTS 2 as the reference unit for defining regional natural disasters. points out that, given the ever greater concentration of disasters in areas that largely do not coincide with areas defined (in some Member States merely administratively) as NUTS 2, but that exceed the borders of a number of such regions, focussing the regional criterion only on NUTS 2 areas risks a lack of objectivity. For this reason, the Committee of the Regions proposes extending the criterion to NUTS 3 level for cases in which a number of directly neighbouring NUTS 3 regions are afflicted that together form an area that by its nature meets at least the minimum criterion for defining a NUTS 2 area (min. 800 000 population). In this case, the consequent GDP level should be calculated from the weighted average of the NUTS 3 regions concerned.

Amendment 5

Article 2, new paragraph after paragraph 3

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘crossborder natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union, at the level of directly neighbouring NUTS 3 regions that together form an area possessing the minimum characteristics of a NUTS 2 region, in direct damage in excess of 1,0 % of the weighted average of the gross domestic product (GDP) of these regions. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘crossborder natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union, at the level of directly neighbouring NUTS 3 regions that together form an area possessing the minimum characteristics of a NUTS 2 region, in direct damage in excess of 1,0 % of the weighted average of the gross domestic product (GDP) of these regions.

Reason

Many disasters are crossborder. Action by the EU would deliver considerable added value in these cases and send a clear, positive signal to the public. For this reason, the Committee of the Regions proposes adding a new criterion for a ‘crossborder natural disaster’. This criterion would be assessed at the level of NUTS 3 regions from a number of Member States or countries negotiating their accession to the EU. In this case, the gravity of the disaster would be judged in a number of directly neighbouring NUTS 3 regions that together form an area meeting the criterion for a NUTS 2 region (min. 800 000 population). In this case, the consequent GDP level should be calculated from the weighted average of the NUTS 3 regions concerned. The eligible recipients would be the countries in which the region as so defined was located.

Amendment 6

Article 2 (4)

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   Assistance from the Fund may also be mobilised for any natural disaster in an eligible State which is a major natural disaster in a neighbouring Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union. | 4.   Assistance from the Fund may also be mobilised for any natural disaster in an eligible State which is a major natural disaster or a regional natural disaster in a neighbouring Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

4.   Assistance from the Fund may also be mobilised for any natural disaster in an eligible State which is a major natural disaster in a neighbouring Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union.

4.   Assistance from the Fund may also be mobilised for any natural disaster in an eligible State which is a major natural disaster or a regional natural disaster in a neighbouring Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union.

Reason

The possibility for neighbouring Member States to claim for damages caused by a ‘major natural disaster’ without having to meet the criteria themselves must also apply to ‘regional natural disasters’. If not, it would be incompatible with what Europe stands for.

Amendment 7

Article 3(2)

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The aim of the Fund is to complement the efforts of the States concerned and to cover part of their public expenditure in order to help the eligible State to carry out the following essential emergency and recovery operations, depending on the type of disaster: | The aim of the Fund is to complement the efforts of the States concerned and to cover part of their public expenditure in order to help the eligible State to carry out the following essential emergency and recovery operations, depending on the type of disaster: |
| (a) | restoring the working order of infrastructure and plant in the fields of energy, water and waste water, telecommunications, transport, health and education; |

Commission text

CoR amendment

The aim of the Fund is to complement the efforts of the States concerned and to cover part of their public expenditure in order to help the eligible State to carry out the following essential emergency and recovery operations, depending on the type of disaster:

The aim of the Fund is to complement the efforts of the States concerned and to cover part of their public expenditure in order to help the eligible State to carry out the following essential emergency and recovery operations, depending on the type of disaster:

(a)

restoring the working order of infrastructure and plant in the fields of energy, water and waste water, telecommunications, transport, health and education;

| (b) | providing temporary accommodation and funding rescue services to meet the needs of the population concerned; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

providing temporary accommodation and funding rescue services to meet the needs of the population concerned;

| (c) | securing of preventive infrastructures and measures of protection of the cultural heritage; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

securing of preventive infrastructures and measures of protection of the cultural heritage;

| (d) | immediate cleaning up of disaster-stricken areas, including natural zones. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

immediate cleaning up of disaster-stricken areas, including natural zones.

| (a) | restoring the working order of infrastructure and plant in the fields of energy, water and waste water, telecommunications, transport, health and education; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

restoring the working order of infrastructure and plant in the fields of energy, water and waste water, telecommunications, transport, health and education;

| (b) | providing temporary accommodation and funding rescue services to meet the needs of the population concerned; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

providing temporary accommodation and funding rescue services to meet the needs of the population concerned;

| (c) | securing of preventive infrastructures and measures of protection of the cultural heritage; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

securing of preventive infrastructures and measures of protection of the cultural heritage;

| (d) | immediate cleaning up of disaster-stricken areas, including natural zones. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

immediate cleaning up of disaster-stricken areas, including natural zones.

For the purposes of point (a), ‘restoration’ shall be understood to mean restoring to a state in which it will be better able to withstand natural disasters, including relocation of such infrastructure projects in cases where they are clearly sited in a place at risk of further natural disaster.

For the purposes of point (b), ‘temporary accommodation’ shall mean accommodation lasting until the population concerned is able to return to their original homes following their repair or reconstruction.

For the purposes of point (b), ‘temporary accommodation’ shall mean accommodation lasting until the population concerned is able to return to their original homes following their repair or reconstruction.

Reason

The fund normally supports the restoration of damaged infrastructure to its original state. However, regions have become aware of new insights regarding essential precautions against natural disasters which argue for the relocation of some infrastructure projects, such as motorways or main rail lines of supra-regional importance. At the same time, repair of heavily damaged infrastructure elements, such as bridges, requires vital investment to eliminate the risk of their being damaged in a subsequent natural disaster. In these cases, merely returning such infrastructure to its previous condition is inadequate and counterproductive.

Amendment 8

Article 3(5)

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Technical assistance, including management, monitoring, information and communication, complaint resolution, and control and audit, is not eligible for a contribution from the Fund. | Outside t
  Technical assistance, including management, monitoring, information and communication, complaint resolution, and control and audit, is not eligible for a contribution from the Fund of up to a maximum of 2% of the total Fund contribution. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

Technical assistance, including management, monitoring, information and communication, complaint resolution, and control and audit, is not eligible for a contribution from the Fund.

Outside t
  Technical assistance, including management, monitoring, information and communication, complaint resolution, and control and audit, is not eligible for a contribution from the Fund of up to a maximum of 2% of the total Fund contribution.

Reason

For some regional authorities, the use of outside technical assistance is often vital in coping with a disaster and the work needed to restore the area; The Committee of the Regions proposes making expenditure on outside technical assistance an eligible expenditure of the fund up to a maximum of 2% of the total fund contribution.

Amendment 9

Article 4(1)

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| As soon as possible and no later than ten weeks after the first occurrence of damage as a consequence of a natural disaster, a State may submit an application for a contribution from the Fund to the Commission providing all available information on, at least:






  (a) | the total direct damage caused by the disaster and its impact on the population, the economy and the environment concerned; |

Commission text

CoR amendment

As soon as possible and no later than ten weeks after the first occurrence of damage as a consequence of a natural disaster, a State may submit an application for a contribution from the Fund to the Commission providing all available information on, at least:

(a)

the total direct damage caused by the disaster and its impact on the population, the economy and the environment concerned;

| (b) | the estimated cost of the operations referred to in Article 3(2); |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the estimated cost of the operations referred to in Article 3(2);

| (c) | any other sources of Union funding; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

any other sources of Union funding;

| (d) | any other sources of national or international funding, including public and private insurance coverage which might contribute
  to the costs of repairing the damage; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

any other sources of national or international funding, including public and private insurance coverage which might contribute

to the costs of repairing the damage;

| (e) | the implementation of Union legislation on disaster risk prevention and management related to the nature of the disaster; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

the implementation of Union legislation on disaster risk prevention and management related to the nature of the disaster;

| (f) | any other relevant information on prevention and mitigation measures taken related to the nature of the disaster. |
| --- | --- |

(f)

any other relevant information on prevention and mitigation measures taken related to the nature of the disaster.

As soon as possible and no later than ten weeks after the first occurrence of damage as a consequence of a natural disaster, a State may submit an application for a contribution from the Fund to the Commission providing all available information on, at least:

| (a) | the total direct damage caused by the disaster and its impact on the population, the economy and the environment concerned; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the total direct damage caused by the disaster and its impact on the population, the economy and the environment concerned;

| (b) | the estimated cost of the operations referred to in Article 3(2); |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the estimated cost of the operations referred to in Article 3(2);

| (c) | any other sources of Union funding; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

any other sources of Union funding;

| (d) | any other sources of national or international funding, including public and private insurance coverage which might contribute
  to the costs of repairing the damage; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

any other sources of national or international funding, including public and private insurance coverage which might contribute

to the costs of repairing the damage;

| (e) | a brief description of the implementation of Union legislation on disaster risk prevention and management related to the nature of the disaster; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

a brief description of the implementation of Union legislation on disaster risk prevention and management related to the nature of the disaster;

| f) | any other relevant information on prevention and mitigation measures taken related to the nature of the disaster. |
| --- | --- |

f)

any other relevant information on prevention and mitigation measures taken related to the nature of the disaster.

Reason

The obligation to include information about the prevention of disaster risk in the application may not only constitute an increased administrative burden for the applicant, but also cause a delay in drafting and submitting the application. This would be at odds with the original aim of simplifying the red tape involved in mobilising this fund. The Committee of the Regions therefore proposes that Article 4(e) be retained but limited merely to a brief description of the implementation of Union legislation and that Article 4(f) be deleted, since the same information is provided in the a report on the implementation of the contribution from the Fund (Article 8(3)).

Amendment 10

Article 4, new paragraph after paragraph 1a

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | In the event of a sustained natural disaster (such as flooding), the ten-week application deadline referred to in paragraph 1 shall run from the date at which the public authorities of the eligible State have officially terminated the threat of natural disaster (by, for example, repealing the state of emergency declared by the Member State or regional authority, etc.). |

Commission text

CoR amendment

In the event of a sustained natural disaster (such as flooding), the ten-week application deadline referred to in paragraph 1 shall run from the date at which the public authorities of the eligible State have officially terminated the threat of natural disaster (by, for example, repealing the state of emergency declared by the Member State or regional authority, etc.).

Reason

Preparation of applications, especially assessing damage and collecting evidence to back up applications, is very time-consuming for the public bodies responsible at a time when they are mounting a necessary response to a disaster. The situation is all the more demanding in the case of floods, which sometimes last several weeks or even months, with any assessment of damage only possible once the water has subsided. The seriousness of the disaster can thus only be ascertained afterwards. Although the proposal for a regulation takes account of slowly unfolding disasters, it retains the current provisions where other natural disasters are concerned and does not address difficulties in preparing applications relating to flooding of long duration.

The Committee therefore proposes, for these lengthy floods, introducing the option of submitting applications within ten weeks of the threat of a natural disaster ceasing (for example, with the repeal of a state of emergency declared by a Member State or regional authority, etc.).

Amendment 11

Article 8(1)

| Commission text | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The contribution from the Fund shall be used within one year from the date on which the Commission has disbursed the full amount of the assistance. Any part of the contribution remaining unused by that deadline or found to be used for ineligible operations shall be recovered by the Commission from the beneficiary State. | The contribution from the Fund shall be used within two years
  one year from the date on which the Commission has disbursed the full amount of the assistance. Any part of the contribution remaining unused by that deadline or found to be used for ineligible operations shall be recovered by the Commission from the beneficiary State. |

Commission text

CoR amendment

The contribution from the Fund shall be used within one year from the date on which the Commission has disbursed the full amount of the assistance. Any part of the contribution remaining unused by that deadline or found to be used for ineligible operations shall be recovered by the Commission from the beneficiary State.

The contribution from the Fund shall be used within two years
  one year from the date on which the Commission has disbursed the full amount of the assistance. Any part of the contribution remaining unused by that deadline or found to be used for ineligible operations shall be recovered by the Commission from the beneficiary State.

Reason

Speeding up the administrative process of approving assistance from the fund will ensure it reaches stricken areas sooner. However, it must be pointed out that the actual period for using the fund contribution is shorter. The Committee of the Region proposes extending to two years the time limit for using the contribution from the fund, above all because repair to essential infrastructure can be lengthy given the need to provide the necessary documentation and to follow regulations on public tenders.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  Inter alia, the Committee of the Regions opinion on ‘Recommendations for better spending’, October 2013 (CDR 3609-2013_00_00_AC).

1

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/57

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Framework on future EU ports policy’

2014/C 114/11

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Political recommendations

| 1. | against the background of currently 3 million people directly or indirectly employed by EU ports and of the projected increase by 50% by 2030 of the volume of goods handled by ports, the Committee of the Regions welcomes that the European Commission builds its ‘ports package’ around the following priorities:






  — | focusing the proposed measures on the 319 ports which are part of the trans-European network while leaving Member States free to apply the draft regulation to other ports; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

against the background of currently 3 million people directly or indirectly employed by EU ports and of the projected increase by 50% by 2030 of the volume of goods handled by ports, the Committee of the Regions welcomes that the European Commission builds its ‘ports package’ around the following priorities:

—

focusing the proposed measures on the 319 ports which are part of the trans-European network while leaving Member States free to apply the draft regulation to other ports;

| — | modernising port services and attracting investment to ports by guaranteeing free market access and increasing financial transparency of port services while respecting a significant degree of autonomy for port authorities; |
| --- | --- |

—

modernising port services and attracting investment to ports by guaranteeing free market access and increasing financial transparency of port services while respecting a significant degree of autonomy for port authorities;

| — | relying on the outcome of a European Social Dialogue for the ports sector launched on 19 June 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

relying on the outcome of a European Social Dialogue for the ports sector launched on 19 June 2013;

| — | ensuring greater consistency of the environmental management of ports; |
| --- | --- |

—

ensuring greater consistency of the environmental management of ports;

| — | ensuring coherence with the EU ‘blue belt’ pilot project which aims at contributing to the developing a single market for maritime transport as called in the Single Market Act II; |
| --- | --- |

—

ensuring coherence with the EU ‘blue belt’ pilot project which aims at contributing to the developing a single market for maritime transport as called in the Single Market Act II;

| 2. | doubts however that the European Commission follows a holistic approach towards ports' policy considering the lack of reference in the ‘ports package’ to either the Europe 2020 strategy or the ‘Blue Growth’ initiative as well as the absence of reference to the review of the highly port-relevant regulations on sulphur limits for marine fuels or the lack of synchronisation with the review of the State aid guidelines applicable to the ports sector; |
| --- | --- |

2.

doubts however that the European Commission follows a holistic approach towards ports' policy considering the lack of reference in the ‘ports package’ to either the Europe 2020 strategy or the ‘Blue Growth’ initiative as well as the absence of reference to the review of the highly port-relevant regulations on sulphur limits for marine fuels or the lack of synchronisation with the review of the State aid guidelines applicable to the ports sector;

Methodology

| 3. | notes that the European Commission has taken the politically courageous option of presenting a draft regulation for which a certain number of legislative parameters such as the draft directive on concessions, the draft TEN-T regulation or the draft regulation on the access of third-country goods and services to the Union's internal market in public procurement (COM(2012) 124 final) have not been adopted yet and therefore remain ‘moving targets’; |
| --- | --- |

3.

notes that the European Commission has taken the politically courageous option of presenting a draft regulation for which a certain number of legislative parameters such as the draft directive on concessions, the draft TEN-T regulation or the draft regulation on the access of third-country goods and services to the Union's internal market in public procurement (COM(2012) 124 final) have not been adopted yet and therefore remain ‘moving targets’;

| 4. | acknowledges that the European Commission had conducted since 2011 intensive consultations with interested parties. Regrets however that neither the Committee of the Regions nor associations representing local and regional authorities had been directly involved. Also expresses disappointment with regard to the fact that despite the recent Commission Staff Working Document on territorial impact assessment (1) the territorial dimension is not explicitly addressed in the impact assessment. This is all the more regrettable in view of the challenges of a European ports policy in relation to territorial cohesion. These challenges are currently exacerbated by the phenomenon of ‘containerisation’ and the threat of congestion in the hinterlands of the largest ports; |
| --- | --- |

4.

acknowledges that the European Commission had conducted since 2011 intensive consultations with interested parties. Regrets however that neither the Committee of the Regions nor associations representing local and regional authorities had been directly involved. Also expresses disappointment with regard to the fact that despite the recent Commission Staff Working Document on territorial impact assessment (1) the territorial dimension is not explicitly addressed in the impact assessment. This is all the more regrettable in view of the challenges of a European ports policy in relation to territorial cohesion. These challenges are currently exacerbated by the phenomenon of ‘containerisation’ and the threat of congestion in the hinterlands of the largest ports;

| 5. | stresses the need to take into account the diversity of ports in the EU due to geographical locations, to different type of economic activities, different ports regulatory regimes and different applicable national ports' policy frameworks. Recalls in this context that the ports' package will, according to Decision No 661/2010/EU on European Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (Art. 12.2), apply to seaports corresponding to one of the categories, A, B or C, defined as follows:






  — | ‘A: international seaports: ports with a total annual traffic volume of not less than 1,5 million tonnes of freight or 200 000 passengers which, unless it is an impossibility, are connected with the overland elements of the trans-European transport network and therefore play a major role in international maritime transport; |
| --- | --- | --- |

5.

stresses the need to take into account the diversity of ports in the EU due to geographical locations, to different type of economic activities, different ports regulatory regimes and different applicable national ports' policy frameworks. Recalls in this context that the ports' package will, according to Decision No 661/2010/EU on European Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (Art. 12.2), apply to seaports corresponding to one of the categories, A, B or C, defined as follows:

—

‘A: international seaports: ports with a total annual traffic volume of not less than 1,5 million tonnes of freight or 200 000 passengers which, unless it is an impossibility, are connected with the overland elements of the trans-European transport network and therefore play a major role in international maritime transport;

| — | B: Union seaports (...): these ports have a total annual traffic volume of not less than 0,5 million tonnes of freight or between 100 000 and 199 999 passengers, are connected, unless it is an impossibility, with the overland elements of the trans-European transport network and are equipped with the necessary transshipment facilities for short-distance sea shipping; |
| --- | --- |

—

B: Union seaports (...): these ports have a total annual traffic volume of not less than 0,5 million tonnes of freight or between 100 000 and 199 999 passengers, are connected, unless it is an impossibility, with the overland elements of the trans-European transport network and are equipped with the necessary transshipment facilities for short-distance sea shipping;

| — | C: regional ports: these ports (...) are situated in island, peripheral or outermost regions, interconnecting such regions by sea and/or connecting them with the central regions of the Union’; |
| --- | --- |

—

C: regional ports: these ports (...) are situated in island, peripheral or outermost regions, interconnecting such regions by sea and/or connecting them with the central regions of the Union’;

| 6. | welcomes the fact that the social partners in the port sector have established an EU-level Social Dialogue Committee and recalls the importance of encouraging social dialogue at national and local level as an instrument to improve living and working conditions as well as to contribute competitiveness of the sector; |
| --- | --- |

6.

welcomes the fact that the social partners in the port sector have established an EU-level Social Dialogue Committee and recalls the importance of encouraging social dialogue at national and local level as an instrument to improve living and working conditions as well as to contribute competitiveness of the sector;

Legal basis, subsidiarity, proportionality

| 7. | endorses the European Commission's argumentation as to the choice of the legal basis (Article 100 (2) TFEU) and the compliance with the subsidiarity principle as outlined in the explanatory memorandum of the draft regulation (point 3.3.). In relation to the proportionality principle, the Committee of the Regions remains however unconvinced about the choice of a regulation rather than a directive as for the previous proposals made by the European Commission or for related legislation (in particular concessions). It would be contradictory to choose a legal instrument that is directly binding in its entirety as the regulation while recognising the main role of the Member States, regional and local public authorities involved in port infrastructure development. Moreover, a directive would be better suitable to take into consideration the wide diversity of ports in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

7.

endorses the European Commission's argumentation as to the choice of the legal basis (Article 100 (2) TFEU) and the compliance with the subsidiarity principle as outlined in the explanatory memorandum of the draft regulation (point 3.3.). In relation to the proportionality principle, the Committee of the Regions remains however unconvinced about the choice of a regulation rather than a directive as for the previous proposals made by the European Commission or for related legislation (in particular concessions). It would be contradictory to choose a legal instrument that is directly binding in its entirety as the regulation while recognising the main role of the Member States, regional and local public authorities involved in port infrastructure development. Moreover, a directive would be better suitable to take into consideration the wide diversity of ports in the EU;

Structural funds and State Aids

| 8. | highlights that since 2000, the EU has made available around EUR 6,2 billion through the Structural and Cohesion Funds to co-finance the construction of seaport infrastructures. In addition, between 2007 and 2012, 4% of the TEN-T envelope (equivalent to EUR 244,6 mi.) were granted to ports; |
| --- | --- |

8.

highlights that since 2000, the EU has made available around EUR 6,2 billion through the Structural and Cohesion Funds to co-finance the construction of seaport infrastructures. In addition, between 2007 and 2012, 4% of the TEN-T envelope (equivalent to EUR 244,6 mi.) were granted to ports;

| 9. | draws attention to the Special Report by the Court of Auditors 4/2012 on the efficiency of using structural and cohesion funds to co-finance seaports' infrastructure (2). Highlights the Court of Auditors' recommendation to ‘make cohesion policy aid for the coming period conditional upon the existence of a comprehensive long-term port development strategy (based on an assessment of needs) for all the ports of the relevant region’; |
| --- | --- |

9.

draws attention to the Special Report by the Court of Auditors 4/2012 on the efficiency of using structural and cohesion funds to co-finance seaports' infrastructure (2). Highlights the Court of Auditors' recommendation to ‘make cohesion policy aid for the coming period conditional upon the existence of a comprehensive long-term port development strategy (based on an assessment of needs) for all the ports of the relevant region’;

| 10. | welcomes the recognition by the European Commission (3) that state aid for services of general economic interest (SGEI), including contributions from the ERDF, would not be considered in the calculation of ceilings for the intensity of regional aid if the conditions set out in the Decision of 20 December 2011 are met (4); |
| --- | --- |

10.

welcomes the recognition by the European Commission (3) that state aid for services of general economic interest (SGEI), including contributions from the ERDF, would not be considered in the calculation of ceilings for the intensity of regional aid if the conditions set out in the Decision of 20 December 2011 are met (4);

| 11. | recalls the importance of clarifying the applicability of the State aid regime to infrastructure, in light of the problems involved in interpreting the General Court judgment of 24 March 2011 on Freistaat Sachsen and Land Sachsen-Anhalt (T-443/08) and Mitteldeutsche Flughafen AG and Flughafen Leipzig-Halle GmbH (T-455/08) v the European Commission, which has resulted in considerable delays in the ex-ante verification of around 200 infrastructure projects funded by the Structural Funds; |
| --- | --- |

11.

recalls the importance of clarifying the applicability of the State aid regime to infrastructure, in light of the problems involved in interpreting the General Court judgment of 24 March 2011 on Freistaat Sachsen and Land Sachsen-Anhalt (T-443/08) and Mitteldeutsche Flughafen AG and Flughafen Leipzig-Halle GmbH (T-455/08) v the European Commission, which has resulted in considerable delays in the ex-ante verification of around 200 infrastructure projects funded by the Structural Funds;

| 12. | regrets that the European Commission has not included directly into the ports' package proposals to clarify the notion of aid as regards the financing of infrastructure, including in the ports sector (Action 5). Instead the European Commission has launched on 3 July 2013 a questionnaire on the functioning and the taxation of ports addressed to the Permanent Representations of all Member States only. Therefore calls on the European Commission to adopt a more inclusive approach in the coming months and to involve local and regional authorities through the CoR in the revision of state aid rules applicable to infrastructure in general and ports in particular, especially with regard to the exemption rules for the port infrastructure category, which will probably be drawn up by the end of 2013; |
| --- | --- |

12.

regrets that the European Commission has not included directly into the ports' package proposals to clarify the notion of aid as regards the financing of infrastructure, including in the ports sector (Action 5). Instead the European Commission has launched on 3 July 2013 a questionnaire on the functioning and the taxation of ports addressed to the Permanent Representations of all Member States only. Therefore calls on the European Commission to adopt a more inclusive approach in the coming months and to involve local and regional authorities through the CoR in the revision of state aid rules applicable to infrastructure in general and ports in particular, especially with regard to the exemption rules for the port infrastructure category, which will probably be drawn up by the end of 2013;

Legislative proposal

| 13. | recommends excluding dredging, mooring, pilotage and towage from the scope of the regulation on the grounds that these services obey to objectives of general interest, i.e. safety, security and the protection of the environment; and calls on the Commission to resolve discrepancies with — or clarify scope in relation to — current directives regarding port reception facilities. The conditions and requirements for port reception facilities are already laid down in Directive 2000/59/EC. The provisions of Article 8, in particular, are contrary to free market access for all providers of disposal services. If the port operator selects individual port reception facilities and includes these in the charging system required in that directive, the tender provisions of Directive 2004/17/EC are applicable; |
| --- | --- |

13.

recommends excluding dredging, mooring, pilotage and towage from the scope of the regulation on the grounds that these services obey to objectives of general interest, i.e. safety, security and the protection of the environment; and calls on the Commission to resolve discrepancies with — or clarify scope in relation to — current directives regarding port reception facilities. The conditions and requirements for port reception facilities are already laid down in Directive 2000/59/EC. The provisions of Article 8, in particular, are contrary to free market access for all providers of disposal services. If the port operator selects individual port reception facilities and includes these in the charging system required in that directive, the tender provisions of Directive 2004/17/EC are applicable;

| 14. | regrets that Article 2 (‘definitions’) does not provide a definition of ‘competent authority’ while it plays a major role in Art. 8 and 9; |
| --- | --- |

14.

regrets that Article 2 (‘definitions’) does not provide a definition of ‘competent authority’ while it plays a major role in Art. 8 and 9;

| 15. | regrets the insufficient recognition of the role of local and regional authorities with regard to applicable legislation or the setting of minimum requirements for the provision of port services (Article 4.2 d, Article 4.4, Article 6.4); |
| --- | --- |

15.

regrets the insufficient recognition of the role of local and regional authorities with regard to applicable legislation or the setting of minimum requirements for the provision of port services (Article 4.2 d, Article 4.4, Article 6.4);

| 16. | envisages further extending the remits of the public service obligations defined in Article 8 in order to include in particular criteria related to territorial cohesion such as the accessibility of remote or island areas and outermost regions; |
| --- | --- |

16.

envisages further extending the remits of the public service obligations defined in Article 8 in order to include in particular criteria related to territorial cohesion such as the accessibility of remote or island areas and outermost regions;

| 17. | wonders why in relation to the procedure for the limitation of the number of port services providers as foreseen in article 7, the European Commission foresees in Article 10 only the possibility and not the obligation to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC; |
| --- | --- |

17.

wonders why in relation to the procedure for the limitation of the number of port services providers as foreseen in article 7, the European Commission foresees in Article 10 only the possibility and not the obligation to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC;

| 18. | expresses doubts as to whether the requirements set notably in article 12 about the degree of detail of the information to be provided by port authorities on the public funding received and the obligation to maintain separate accounts is not disproportionate, in particular with regard to the very different cost structures depending on the location of the ports; |
| --- | --- |

18.

expresses doubts as to whether the requirements set notably in article 12 about the degree of detail of the information to be provided by port authorities on the public funding received and the obligation to maintain separate accounts is not disproportionate, in particular with regard to the very different cost structures depending on the location of the ports;

| 19. | requests the European Commission to further specify what is meant in Article 14.5 by ‘common charging principles’, considering that any empowerment conferred to the European Commission to adopt delegated acts should be kept as precise as possible; |
| --- | --- |

19.

requests the European Commission to further specify what is meant in Article 14.5 by ‘common charging principles’, considering that any empowerment conferred to the European Commission to adopt delegated acts should be kept as precise as possible;

| 20. | questions the added value of establishing an independent supervisory body responsible for monitoring and supervising the application of the regulation (Recital 19 and Article 17). A body of this kind would be liable to add to the administrative burden associated with planning port development and to have an impact on Member States' budgets; |
| --- | --- |

20.

questions the added value of establishing an independent supervisory body responsible for monitoring and supervising the application of the regulation (Recital 19 and Article 17). A body of this kind would be liable to add to the administrative burden associated with planning port development and to have an impact on Member States' budgets;

| 21. | similarly, expresses doubts on the need of setting-up a cooperation between independent supervisory authorities for facilitating a uniform implementation of a Regulation which is by definition directly applicable (Article 18). |
| --- | --- |

21.

similarly, expresses doubts on the need of setting-up a cooperation between independent supervisory authorities for facilitating a uniform implementation of a Regulation which is by definition directly applicable (Article 18).

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Title

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a framework on market access to port services and financial transparency of ports | Proposal for a
  DIRECTIVE
  REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a framework on market access to port services and financial transparency of ports |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a framework on market access to port services and financial transparency of ports

Proposal for a
  DIRECTIVE
  REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a framework on market access to port services and financial transparency of ports

Reason

The Committee of the Regions remains unconvinced about the choice of a regulation rather than a directive as for the previous proposals made by the European Commission or for related legislation (in particular concessions). Moreover, a directive would be better suitable to take into consideration the wide diversity of ports in the EU.

Amendment 2

Recital 4

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The overwhelming majority of Union maritime traffic transits through the seaports of the trans-European transport network. In order to achieve the aim of this Regulation in a proportionate way without imposing any unnecessary burden on other ports, this Regulation should apply to the ports of the trans-European transport network, each of which playing a significant role for the European transport system either because it handles more than 0,1% of the total EU freight or the total number of passengers or because it improves the regional accessibility of island or peripheral areas, without prejudice, however, to the possibility of Member States deciding to apply this Regulation to other ports as well. Pilotage services performed in the deep sea do not have a direct impact on the efficiency of the ports as they are not used for the direct entry and exit of the ports and therefore do not need to be included in this Regulation. | The overwhelming majority of Union maritime traffic transits through the seaports of the trans-European transport network. In order to achieve the aim of this Directive
  Regulation in a proportionate way without imposing any unnecessary burden on other ports, this Directive
  Regulation should apply to the ports of the trans-European transport network, each of which playing a significant role for the European transport system either because it handles more than 0,1% of the total EU freight or the total number of passengers or because it improves the regional accessibility of island or peripheral areas, or outermost regions, without prejudice, however, to the possibility of Member States deciding to apply this Directive
  Regulation to other ports as well. Pilotage
  Technical-nautical services which fulfil missions of general interest
  performed in the deep sea do not have a direct impact on the efficiency of the ports as they are not used for the direct entry and exit of the ports and therefore do not need to be included in this Regulation
  Directive. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The overwhelming majority of Union maritime traffic transits through the seaports of the trans-European transport network. In order to achieve the aim of this Regulation in a proportionate way without imposing any unnecessary burden on other ports, this Regulation should apply to the ports of the trans-European transport network, each of which playing a significant role for the European transport system either because it handles more than 0,1% of the total EU freight or the total number of passengers or because it improves the regional accessibility of island or peripheral areas, without prejudice, however, to the possibility of Member States deciding to apply this Regulation to other ports as well. Pilotage services performed in the deep sea do not have a direct impact on the efficiency of the ports as they are not used for the direct entry and exit of the ports and therefore do not need to be included in this Regulation.

The overwhelming majority of Union maritime traffic transits through the seaports of the trans-European transport network. In order to achieve the aim of this Directive
  Regulation in a proportionate way without imposing any unnecessary burden on other ports, this Directive
  Regulation should apply to the ports of the trans-European transport network, each of which playing a significant role for the European transport system either because it handles more than 0,1% of the total EU freight or the total number of passengers or because it improves the regional accessibility of island or peripheral areas, or outermost regions, without prejudice, however, to the possibility of Member States deciding to apply this Directive
  Regulation to other ports as well. Pilotage
  Technical-nautical services which fulfil missions of general interest
  performed in the deep sea do not have a direct impact on the efficiency of the ports as they are not used for the direct entry and exit of the ports and therefore do not need to be included in this Regulation
  Directive.

Reason

Amendment linked to the amendment to Article 1 (scope).

Amendment 3

Recital 19

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Member States should retain the power to ensure an adequate level of social protection for the staff of undertaking providing port services. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the social and labour rules of the Member States. In cases of limitation of the number of port service providers, where the conclusion of a port service contract may entail a change of port service operator, it should be possible for the competent authorities to ask the chosen service operator to apply the provisions of Council Directive 2001/23/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses. | Member States should retain the power to ensure an adequate level of social protection for the staff of undertaking providing port services. This Directive
  Regulation shall not affect the application of the social and labour rules of the Member States. In cases of limitation of the number of port service providers, where the conclusion of a port service contract may entail a change of port service operator, it should be possible for the competent authorities to ask the chosen service operator shall
  to apply the provisions of Council Directive 2001/23/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Member States should retain the power to ensure an adequate level of social protection for the staff of undertaking providing port services. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the social and labour rules of the Member States. In cases of limitation of the number of port service providers, where the conclusion of a port service contract may entail a change of port service operator, it should be possible for the competent authorities to ask the chosen service operator to apply the provisions of Council Directive 2001/23/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses.

Member States should retain the power to ensure an adequate level of social protection for the staff of undertaking providing port services. This Directive
  Regulation shall not affect the application of the social and labour rules of the Member States. In cases of limitation of the number of port service providers, where the conclusion of a port service contract may entail a change of port service operator, it should be possible for the competent authorities to ask the chosen service operator shall
  to apply the provisions of Council Directive 2001/23/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses.

Reason

Amendment linked to the amendment to Article 10.2.

Amendment 4

Recital 29

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| In order to supplement and amend certain non-essential elements of this Regulation and in particular to promote the uniform application of environmental charging, reinforce the Union-wide coherence of environmental charging and to ensure common charging principles in relation to the promotion of short sea shipping, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations according to which to vary the infrastructure charges and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges. (...) | In order to supplement and amend certain non-essential elements of this Directive
  Regulation and in particular to promote the uniform application of environmental charging, reinforce the Union-wide coherence of environmental charging and to ensure common charging principles in relation to the promotion of short sea shipping, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations on the basis of
  according to which to vary the infrastructure charges and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges can vary. (...) |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

In order to supplement and amend certain non-essential elements of this Regulation and in particular to promote the uniform application of environmental charging, reinforce the Union-wide coherence of environmental charging and to ensure common charging principles in relation to the promotion of short sea shipping, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations according to which to vary the infrastructure charges and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges. (...)

In order to supplement and amend certain non-essential elements of this Directive
  Regulation and in particular to promote the uniform application of environmental charging, reinforce the Union-wide coherence of environmental charging and to ensure common charging principles in relation to the promotion of short sea shipping, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations on the basis of
  according to which to vary the infrastructure charges and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges can vary. (...)

Reason

Amendment linked to the amendment to Article 14.5. In agreement regarding common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations. However, only the port authority can decide on variations in port charges.

Amendment 5

Article 1 — Subject matter and scope

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   This Regulation establishes:






  (a) | a clear framework for access to the market of port services; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   This Regulation establishes:

(a)

a clear framework for access to the market of port services;

| (b) | common rules on the financial transparency and charges to be applied by managing bodies or providers of port services. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

common rules on the financial transparency and charges to be applied by managing bodies or providers of port services.

1.   This Directive
  Regulation establishes:

| (a) | a clear framework for access to the market of port services; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

a clear framework for access to the market of port services;

| (b) | common rules on the financial transparency and charges to be applied by managing bodies or providers of port services. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

common rules on the financial transparency and charges to be applied by managing bodies or providers of port services.

2.   This Regulation shall apply to the provision of the following categories of port services, either inside the port area or on the waterway access to and from the ports.

| (a) | bunkering |
| --- | --- |

(a)

bunkering

| (b) | cargo handling; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

cargo handling;

| (c) | dredging; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

dredging;

| (d) | mooring; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

mooring;

| (e) | passenger services; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

passenger services;

| (f) | port reception facilities; |
| --- | --- |

(f)

port reception facilities;

| (g) | pilotage and; |
| --- | --- |

(g)

pilotage and;

| (h) | towage. |
| --- | --- |

(h)

towage.

2.   This Directive
  Regulation shall apply to the provision of the following categories of port services, either inside the port area or on the waterway access to and from the ports.

| (a) | bunkering |
| --- | --- |

(a)

bunkering

| (b) | cargo handling; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

cargo handling;

| (c) | dredging; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

dredging;

| (d) | mooring; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

mooring;

| (e) | (c) passenger services; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

(c) passenger services;

| (f) | (d) port reception facilities; |
| --- | --- |

(f)

(d) port reception facilities;

| (g) | pilotage and; |
| --- | --- |

(g)

pilotage and;

| (h) | towage. |
| --- | --- |

(h)

towage.

3.   This Regulation shall apply to all seaports of the trans-European transport network, as defined in Annex I of Regulation XXX [regulation on the TEN-T Guidelines].

3.   This Directive
  Regulation shall apply to all seaports of the trans-European transport network, as defined in Annex I of Regulation XXX [regulation on the TEN-T Guidelines].

4.   Member States may also apply this Regulation to other seaports. When Member States decide to apply this Regulation to other seaports they shall notify their Decision to the Commission.

4.   Member States may also apply this Directive
  Regulation to other seaports. When Member States decide to apply this Directive
  Regulation to other seaports they shall notify their Decision to the Commission.

Reason

| — | Pilotage, towing and mooring are port services of general interest (objective of preserving maritime safety and protecting the environment), strictly regulated by Member States, and cannot be subject to a market approach. |
| --- | --- |

—

Pilotage, towing and mooring are port services of general interest (objective of preserving maritime safety and protecting the environment), strictly regulated by Member States, and cannot be subject to a market approach.

| — | The inclusion of dredging services in the Regulation contravenes the property rights of ports, as they would for the most part no longer be able to maintain their own waterways and docks on their own. Moreover, dredging in port areas is comparable with maintenance work on quays and locks, not with other port services that are directly related to the arrival of a specific ship and are invoiced individually for each call. |
| --- | --- |

—

The inclusion of dredging services in the Regulation contravenes the property rights of ports, as they would for the most part no longer be able to maintain their own waterways and docks on their own. Moreover, dredging in port areas is comparable with maintenance work on quays and locks, not with other port services that are directly related to the arrival of a specific ship and are invoiced individually for each call.

Amendment 6

Article 2, add new point 2 bis) — Definitions

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | ‘competent authority’ means any public authority or group of public authorities of a Member State or Member States which has the power to intervene in port services in a given geographical area or any body vested with such authority |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

‘competent authority’ means any public authority or group of public authorities of a Member State or Member States which has the power to intervene in port services in a given geographical area or any body vested with such authority

Reason

The term ‘competent authority’ is used in Regulation (EC) 1370/2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road where it is defined as ‘any public authority or group of public authorities of a Member State or Member States which has the power to intervene in public passenger transport in a given geographical area or anybody vested with such authority’ (Art. 2 (b)). The definition would contribute to the consistency of EU legal texts and increase the legal transparency to develop a harmonised definition not restricted to passenger services.

Amendment 7

Article 2.14 — Definitions

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| ‘public service obligation’ means a requirement defined or determined in order to ensure the provision of those port services in the general interest that an operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions; | ‘public service obligation’ means a requirement defined or determined by a competent authority in order to ensure the provision of those port services in the general interest that an operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions without compensation; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

‘public service obligation’ means a requirement defined or determined in order to ensure the provision of those port services in the general interest that an operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions;

‘public service obligation’ means a requirement defined or determined by a competent authority in order to ensure the provision of those port services in the general interest that an operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions without compensation;

Reason

This amendment echoes in particular recital 16, which provides that ‘this Regulation does not preclude the possibility of competent authorities to grant compensation for the accomplishment of the public service obligations provided that it complies with the applicable State aid rules’.

Amendment 8

Article 2.15 — Definitions

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| ‘short sea shipping’ means the movement of cargo and passengers by sea between ports situated in geographical Europe or between those ports and ports situated in non-European countries having a coastline on the enclosed seas bordering Europe; | ‘short sea shipping’ means the movement of cargo and passengers by sea between ports situated in geographical Europe or between those ports and ports situated in non-European countries having a coastline on the enclosed seas bordering Europe or, in the case of the outermost regions, between ports situated in countries in their geographical neighbourhood; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

‘short sea shipping’ means the movement of cargo and passengers by sea between ports situated in geographical Europe or between those ports and ports situated in non-European countries having a coastline on the enclosed seas bordering Europe;

‘short sea shipping’ means the movement of cargo and passengers by sea between ports situated in geographical Europe or between those ports and ports situated in non-European countries having a coastline on the enclosed seas bordering Europe or, in the case of the outermost regions, between ports situated in countries in their geographical neighbourhood;

Reason

There is no justification for restricting ‘close proximity’ to the EU itself. This concept should be extended to whole of the EU's territory, regardless of its geographical location, and particularly to the outermost regions where the EU is encouraging a strategy for strengthening their integration in their close geographical surroundings.

Amendment 9

Article 2.16 — Definitions

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| ‘seaport’ means an area of land and water made up of such works and equipment so as to permit, principally, the reception of ships, their loading and unloading, the storage of goods, the receipt and delivery of these goods and the embarkation and disembarkation of passengers; and any other infrastructure necessary for transport operators within the port area; | ‘seaport’ means an area of land and water made up of such works and equipment so as to permit, principally, the reception of ships, their loading and unloading, the storage of goods, the receipt and delivery of these goods and the embarkation and disembarkation of passengers; and any other infrastructure necessary for transport operators within the port area; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

‘seaport’ means an area of land and water made up of such works and equipment so as to permit, principally, the reception of ships, their loading and unloading, the storage of goods, the receipt and delivery of these goods and the embarkation and disembarkation of passengers; and any other infrastructure necessary for transport operators within the port area;

‘seaport’ means an area of land and water made up of such works and equipment so as to permit, principally, the reception of ships, their loading and unloading, the storage of goods, the receipt and delivery of these goods and the embarkation and disembarkation of passengers; and any other infrastructure necessary for transport operators within the port area;

Reason

It is proposed to delete the last part of the definition of a seaport. This part is new compared to previous proposed definitions but the notion of ‘port area’ is not defined. This could lead to confusion with transport infrastructures provided by local and regional authorities between the port and its hinterland.

Amendment 10

Article 2.16 bis (new point) — Definitions

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | ‘Technical-nautical services’ mean port services of general interest provided in order to preserve maritime safety and to protect the environment, such as mooring, pilotage and towage. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

‘Technical-nautical services’ mean port services of general interest provided in order to preserve maritime safety and to protect the environment, such as mooring, pilotage and towage.

Reason

Follows from the amendments to Articles 2 and 18.

Amendment 11

Chapter II — Title

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| CHAPTER II — Market access | CHAPTER II — Market access
  Principles governing the provision of and access to port services |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

CHAPTER II — Market access

CHAPTER II — Market access
  Principles governing the provision of and access to port services

Reason

As it currently stands, the title of the chapter suggests that the objective being pursued by the Commission is liberalisation, whereas the chapter actually focuses on provisions that will allow the operation of port services that are not necessarily opened up to the market.

Amendment 12

Article 4 — Minimum requirements for the provision of port services

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   The managing body of the port may require that providers of port services comply with minimum requirements to perform the corresponding port service. | 1.   The managing body of the port in consultation with the relevant competent authorities may require that providers of port services comply with minimum requirements to perform the corresponding port service. |
| 2.   The minimum requirements provided for in paragraph 1 may only relate, where applicable, to: (...)






  (d) | the compliance with local, national, Union and international environmental requirements.
  (...) |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   The managing body of the port may require that providers of port services comply with minimum requirements to perform the corresponding port service.

1.   The managing body of the port in consultation with the relevant competent authorities may require that providers of port services comply with minimum requirements to perform the corresponding port service.

2.   The minimum requirements provided for in paragraph 1 may only relate, where applicable, to: (...)

(d)

the compliance with local, national, Union and international environmental requirements.

(...)

2.   The minimum requirements provided for in paragraph 1 may only relate, where applicable, to: (...)

| (d) | the compliance with local, regional, national, Union and international environmental requirements.
  (...) |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the compliance with local, regional, national, Union and international environmental requirements.

(...)

4.   Where the minimum requirements include specific local knowledge or acquaints with local conditions, the managing body of the port shall ensure that adequate access to relevant training exists, under transparent and non-discriminatory conditions, unless adequate access to such training is ensured by the Member State.

4.   Where the minimum requirements include specific local knowledge or acquaints with local conditions, the managing body of the port shall ensure that adequate access to relevant training exists, under transparent and non-discriminatory conditions, unless adequate access to such training is ensured by the relevant competent authority
  Member State.

Reason

This amendment aims at strengthening the recognition of the role of local and regional authorities with regard to the applicable legislation or the setting of minimum requirements for the provision of port services.

Amendment 13

Article 6.4 — Limitations of the number of providers of port services

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| When a managing body of a port provides port services itself or through a legally distinct entity which it directly or indirectly controls, the Member State may entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to an authority which is independent from the managing body of the port. If the Member State does not entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to such an authority, the number of providers shall not be less than two. | When a managing body of a port provides port services itself or through a legally distinct entity which it directly or indirectly controls, the relevant competent authority
  Member State may entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to an authority which is independent from the managing body of the port. The managing body of the port shall prove that the market situation renders possible a limitation. The limitation shall be temporary. If the relevant competent authority Member State does not entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to such an authority, the number of providers shall not be less than two. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

When a managing body of a port provides port services itself or through a legally distinct entity which it directly or indirectly controls, the Member State may entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to an authority which is independent from the managing body of the port. If the Member State does not entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to such an authority, the number of providers shall not be less than two.

When a managing body of a port provides port services itself or through a legally distinct entity which it directly or indirectly controls, the relevant competent authority
  Member State may entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to an authority which is independent from the managing body of the port. The managing body of the port shall prove that the market situation renders possible a limitation. The limitation shall be temporary. If the relevant competent authority Member State does not entrust the adoption of the decision limiting the number of providers of port services to such an authority, the number of providers shall not be less than two.

Amendment 14

Article 7

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   Any limitation of the number of providers for a port service in accordance with Article 6 shall follow a selection procedure which shall be open to all interested parties, non-discriminatory and transparent. | 1.   Any limitation of the number of providers for a port service in accordance with Article 6 shall follow a selection procedure which shall be open to all interested parties, non-discriminatory and transparent. |
| 2.   If the estimated value of the port service exceeds the threshold defined in paragraph 3, the rules on the award procedure, the procedural guarantees and the maximum duration of the concessions as set out in Directive ..../.... [concession] shall apply. | 2.   If the estimated value of the port service exceeds the threshold defined in paragraph 3, the rules on the award procedure, the procedural guarantees and the maximum duration of the concessions as set out in Directive ..../.... [concession] shall apply. |
| 3.   The threshold and the method to determine the value of the port service shall be those of the relevant and applicable provisions of Directive ..../.... [concession]. | 3.   The threshold and the method to determine the value of the port service shall be those of the relevant and applicable provisions of Directive ..../.... [concession]. |
| 4.   The selected provider or providers and the managing body of the port shall conclude a port service contract. | 4.2.   The selected provider or providers and the managing body of the port shall conclude a port service contract. |
| 5.   For the purposes of this Regulation, a substantial modification within the meaning of Directive ..../... [concession] of the provisions of a port service contract during its term shall be considered as a new port service contract and shall require a new procedure as referred to in paragraph 2. | 5.   For the purposes of this Regulation, a substantial modification within the meaning of Directive ..../... [concession] of the provisions of a port service contract during its term shall be considered as a new port service contract and shall require a new procedure as referred to in paragraph 2. |
| 6.   Paragraphs 1 to 5 of this Article shall not apply in the cases referred to in Article 9. | 6.3.   Paragraphs 1 to 5and 2 of this Article shall not apply in the cases referred to in Article 9. |
| 7.   This Regulation is without prejudice to Directive .../... [concession][1], Directive ..../....[public utilities][2] and Directive .../... [public procurement][3]. | 7.4.   This Regulation is without prejudice to Directive .../... [concession][1], Directive ..../....[public utilities][2] and Directive .../... [public procurement][3].

  4a.   The duration of the port service contracts shall be proportionate to the investments made. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   Any limitation of the number of providers for a port service in accordance with Article 6 shall follow a selection procedure which shall be open to all interested parties, non-discriminatory and transparent.

1.   Any limitation of the number of providers for a port service in accordance with Article 6 shall follow a selection procedure which shall be open to all interested parties, non-discriminatory and transparent.

2.   If the estimated value of the port service exceeds the threshold defined in paragraph 3, the rules on the award procedure, the procedural guarantees and the maximum duration of the concessions as set out in Directive ..../.... [concession] shall apply.

2.   If the estimated value of the port service exceeds the threshold defined in paragraph 3, the rules on the award procedure, the procedural guarantees and the maximum duration of the concessions as set out in Directive ..../.... [concession] shall apply.

3.   The threshold and the method to determine the value of the port service shall be those of the relevant and applicable provisions of Directive ..../.... [concession].

3.   The threshold and the method to determine the value of the port service shall be those of the relevant and applicable provisions of Directive ..../.... [concession].

4.   The selected provider or providers and the managing body of the port shall conclude a port service contract.

4.2.   The selected provider or providers and the managing body of the port shall conclude a port service contract.

5.   For the purposes of this Regulation, a substantial modification within the meaning of Directive ..../... [concession] of the provisions of a port service contract during its term shall be considered as a new port service contract and shall require a new procedure as referred to in paragraph 2.

5.   For the purposes of this Regulation, a substantial modification within the meaning of Directive ..../... [concession] of the provisions of a port service contract during its term shall be considered as a new port service contract and shall require a new procedure as referred to in paragraph 2.

6.   Paragraphs 1 to 5 of this Article shall not apply in the cases referred to in Article 9.

6.3.   Paragraphs 1 to 5and 2 of this Article shall not apply in the cases referred to in Article 9.

7.   This Regulation is without prejudice to Directive .../... [concession][1], Directive ..../....[public utilities][2] and Directive .../... [public procurement][3].

7.4.   This Regulation is without prejudice to Directive .../... [concession][1], Directive ..../....[public utilities][2] and Directive .../... [public procurement][3].

4a.   The duration of the port service contracts shall be proportionate to the investments made.

Amendment 15

Article 8 — Public service obligations

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   Member States may decide to impose public service obligations related to port services on providers in order to ensure the following:






  (a) | the availability of the service without interruption during the day, the night, the week and the year; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   Member States may decide to impose public service obligations related to port services on providers in order to ensure the following:

(a)

the availability of the service without interruption during the day, the night, the week and the year;

| (b) | the availability of the service to all users; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the availability of the service to all users;

| (c) | the affordability of the service for certain categories of users. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the affordability of the service for certain categories of users.

1.   The competent authorities
  Member States may decide to impose public service obligations related to port services on providers in order to ensure the following:

| (a) | the availability of the service without interruption during the day, the night, the week and the year; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the availability of the service without interruption during the day, the night, the week and the year;

| (b) | the availability of the service to all users; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the availability of the service to all users;

| (c) | the affordability of the service for certain categories of users; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the affordability of the service for certain categories of users;

| (d) | criteria related to territorial cohesion such as the accessibility of remote, island areas and outermost regions; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

criteria related to territorial cohesion such as the accessibility of remote, island areas and outermost regions;

| (e) | compliance with specific safety, environmental and other requirements that would not be met by port service providers for economic reasons. |
| --- | --- |

(e)

compliance with specific safety, environmental and other requirements that would not be met by port service providers for economic reasons.

2.   The obligations referred to in paragraph 1 shall be clearly defined, transparent, non-discriminatory, verifiable and shall guarantee equality of access to all port service providers established in the Union.

3.   The Member States shall designate the competent authorities within their territory to impose such public service obligations. The managing body of the port may be the competent authority. (...)

2.   The obligations referred to in paragraph 1 shall be clearly defined, transparent, non-discriminatory, verifiable and shall guarantee equality of access to all port service providers established in the Union.

3.   The Member States shall designate the competent authorities within their territory to impose such public service obligations. The managing body of the port may, if it is public, be the competent authority. (...)

Reason

| — | It is proposed to extend the public service obligations to criteria related to territorial cohesion as suggested in the explanatory memorandum to the draft regulation (see end of section 1.4). Attention should also be paid to criteria that are particularly important for the environment and the safety of port activities but are not economically viable. |
| --- | --- |

—

It is proposed to extend the public service obligations to criteria related to territorial cohesion as suggested in the explanatory memorandum to the draft regulation (see end of section 1.4). Attention should also be paid to criteria that are particularly important for the environment and the safety of port activities but are not economically viable.

| — | Since the managing body of the port may be a private body and receive public funds, the possibility provided in article 8§ 3 for this body to be the competent authority for defining public service obligations should be limited to public managing bodies. |
| --- | --- |

—

Since the managing body of the port may be a private body and receive public funds, the possibility provided in article 8§ 3 for this body to be the competent authority for defining public service obligations should be limited to public managing bodies.

Amendment 16

Article 9 — Internal operator

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   In the cases provided for in Article 6 (1) (b), the competent authority may decide to provide a port service under public service obligations itself or to impose such obligations directly on a legally distinct entity over which it exercises a control similar to that exercised over its own departments. In such a case, the port service provider shall be considered as an internal operator for the purpose of this Regulation.
  (...) | 1.   In the cases provided for in Article 6 (1) (b), the competent authority may decide to provide a port service under public service obligations itself or by
  to impose such obligations directly on a legally distinct entity over which it exercises a control similar to that exercised over its own departments. In such a case, the port service provider shall be considered as an internal operator for the purpose of this Directive
  Regulation.
  (...) |
| 4.   If a competent authority decides to apply paragraph 1 in all the seaports covered by this Regulation in a Member State, it shall inform the Commission.
  (...) | 4.   If a competent authority decides to apply paragraph 1 in all the seaports covered by this Directive
  Regulation in a Member State, it shall inform the Commission.
  (...) |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   In the cases provided for in Article 6 (1) (b), the competent authority may decide to provide a port service under public service obligations itself or to impose such obligations directly on a legally distinct entity over which it exercises a control similar to that exercised over its own departments. In such a case, the port service provider shall be considered as an internal operator for the purpose of this Regulation.

(...)

1.   In the cases provided for in Article 6 (1) (b), the competent authority may decide to provide a port service under public service obligations itself or by
  to impose such obligations directly on a legally distinct entity over which it exercises a control similar to that exercised over its own departments. In such a case, the port service provider shall be considered as an internal operator for the purpose of this Directive
  Regulation.

(...)

4.   If a competent authority decides to apply paragraph 1 in all the seaports covered by this Regulation in a Member State, it shall inform the Commission.

(...)

4.   If a competent authority decides to apply paragraph 1 in all the seaports covered by this Directive
  Regulation in a Member State, it shall inform the Commission.

(...)

Reason

It is questionable that the situation where the port service provider shall be considered as an ‘internal operator’ is limited to port services under public service obligations only. There could indeed be purely commercial reasons why a port managing body (which can be a private body) could decide to provide a service itself without that service being specifically defined as a public service.

Amendment 17

Article 10.2 — Safeguarding of employees' rights

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Without prejudice to national and Union law including collective agreements between social partners, the managing bodies of the port may require the designated provider of port services appointed in accordance with the procedure established by Article 7, in the case where this provider is different from the incumbent provider of port services, to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC. | Without prejudice to national and Union law including collective agreements between social partners, the managing bodies of the port may require the designated provider of port services appointed in accordance with the procedure established by Article 7, in the case where this provider is different from the incumbent provider of port services, to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Without prejudice to national and Union law including collective agreements between social partners, the managing bodies of the port may require the designated provider of port services appointed in accordance with the procedure established by Article 7, in the case where this provider is different from the incumbent provider of port services, to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC.

Without prejudice to national and Union law including collective agreements between social partners, the managing bodies of the port may require the designated provider of port services appointed in accordance with the procedure established by Article 7, in the case where this provider is different from the incumbent provider of port services, to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC.

Reason

It is not understandable why the Commission foresees only the possibility and not the obligation to grant staff previously taken on by the incumbent provider of port services the rights to which they would have been entitled if there had been a transfer within the meaning of Directive 2001/23/EC.

Amendment 18

Article 10.3 — Safeguarding of employees' rights

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Where managing bodies of the port require providers of port services to comply with certain social standards as regards the provision of relevant port services, tender documents and port service contracts shall list the staff concerned and give transparent details of their contractual rights and the conditions under which employees are deemed to be linked to the port services. | Where managing bodies of the port require providers of port services to comply with certain social standards as regards the provision of relevant port services, tender documents and port service contracts shall list the staff concerned and give transparent details
  indicate the status of their contractual rights and the conditions under which employees are deemed to be linked to the port services. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Where managing bodies of the port require providers of port services to comply with certain social standards as regards the provision of relevant port services, tender documents and port service contracts shall list the staff concerned and give transparent details of their contractual rights and the conditions under which employees are deemed to be linked to the port services.

Where managing bodies of the port require providers of port services to comply with certain social standards as regards the provision of relevant port services, tender documents and port service contracts shall list the staff concerned and give transparent details
  indicate the status of their contractual rights and the conditions under which employees are deemed to be linked to the port services.

Reason

Publishing the ‘transparent details of the contractual rights’ of staff seems might violate rights concerning personal data.

Amendment 19

Article 12.2 — Transparency of financial relations

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Where the managing body of the port that receives public funds provides port services itself, it shall keep the accounts of each port service activity separate from the accounts of its other activities, in such a way that :






  (a) | all costs and revenues are correctly assigned or allocated on the basis of consistently applied and objectively justifiable cost accounting principles; and |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Where the managing body of the port that receives public funds provides port services itself, it shall keep the accounts of each port service activity separate from the accounts of its other activities, in such a way that :

(a)

all costs and revenues are correctly assigned or allocated on the basis of consistently applied and objectively justifiable cost accounting principles; and

| (b) | the cost accounting principles according to which separate accounts are maintained are clearly established.” |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the cost accounting principles according to which separate accounts are maintained are clearly established.”

Where the managing body of the port that receives public funds provides port services itself, it shall keep the accounts of each port service activity separate from the accounts of its other activities, in such a way that allows for monitoring of the prohibition on transferring public funds paid to one area of activity to another and the monitoring of the use of income from infrastructure charges and surpluses from other commercial activities.

| (a) | all costs and revenues are correctly assigned or allocated on the basis of consistently applied and objectively justifiable cost accounting principles; and |
| --- | --- |

(a)

all costs and revenues are correctly assigned or allocated on the basis of consistently applied and objectively justifiable cost accounting principles; and

| (b) | the cost accounting principles according to which separate accounts are maintained are clearly established. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the cost accounting principles according to which separate accounts are maintained are clearly established.

Reason

Suggested simplification of the accountancy requirements derived from Article 6 of Directive 2012/34/EU establishing a single European railway area.

Amendment 20

Article 14.4

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   Without prejudice to paragraph 3, port infrastructure charges may vary in accordance with commercial practices related to frequent users, or in order to promote a more efficient use of the port infrastructure, short sea shipping or a high environmental performance, energy efficiency or carbon efficiency of transport operations. The criteria used for such a variation shall be relevant, objective, transparent and non-discriminatory and in due respect of the competition rules. The resulting variation shall in particular be available to all relevant port service users on equal terms. | 4.   Without prejudice to paragraph 3, port infrastructure charges may vary in accordance with commercial practices related to frequent users, or in order to promote a more efficient use of the port infrastructure, short sea shipping or a high environmental performance, energy efficiency or carbon efficiency of transport operations, or for reasons of territorial cohesion, such as the accessibility of the outermost regions for example. The criteria used for such a variation shall be relevant, objective, transparent and non-discriminatory and in due respect of the competition rules. The resulting variation shall in particular be available to all relevant port service users on equal terms. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

4.   Without prejudice to paragraph 3, port infrastructure charges may vary in accordance with commercial practices related to frequent users, or in order to promote a more efficient use of the port infrastructure, short sea shipping or a high environmental performance, energy efficiency or carbon efficiency of transport operations. The criteria used for such a variation shall be relevant, objective, transparent and non-discriminatory and in due respect of the competition rules. The resulting variation shall in particular be available to all relevant port service users on equal terms.

4.   Without prejudice to paragraph 3, port infrastructure charges may vary in accordance with commercial practices related to frequent users, or in order to promote a more efficient use of the port infrastructure, short sea shipping or a high environmental performance, energy efficiency or carbon efficiency of transport operations, or for reasons of territorial cohesion, such as the accessibility of the outermost regions for example. The criteria used for such a variation shall be relevant, objective, transparent and non-discriminatory and in due respect of the competition rules. The resulting variation shall in particular be available to all relevant port service users on equal terms.

Reason

The amendment wants the rules to allow other pricing criteria that take account of the inaccessibility of the outermost regions and the need for offsetting their additional transport costs so that they enjoy the same conditions as all users, as recognised under TFEU Art. 349.

Amendment 21

Article 14 — Port infrastructure charges

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (...)
  5.   The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary, delegated acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 21 concerning common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations according to which the infrastructure charges can vary and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges.
  (...)
  7.   The managing body of the port shall make available to the competent independent supervisory body and to the Commission, upon request, the information referred to in paragraph 4 and the detailed costs and revenues, serving as a basis to determine the structure and the level of the port infrastructure charges and the methodology used for setting the port infrastructure charges with regard to the facilities and services to which these port charges relate to | (...)
  5.   The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary, delegated acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 21 concerning common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations according to which the infrastructure charges can vary and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges.
  (...)

  7.   The managing body of the port shall make available to the competent independent supervisory body and to the Commission, upon request, the information referred to in paragraph 4 and the detailed costs and revenues, serving as a basis to determine the structure and the level of the port infrastructure charges and the methodology used for setting the port infrastructure charges with regard to the facilities and services to which these port charges relate to. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

(...)

5.   The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary, delegated acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 21 concerning common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations according to which the infrastructure charges can vary and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges.

(...)

7.   The managing body of the port shall make available to the competent independent supervisory body and to the Commission, upon request, the information referred to in paragraph 4 and the detailed costs and revenues, serving as a basis to determine the structure and the level of the port infrastructure charges and the methodology used for setting the port infrastructure charges with regard to the facilities and services to which these port charges relate to

(...)

5.   The Commission shall be empowered to adopt, where necessary, delegated acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 21 concerning common classifications of vessels, fuels and types of operations according to which the infrastructure charges can vary and common charging principles for port infrastructure charges.

(...)

7.   The managing body of the port shall make available to the competent independent supervisory body and to the Commission, upon request, the information referred to in paragraph 4 and the detailed costs and revenues, serving as a basis to determine the structure and the level of the port infrastructure charges and the methodology used for setting the port infrastructure charges with regard to the facilities and services to which these port charges relate to.

Reason

The commercial freedom of port managing bodies may not be constrained by such principles (charging/pricing is a competitive area). In addition, any empowerment conferred to the European Commission to adopt delegated acts should be kept as precise and limited as possible.

Amendment 22

Article 17

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Independent supervisory body

  1.   Member States shall ensure that an independent supervisory body monitors and supervises the application of this Regulation in all the seaports covered by this Regulation on the territory of each Member State.
  2.   The independent supervisory body shall be legally distinct from and functionally independent of any managing body of the port or providers of port services. Member States that retain ownership or control of ports or port managing bodies shall ensure an effective structural separation between the functions relating to the supervision and monitoring of this Regulation and the activities associated with that ownership or control. The independent supervisory body shall exercise its powers impartially and transparently and with due respect to the right to freely conduct business.
  3.   The independent supervisory body shall handle the complaints lodged by any party with a legitimate interest and the disputes brought before it arising in connection with the application of this Regulation.
  4.   In the event that the dispute arises between parties established in different Member States, the independent supervisory body of the Member State of the port where the dispute is presumed to have its origin shall have competence to solve the dispute.
  5.   The independent supervisory body shall have the right to require managing bodies of the ports, providers of port services and port users to submit information needed to ensure monitoring and supervision of the application of this Regulation.
  6.   The independent supervisory body may issue opinions at the request of a competent authority in the Member State on any issues in relation to the application of this Regulation.
  7.   The independent supervisory body may consult the port users' advisory committee of the port concerned when dealing with the complaints or disputes.
  8.   The decisions of the independent supervisory body shall have binding effects, without prejudice to judicial review.
  9.   Member States shall notify to the Commission the identity of the independent supervisory bodies by 1 July 2015 at the latest and subsequently any modification thereof. The Commission shall publish and update the list of the independent supervisory bodies on its website. | Independent supervisory body



  1.   Member States shall ensure that an independent supervisory body monitors and supervises the application of this Regulation in all the seaports covered by this Regulation on the territory of each Member State.


  2.   The independent supervisory body shall be legally distinct from and functionally independent of any managing body of the port or providers of port services. Member States that retain ownership or control of ports or port managing bodies shall ensure an effective structural separation between the functions relating to the supervision and monitoring of this Regulation and the activities associated with that ownership or control. The independent supervisory body shall exercise its powers impartially and transparently and with due respect to the right to freely conduct business.


  3.   The independent supervisory body shall handle the complaints lodged by any party with a legitimate interest and the disputes brought before it arising in connection with the application of this Regulation.


  4.   In the event that the dispute arises between parties established in different Member States, the independent supervisory body of the Member State of the port where the dispute is presumed to have its origin shall have competence to solve the dispute.


  5.   The independent supervisory body shall have the right to require managing bodies of the ports, providers of port services and port users to submit information needed to ensure monitoring and supervision of the application of this Regulation.


  6.   The independent supervisory body may issue opinions at the request of a competent authority in the Member State on any issues in relation to the application of this Regulation.


  7.   The independent supervisory body may consult the port users' advisory committee of the port concerned when dealing with the complaints or disputes.


  8.   The decisions of the independent supervisory body shall have binding effects, without prejudice to judicial review.


  9.   Member States shall notify to the Commission the identity of the independent supervisory bodies by 1 July 2015 at the latest and subsequently any modification thereof. The Commission shall publish and update the list of the independent supervisory bodies on its website. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Independent supervisory body

1.   Member States shall ensure that an independent supervisory body monitors and supervises the application of this Regulation in all the seaports covered by this Regulation on the territory of each Member State.

2.   The independent supervisory body shall be legally distinct from and functionally independent of any managing body of the port or providers of port services. Member States that retain ownership or control of ports or port managing bodies shall ensure an effective structural separation between the functions relating to the supervision and monitoring of this Regulation and the activities associated with that ownership or control. The independent supervisory body shall exercise its powers impartially and transparently and with due respect to the right to freely conduct business.

3.   The independent supervisory body shall handle the complaints lodged by any party with a legitimate interest and the disputes brought before it arising in connection with the application of this Regulation.

4.   In the event that the dispute arises between parties established in different Member States, the independent supervisory body of the Member State of the port where the dispute is presumed to have its origin shall have competence to solve the dispute.

5.   The independent supervisory body shall have the right to require managing bodies of the ports, providers of port services and port users to submit information needed to ensure monitoring and supervision of the application of this Regulation.

6.   The independent supervisory body may issue opinions at the request of a competent authority in the Member State on any issues in relation to the application of this Regulation.

7.   The independent supervisory body may consult the port users' advisory committee of the port concerned when dealing with the complaints or disputes.

8.   The decisions of the independent supervisory body shall have binding effects, without prejudice to judicial review.

9.   Member States shall notify to the Commission the identity of the independent supervisory bodies by 1 July 2015 at the latest and subsequently any modification thereof. The Commission shall publish and update the list of the independent supervisory bodies on its website.

Independent supervisory body

1.   Member States shall ensure that an independent supervisory body monitors and supervises the application of this Regulation in all the seaports covered by this Regulation on the territory of each Member State.

2.   The independent supervisory body shall be legally distinct from and functionally independent of any managing body of the port or providers of port services. Member States that retain ownership or control of ports or port managing bodies shall ensure an effective structural separation between the functions relating to the supervision and monitoring of this Regulation and the activities associated with that ownership or control. The independent supervisory body shall exercise its powers impartially and transparently and with due respect to the right to freely conduct business.

3.   The independent supervisory body shall handle the complaints lodged by any party with a legitimate interest and the disputes brought before it arising in connection with the application of this Regulation.

4.   In the event that the dispute arises between parties established in different Member States, the independent supervisory body of the Member State of the port where the dispute is presumed to have its origin shall have competence to solve the dispute.

5.   The independent supervisory body shall have the right to require managing bodies of the ports, providers of port services and port users to submit information needed to ensure monitoring and supervision of the application of this Regulation.

6.   The independent supervisory body may issue opinions at the request of a competent authority in the Member State on any issues in relation to the application of this Regulation.

7.   The independent supervisory body may consult the port users' advisory committee of the port concerned when dealing with the complaints or disputes.

8.   The decisions of the independent supervisory body shall have binding effects, without prejudice to judicial review.

9.   Member States shall notify to the Commission the identity of the independent supervisory bodies by 1 July 2015 at the latest and subsequently any modification thereof. The Commission shall publish and update the list of the independent supervisory bodies on its website.

Reason

The added value of (establishing) an independent supervisory body responsible for monitoring and supervising the application of this regulation is questionable. Existing competent authorities (including at local and regional level) can take responsibility for such supervision. In addition, a regulation is by definition ‘directly binding in its entirety’ and therefore needs no measures for facilitating its uniform implementation. In any case, article 19 provides for an appeal mechanism.

Amendment 23

Article 18 — Cooperation between independent supervisory bodies

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Cooperation between independent supervisory bodies

  1.   The independent supervisory bodies shall exchange information about their work and decision-making principles and practices in order to facilitate a uniform implementation of this Regulation. For this purpose, they shall participate and work together in a network that convenes at regular intervals and at least once a year. The Commission shall participate, coordinate and support the work of the network.
  2.   The independent supervisory bodies shall cooperate closely for the purposes of mutual assistance in their tasks, including in carrying out investigations required to handle complaints and disputes in cases involving ports in different Member States. For this purpose, an independent supervisory body shall make available to another such body, after a substantiated request, the information necessary to allow that body to fulfil its responsibilities under this Regulation.
  3.   The Member States shall ensure that the independent supervisory bodies shall provide the Commission, after a reasoned request, with the information necessary for it to carry its tasks. The information requested by the Commission shall be proportionate to the performance of those tasks.
  4.   Where information is considered confidential by the independent supervisory body in accordance with Union or national rules on business confidentiality, the other national supervisory body and the Commission shall ensure such confidentiality. This information may only be used for the purpose which it was requested.
  5.   Based on the experience of the independent supervisory bodies and on the activities of the network referred to in paragraph 1, and in order to ensure efficient cooperation, the Commission may adopt common principles on the appropriate arrangements for the exchange of information between independent supervisory bodies. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 22(2). | Cooperation between independent supervisory bodies



  1.   The independent supervisory bodies shall exchange information about their work and decision-making principles and practices in order to facilitate a uniform implementation of this Regulation. For this purpose, they shall participate and work together in a network that convenes at regular intervals and at least once a year. The Commission shall participate, coordinate and support the work of the network.


  2.   The independent supervisory bodies shall cooperate closely for the purposes of mutual assistance in their tasks, including in carrying out investigations required to handle complaints and disputes in cases involving ports in different Member States. For this purpose, an independent supervisory body shall make available to another such body, after a substantiated request, the information necessary to allow that body to fulfil its responsibilities under this Regulation.


  3.   The Member States shall ensure that the independent supervisory bodies shall provide the Commission, after a reasoned request, with the information necessary for it to carry its tasks. The information requested by the Commission shall be proportionate to the performance of those tasks.


  4.   Where information is considered confidential by the independent supervisory body in accordance with Union or national rules on business confidentiality, the other national supervisory body and the Commission shall ensure such confidentiality. This information may only be used for the purpose which it was requested.


  5.   Based on the experience of the independent supervisory bodies and on the activities of the network referred to in paragraph 1, and in order to ensure efficient cooperation, the Commission may adopt common principles on the appropriate arrangements for the exchange of information between independent supervisory bodies. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 22(2). |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Cooperation between independent supervisory bodies

1.   The independent supervisory bodies shall exchange information about their work and decision-making principles and practices in order to facilitate a uniform implementation of this Regulation. For this purpose, they shall participate and work together in a network that convenes at regular intervals and at least once a year. The Commission shall participate, coordinate and support the work of the network.

2.   The independent supervisory bodies shall cooperate closely for the purposes of mutual assistance in their tasks, including in carrying out investigations required to handle complaints and disputes in cases involving ports in different Member States. For this purpose, an independent supervisory body shall make available to another such body, after a substantiated request, the information necessary to allow that body to fulfil its responsibilities under this Regulation.

3.   The Member States shall ensure that the independent supervisory bodies shall provide the Commission, after a reasoned request, with the information necessary for it to carry its tasks. The information requested by the Commission shall be proportionate to the performance of those tasks.

4.   Where information is considered confidential by the independent supervisory body in accordance with Union or national rules on business confidentiality, the other national supervisory body and the Commission shall ensure such confidentiality. This information may only be used for the purpose which it was requested.

5.   Based on the experience of the independent supervisory bodies and on the activities of the network referred to in paragraph 1, and in order to ensure efficient cooperation, the Commission may adopt common principles on the appropriate arrangements for the exchange of information between independent supervisory bodies. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 22(2).

Cooperation between independent supervisory bodies

1.   The independent supervisory bodies shall exchange information about their work and decision-making principles and practices in order to facilitate a uniform implementation of this Regulation. For this purpose, they shall participate and work together in a network that convenes at regular intervals and at least once a year. The Commission shall participate, coordinate and support the work of the network.

2.   The independent supervisory bodies shall cooperate closely for the purposes of mutual assistance in their tasks, including in carrying out investigations required to handle complaints and disputes in cases involving ports in different Member States. For this purpose, an independent supervisory body shall make available to another such body, after a substantiated request, the information necessary to allow that body to fulfil its responsibilities under this Regulation.

3.   The Member States shall ensure that the independent supervisory bodies shall provide the Commission, after a reasoned request, with the information necessary for it to carry its tasks. The information requested by the Commission shall be proportionate to the performance of those tasks.

4.   Where information is considered confidential by the independent supervisory body in accordance with Union or national rules on business confidentiality, the other national supervisory body and the Commission shall ensure such confidentiality. This information may only be used for the purpose which it was requested.

5.   Based on the experience of the independent supervisory bodies and on the activities of the network referred to in paragraph 1, and in order to ensure efficient cooperation, the Commission may adopt common principles on the appropriate arrangements for the exchange of information between independent supervisory bodies. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 22(2).

Reason

Similar argumentation line here than for the amendment to Article 17: It remains unclear why cooperation between independent supervisory authorities is needed. It is even more unclear if one follows the Commission's logic of opting for a draft regulation which is by definition ‘directly binding in its entirety’ and ‘should prevent additional administrative burden for Member States and the Commission’ and therefore needs no measures for facilitating its uniform implementation. In any case, Article 19 provides for an appeal mechanism.

Amendment 24

Article 19 — Appeals

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   Any party with a legitimate interest shall have the right to appeal against the decisions or individual measures taken under this Regulation by the competent authorities, by the managing body of the port or by the independent supervisory body to an appeal body which is independent of the parties involved. This appeal body may be a court. | 1.   Any party with a legitimate interest shall have the right to appeal against the decisions or individual measures taken under this Regulation by the competent authorities, or by the managing body of the port or by the independent supervisory body to an appeal body which is independent of the parties involved. This appeal body may be a court. |
| 2.   Where the appeal body referred in paragraph 1 is not judicial in character, it shall give reasons in writing for its decisions. Its decisions shall also be subject to review by a national court. | 2.   Where the appeal body referred in paragraph 1 is not judicial in character, it shall give reasons in writing for its decisions. Its decisions shall also be subject to review by a national court. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   Any party with a legitimate interest shall have the right to appeal against the decisions or individual measures taken under this Regulation by the competent authorities, by the managing body of the port or by the independent supervisory body to an appeal body which is independent of the parties involved. This appeal body may be a court.

1.   Any party with a legitimate interest shall have the right to appeal against the decisions or individual measures taken under this Regulation by the competent authorities, or by the managing body of the port or by the independent supervisory body to an appeal body which is independent of the parties involved. This appeal body may be a court.

2.   Where the appeal body referred in paragraph 1 is not judicial in character, it shall give reasons in writing for its decisions. Its decisions shall also be subject to review by a national court.

2.   Where the appeal body referred in paragraph 1 is not judicial in character, it shall give reasons in writing for its decisions. Its decisions shall also be subject to review by a national court.

Reason

Follows from the amendments to Articles 17 and 18.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  SWD(2013) 3 final, http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/key_docs/docs/cswd_ati_en.pdf.

1

http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/key_docs/docs/cswd_ati_en.pdf

(2)  http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls/portal/docs/1/14018736.PDF.

2

http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls/portal/docs/1/14018736.PDF

(3)  Guide to the application of the EU rules on state aid, public procurement and the internal market to SGEI, SWD(2013) 53, 15.2.2013.

3

(4)  In accordance with the decision of 20.12.2011 on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest.

4

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/73 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/73

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Roma integration strategies’

2014/C 114/12

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments: promoting integration and tackling discrimination

| 1. | welcomes the Communication from the Commission as tangible evidence of EU commitment towards promoting Roma communities (1) integration and combatting the discrimination that they frequently experience, by means of national integration strategies; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the Communication from the Commission as tangible evidence of EU commitment towards promoting Roma communities (1) integration and combatting the discrimination that they frequently experience, by means of national integration strategies;

| 2. | recalls that, with an estimated population of 10-12 million in Europe (of whom six million live in the EU), Roma people are the biggest ethnic minority in Europe. Most Roma are EU citizens; |
| --- | --- |

2.

recalls that, with an estimated population of 10-12 million in Europe (of whom six million live in the EU), Roma people are the biggest ethnic minority in Europe. Most Roma are EU citizens;

| 3. | the size and the social and economic situation of the Roma population are different in each region and Member State; therefore national approaches to Roma inclusion should be tailored to the specific circumstances and needs on the ground, including by adopting or continuing to pursue policies that address marginalised and disadvantaged groups, such as Roma, in a broader context; |
| --- | --- |

3.

the size and the social and economic situation of the Roma population are different in each region and Member State; therefore national approaches to Roma inclusion should be tailored to the specific circumstances and needs on the ground, including by adopting or continuing to pursue policies that address marginalised and disadvantaged groups, such as Roma, in a broader context;

| 4. | believes that the EU institutions and Member States have a joint responsibility to improve Roma people's social inclusion and integration. Recalls that tackling the discrimination, prejudice and social exclusion faced by Roma people is a Treaty obligation and legal requirement (2), in terms of combating discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, gender or sexual orientation. Therefore strongly condemns any form of discrimination against Roma communities; |
| --- | --- |

4.

believes that the EU institutions and Member States have a joint responsibility to improve Roma people's social inclusion and integration. Recalls that tackling the discrimination, prejudice and social exclusion faced by Roma people is a Treaty obligation and legal requirement (2), in terms of combating discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, gender or sexual orientation. Therefore strongly condemns any form of discrimination against Roma communities;

| 5. | notes that national policies rightly designed to promote and govern compliance with the rule of law among the Roma people must under no circumstances cast doubt on or negate outright their right, as citizens of a Member State (not stateless), to European citizenship. The Committee deplores any use of confused expulsion procedures designed to rule out reception of Roma people without good reason and rejecting any attempt at integration. It calls on the EU to clarify this matter; |
| --- | --- |

5.

notes that national policies rightly designed to promote and govern compliance with the rule of law among the Roma people must under no circumstances cast doubt on or negate outright their right, as citizens of a Member State (not stateless), to European citizenship. The Committee deplores any use of confused expulsion procedures designed to rule out reception of Roma people without good reason and rejecting any attempt at integration. It calls on the EU to clarify this matter;

| 6. | condemns stereotyping and limited access to public services due to perceived cultural differences. Reiterates its support for the Commission's efforts to tackle the problems faced by Roma communities in terms of poverty, labour market barriers and access to housing and healthcare, by targeting the preconditions for successful implementation of integration strategies; as these problems have still not been adequately solved, calls for efforts to be stepped up, inter alia by assigning more responsibilities to local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

6.

condemns stereotyping and limited access to public services due to perceived cultural differences. Reiterates its support for the Commission's efforts to tackle the problems faced by Roma communities in terms of poverty, labour market barriers and access to housing and healthcare, by targeting the preconditions for successful implementation of integration strategies; as these problems have still not been adequately solved, calls for efforts to be stepped up, inter alia by assigning more responsibilities to local and regional authorities;

| 7. | stresses that integration is a two way process. In this respect, organisations representing Roma, should inform the Roma societies of the benefits that they can acquire from integrating well in the host country as well as their obligations that derive from residing in a country; |
| --- | --- |

7.

stresses that integration is a two way process. In this respect, organisations representing Roma, should inform the Roma societies of the benefits that they can acquire from integrating well in the host country as well as their obligations that derive from residing in a country;

| 8. | supports the Commission’s prioritisation of several structural preconditions that are important for a successful implementation of the integration strategies, notably working more closely with local and regional authorities and allocating proportionate financial resources; |
| --- | --- |

8.

supports the Commission’s prioritisation of several structural preconditions that are important for a successful implementation of the integration strategies, notably working more closely with local and regional authorities and allocating proportionate financial resources;

Implementation of the EU strategy

| 9. | calls on the European Commission to define clear and measurable targets and indicators for those Member States having a Roma community, monitoring progress on all four pillars, including cooperation with local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

9.

calls on the European Commission to define clear and measurable targets and indicators for those Member States having a Roma community, monitoring progress on all four pillars, including cooperation with local and regional authorities;

| 10. | reiterates the importance for Member States to adopt a comprehensive, multi-sectorial and coordinated integration strategy. Indeed, the main policy areas identified by the EU Framework Strategy are interlocking issues. The EU and the Member States are unable to solve every problem through ‘top-down’ strategies that seek to lever Roma communities from above and should rely on cooperation with all actors at all levels; |
| --- | --- |

10.

reiterates the importance for Member States to adopt a comprehensive, multi-sectorial and coordinated integration strategy. Indeed, the main policy areas identified by the EU Framework Strategy are interlocking issues. The EU and the Member States are unable to solve every problem through ‘top-down’ strategies that seek to lever Roma communities from above and should rely on cooperation with all actors at all levels;

| 11. | calls on the European Commission to establish more robust monitoring mechanism for more effective evaluation of progress in meeting set targets for Member States having a Roma community as well as recommending practical measures to be undertaken by such Member States; |
| --- | --- |

11.

calls on the European Commission to establish more robust monitoring mechanism for more effective evaluation of progress in meeting set targets for Member States having a Roma community as well as recommending practical measures to be undertaken by such Member States;

| 12. | regrets that the Commission document barely touches on efforts in integrating Roma in the newest EU Member State as well as EU candidate and potential candidate countries, some of which have significant Roma population in dire need of support, their situation having been caused or worsened by exclusion and discrimination; |
| --- | --- |

12.

regrets that the Commission document barely touches on efforts in integrating Roma in the newest EU Member State as well as EU candidate and potential candidate countries, some of which have significant Roma population in dire need of support, their situation having been caused or worsened by exclusion and discrimination;

| 13. | calls on the EU candidate and potential candidate countries to continue adopting anti-discrimination legislation, and to develop/revise their own national Roma integration strategies, in participation with their local and regional governments, and to include measurable targets and provision on obligation for regular publishing of the achievements; |
| --- | --- |

13.

calls on the EU candidate and potential candidate countries to continue adopting anti-discrimination legislation, and to develop/revise their own national Roma integration strategies, in participation with their local and regional governments, and to include measurable targets and provision on obligation for regular publishing of the achievements;

| 14. | welcomes the idea of establishing a network of National Contact Points for Roma to facilitate multilateral exchanges of best practices, peer-learning and cooperation; calls for inclusion of representatives of local and regional authorities as well as civil society organisations into the network. Such a platform should include representatives from EU candidate and potential candidate countries; |
| --- | --- |

14.

welcomes the idea of establishing a network of National Contact Points for Roma to facilitate multilateral exchanges of best practices, peer-learning and cooperation; calls for inclusion of representatives of local and regional authorities as well as civil society organisations into the network. Such a platform should include representatives from EU candidate and potential candidate countries;

| 15. | recognises the work of the Congress of local and regional authorities (Council of Europe), notably its resolution ‘The situation of Roma in Europe: a challenge for local and regional authorities’ (3). Calls on the EU institutions to work more closely with the Council of Europe on improving the status of Roma, including supporting the recently-established European Alliance of Cities and Regions for Roma Inclusion, and support to the very successful ‘Dosta!’ campaign; |
| --- | --- |

15.

recognises the work of the Congress of local and regional authorities (Council of Europe), notably its resolution ‘The situation of Roma in Europe: a challenge for local and regional authorities’ (3). Calls on the EU institutions to work more closely with the Council of Europe on improving the status of Roma, including supporting the recently-established European Alliance of Cities and Regions for Roma Inclusion, and support to the very successful ‘Dosta!’ campaign;

| 16. | calls on the Member States to ensure that Roma have protection under international law and in particular the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (4); |
| --- | --- |

16.

calls on the Member States to ensure that Roma have protection under international law and in particular the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (4);

| 17. | calls for policies, strategies and funding on Roma to explicitly include migrant Roma moving from other Member States and from third countries, and not only established Roma populations; |
| --- | --- |

17.

calls for policies, strategies and funding on Roma to explicitly include migrant Roma moving from other Member States and from third countries, and not only established Roma populations;

| 18. | proposes that the European Commission calls on Member States and local and regional authorities to establish mentoring schemes to provide links between Roma and public authorities and widen work opportunities for Roma; |
| --- | --- |

18.

proposes that the European Commission calls on Member States and local and regional authorities to establish mentoring schemes to provide links between Roma and public authorities and widen work opportunities for Roma;

| 19. | stresses that the role of civil society should not just be advisory: it should play an active part in implementing and monitoring national strategies; |
| --- | --- |

19.

stresses that the role of civil society should not just be advisory: it should play an active part in implementing and monitoring national strategies;

| 20. | reiterates the importance of involving at all levels of governance representatives of Roma communities in the formation of policies and strategies relevant to Roma integration; |
| --- | --- |

20.

reiterates the importance of involving at all levels of governance representatives of Roma communities in the formation of policies and strategies relevant to Roma integration;

| 21. | acknowledges that Roma women experience multiple discrimination and commits local and regional authorities to working with national government agencies and civil society to tackle this issue, for example by devising strategies that actively involve them and give them responsibilities in prevention and integration programmes; |
| --- | --- |

21.

acknowledges that Roma women experience multiple discrimination and commits local and regional authorities to working with national government agencies and civil society to tackle this issue, for example by devising strategies that actively involve them and give them responsibilities in prevention and integration programmes;

Funding

| 22. | strongly welcomes the Commission's recommendation that Roma integration be explicitly included in the partnership agreements for the programming period 2014-2020; |
| --- | --- |

22.

strongly welcomes the Commission's recommendation that Roma integration be explicitly included in the partnership agreements for the programming period 2014-2020;

| 23. | calls for a more ‘dynamic approach’ when it comes to allocation of funds to better address the different needs in different parts of Europe, ensuring effective support for those areas with higher than average Roma populations and/or significant influx of Roma population; furthermore, calls for clear, lasting and dynamic support for regional and local authorities that are already implementing or are planning to implement specific plans for the development and promotion of the Roma; |
| --- | --- |

23.

calls for a more ‘dynamic approach’ when it comes to allocation of funds to better address the different needs in different parts of Europe, ensuring effective support for those areas with higher than average Roma populations and/or significant influx of Roma population; furthermore, calls for clear, lasting and dynamic support for regional and local authorities that are already implementing or are planning to implement specific plans for the development and promotion of the Roma;

| 24. | reiterates the need to provide adequate funds to local and regional authorities who, through their policies in the areas of child protection, early childhood services and promoting the right to education, play a strategic role in securing the inclusion of Roma children in pre-school and school systems; |
| --- | --- |

24.

reiterates the need to provide adequate funds to local and regional authorities who, through their policies in the areas of child protection, early childhood services and promoting the right to education, play a strategic role in securing the inclusion of Roma children in pre-school and school systems;

| 25. | considers that civil society organisations representing, or advocating for Roma must have better access to public funding (including EU funds) for developing and implementing integration policies; |
| --- | --- |

25.

considers that civil society organisations representing, or advocating for Roma must have better access to public funding (including EU funds) for developing and implementing integration policies;

| 26. | suggests co-ordinating resources available for promoting Roma integration from various funding streams more effectively. Such a thematic approach would be immensely helpful to local and regional authorities with substantial Roma populations to deal effectively with new challenges and provide early opportunities for preventing their exclusion, and to promote links with the local communities: |
| --- | --- |

26.

suggests co-ordinating resources available for promoting Roma integration from various funding streams more effectively. Such a thematic approach would be immensely helpful to local and regional authorities with substantial Roma populations to deal effectively with new challenges and provide early opportunities for preventing their exclusion, and to promote links with the local communities:

| 27. | stresses that one-size-fits-all policies may be counterproductive. Policies regarding Roma which are based on individuals and pay attention to encouraging, stimulating and rewarding individual initiatives especially regarding employment and self-employment, will be more productive. For example, on systematic profiling and training of individuals and families, support for new enterprise and for education; paying special attention to talented Roma students; |
| --- | --- |

27.

stresses that one-size-fits-all policies may be counterproductive. Policies regarding Roma which are based on individuals and pay attention to encouraging, stimulating and rewarding individual initiatives especially regarding employment and self-employment, will be more productive. For example, on systematic profiling and training of individuals and families, support for new enterprise and for education; paying special attention to talented Roma students;

Children and education: a key factor in integration

| 28. | recognises that the Roma population is young; 35,7% are under 15 compared to 15,7% across the EU population, with average age being 24 in Roma, compared to 40 across the EU. The vast majority of working age Roma lack the education to find sustainable jobs, highlighting the importance of investment in education for Roma children to enable successful entry into the labour market and integration into society; |
| --- | --- |

28.

recognises that the Roma population is young; 35,7% are under 15 compared to 15,7% across the EU population, with average age being 24 in Roma, compared to 40 across the EU. The vast majority of working age Roma lack the education to find sustainable jobs, highlighting the importance of investment in education for Roma children to enable successful entry into the labour market and integration into society;

| 29. | believes that for any integration programme to be successful, an emphasis on focused education of the majority is as important as the education of minorities; |
| --- | --- |

29.

believes that for any integration programme to be successful, an emphasis on focused education of the majority is as important as the education of minorities;

| 30. | reiterates the need for a more holistic approach to integration and suggests ensuring basic literacy and numeracy of parents as a key to achieving these skills in the education of Roma children, as for other children; |
| --- | --- |

30.

reiterates the need for a more holistic approach to integration and suggests ensuring basic literacy and numeracy of parents as a key to achieving these skills in the education of Roma children, as for other children;

| 31. | calls for the end of practice of segregation and placing of Roma children in schools with learning disabilities, as well as segregation in mainstream schools; |
| --- | --- |

31.

calls for the end of practice of segregation and placing of Roma children in schools with learning disabilities, as well as segregation in mainstream schools;

| 32. | considers that practices of positive discrimination should be introduced only with the utmost care and on a limited scale, to avoid compromising principles of equal rights and opportunities; |
| --- | --- |

32.

considers that practices of positive discrimination should be introduced only with the utmost care and on a limited scale, to avoid compromising principles of equal rights and opportunities;

| 33. | considers that actions should be taken in order to encourage the training of teachers and students to be more tolerant to Roma; |
| --- | --- |

33.

considers that actions should be taken in order to encourage the training of teachers and students to be more tolerant to Roma;

| 34. | stresses that segregation in schools should be avoided and integrated education in school should be the norm in order to prevent exclusion and segregation from the majority. Indeed, the Roma themselves should play an active role in the demolition of the barriers of hostility by including the parents in education and early education; |
| --- | --- |

34.

stresses that segregation in schools should be avoided and integrated education in school should be the norm in order to prevent exclusion and segregation from the majority. Indeed, the Roma themselves should play an active role in the demolition of the barriers of hostility by including the parents in education and early education;

| 35. | considers that in order to prevent the marginalisation and exclusion of Roma children, action is needed from a very early age, by ensuring education and care for pre-school children; |
| --- | --- |

35.

considers that in order to prevent the marginalisation and exclusion of Roma children, action is needed from a very early age, by ensuring education and care for pre-school children;

| 36. | considers that employment of more Roma teachers and teaching assistants could actively reduce the ethnic tensions in schools; |
| --- | --- |

36.

considers that employment of more Roma teachers and teaching assistants could actively reduce the ethnic tensions in schools;

| 37. | shares concerns that Roma children are at higher risk of more severe and extreme poverty than any other minority group in Europe; |
| --- | --- |

37.

shares concerns that Roma children are at higher risk of more severe and extreme poverty than any other minority group in Europe;

| 38. | calls on the Member States to adopt effective strategies to combat child labour, the involvement of minors in begging, the practice of arranged marriages and marriages with minors, and to combat human trafficking more effectively; |
| --- | --- |

38.

calls on the Member States to adopt effective strategies to combat child labour, the involvement of minors in begging, the practice of arranged marriages and marriages with minors, and to combat human trafficking more effectively;

| 39. | recalls its previous opinions on Roma (5) which stressed the need for full involvement of local and regional authorities and Roma communities in work on national integration and social exclusion policies; |
| --- | --- |

39.

recalls its previous opinions on Roma (5) which stressed the need for full involvement of local and regional authorities and Roma communities in work on national integration and social exclusion policies;

Role and involvement of local and regional governments

| 40. | reiterates that local and regional authorities are the level of governance with most responsibilities for the integration of Roma populations; |
| --- | --- |

40.

reiterates that local and regional authorities are the level of governance with most responsibilities for the integration of Roma populations;

| 41. | stresses that only well-established working partnerships between all stakeholders, including civil society organisations and local and regional authorities, can result in the design of effective Roma integration strategies. Believes that the current top-down approach is failing to produce a satisfactory outcome; |
| --- | --- |

41.

stresses that only well-established working partnerships between all stakeholders, including civil society organisations and local and regional authorities, can result in the design of effective Roma integration strategies. Believes that the current top-down approach is failing to produce a satisfactory outcome;

| 42. | considers that the migration of Roma changes the characteristics of Roma populations and their experiences of social exclusion within local areas and requires different models of intervention to achieve integration, thus a centralised ‘one size fits all’ strategy is unlikely to be successful. Therefore believes that a more decentralised approach would be more effective in tackling the issue; |
| --- | --- |

42.

considers that the migration of Roma changes the characteristics of Roma populations and their experiences of social exclusion within local areas and requires different models of intervention to achieve integration, thus a centralised ‘one size fits all’ strategy is unlikely to be successful. Therefore believes that a more decentralised approach would be more effective in tackling the issue;

| 43. | stresses that Roma integration strategies should be consistent with EU strategies for reducing poverty and social and economic exclusion, and calls for specific programmes and initiatives to be devised and implemented at local and regional level on the basis of concrete, measurable objectives; |
| --- | --- |

43.

stresses that Roma integration strategies should be consistent with EU strategies for reducing poverty and social and economic exclusion, and calls for specific programmes and initiatives to be devised and implemented at local and regional level on the basis of concrete, measurable objectives;

| 44. | expresses concern that only 20 Member States have involved local and regional authorities in a structured dialogue for the implementation of the national Roma Strategies; that only 12 Member States have promoted the exchange of experience and cooperation among local authorities and only 15 Member States have allocated resources for Roma integration to local and regional authorities. Calls therefore on Member State governments to involve local and regional authorities more actively in developing national Roma integration strategies; |
| --- | --- |

44.

expresses concern that only 20 Member States have involved local and regional authorities in a structured dialogue for the implementation of the national Roma Strategies; that only 12 Member States have promoted the exchange of experience and cooperation among local authorities and only 15 Member States have allocated resources for Roma integration to local and regional authorities. Calls therefore on Member State governments to involve local and regional authorities more actively in developing national Roma integration strategies;

| 45. | stresses the need to step up the fight against the discrimination and racism faced by Roma, both by making national civil society more aware of the social and economic benefits of Roma inclusion, and by making the Roma themselves more aware of their rights and obligations; |
| --- | --- |

45.

stresses the need to step up the fight against the discrimination and racism faced by Roma, both by making national civil society more aware of the social and economic benefits of Roma inclusion, and by making the Roma themselves more aware of their rights and obligations;

| 46. | suggests that sanctions such as loss of financial benefits must be part of any scheme or initiative involving public subsidies. Sanctions should only be imposed when agreed patterns of conduct are violated or when the law is broken. Indeed, efforts made to reduce long term dependency on the state by improving the employment situation for Roma alongside promoting income from paid work that which exceeds the income from unemployment benefits is to be encouraged; |
| --- | --- |

46.

suggests that sanctions such as loss of financial benefits must be part of any scheme or initiative involving public subsidies. Sanctions should only be imposed when agreed patterns of conduct are violated or when the law is broken. Indeed, efforts made to reduce long term dependency on the state by improving the employment situation for Roma alongside promoting income from paid work that which exceeds the income from unemployment benefits is to be encouraged;

| 47. | calls on the European Commission to disclose more specific data on the involvement of local and regional authorities in the implementation of the national Roma Strategies; |
| --- | --- |

47.

calls on the European Commission to disclose more specific data on the involvement of local and regional authorities in the implementation of the national Roma Strategies;

| 48. | calls for the establishment of a Local and Regional Authority contact point in each Member State to strengthen dialogue and ensure involvement; |
| --- | --- |

48.

calls for the establishment of a Local and Regional Authority contact point in each Member State to strengthen dialogue and ensure involvement;

| 49. | calls on the government agencies to support and facilitate adult educational and training programmes to enable the Roma population gain specific skills that are in demand. The private sector should be involved in the preparation and running such training programmes. For example, seasonal labour contracts can be an effective and legal way of providing members of the Roma minority with jobs in the free markets; |
| --- | --- |

49.

calls on the government agencies to support and facilitate adult educational and training programmes to enable the Roma population gain specific skills that are in demand. The private sector should be involved in the preparation and running such training programmes. For example, seasonal labour contracts can be an effective and legal way of providing members of the Roma minority with jobs in the free markets;

| 50. | reiterates the importance of allocating appropriate financial and human resources to local authorities in order to enable them to contribute effectively to all phases of the implementation of Roma integration strategies; |
| --- | --- |

50.

reiterates the importance of allocating appropriate financial and human resources to local authorities in order to enable them to contribute effectively to all phases of the implementation of Roma integration strategies;

Subsidiarity and proportionality

| 51. | in its previous opinion (6) the CoR evaluated compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, as set out under Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union, as follows:






  — | the Commission's proposal complies with the principle of subsidiarity, since the transnational character of the European Roma community, and the shared aspects of social exclusion that this community faces in various parts of Europe, are such that the measures proposed can best be achieved at EU level; |
| --- | --- | --- |

51.

in its previous opinion (6) the CoR evaluated compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, as set out under Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union, as follows:

—

the Commission's proposal complies with the principle of subsidiarity, since the transnational character of the European Roma community, and the shared aspects of social exclusion that this community faces in various parts of Europe, are such that the measures proposed can best be achieved at EU level;

| — | the measures adopted do not introduce new legal instruments as, firstly, they fall within the scope of the open method of coordination, and secondly, many of them are based on existing legislative frameworks, in line with the principle of proportionality; |
| --- | --- |

—

the measures adopted do not introduce new legal instruments as, firstly, they fall within the scope of the open method of coordination, and secondly, many of them are based on existing legislative frameworks, in line with the principle of proportionality;

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION (COM(2013) 460 final)

Amendment 1

Point 4.2

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| They should involve regions, local authorities and local civil society in reviewing, managing, implementing and monitoring their national strategies. Relevant stakeholders should be involved as regards partnership agreements and operational programmes co-financed by the European Structural and Investment Funds. Central and local authorities should cooperate constantly in the implementation of the strategies. To this end, the Member States should allocate sufficient funding to local public authorities to facilitate the implementation of targeted sets of policies at local level. | They should involve regions, local authorities and local civil society in reviewing, managing, implementing and monitoring their national strategies. Relevant stakeholders should be involved as regards the drafting and implementation partnership agreements and operational programmes co-financed by the European Structural and Investment Funds. Central
  National, regional and local authorities should cooperate constantly in the implementation of the strategies. To this end, the Member States should allocate sufficient funding to regional and/or local public authorities to facilitate the implementation of targeted sets of policies at regional and/or local level. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

They should involve regions, local authorities and local civil society in reviewing, managing, implementing and monitoring their national strategies. Relevant stakeholders should be involved as regards partnership agreements and operational programmes co-financed by the European Structural and Investment Funds. Central and local authorities should cooperate constantly in the implementation of the strategies. To this end, the Member States should allocate sufficient funding to local public authorities to facilitate the implementation of targeted sets of policies at local level.

They should involve regions, local authorities and local civil society in reviewing, managing, implementing and monitoring their national strategies. Relevant stakeholders should be involved as regards the drafting and implementation partnership agreements and operational programmes co-financed by the European Structural and Investment Funds. Central
  National, regional and local authorities should cooperate constantly in the implementation of the strategies. To this end, the Member States should allocate sufficient funding to regional and/or local public authorities to facilitate the implementation of targeted sets of policies at regional and/or local level.

Reason

Amendment 2

Point 4.7

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The Member States should provide National Contact Points for Roma integration with adequate mandate, financial and human resources so that they can effectively coordinate the cross-sectoral implementation and monitoring of Roma integration policies at national and local level. They should ensure that National Contact Points for Roma integration are consulted during the decision-making processes regarding the definition, funding and implementation of relevant policies. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should facilitate the participation and involvement of Roma civil society in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies and local action plans. | The Member States should provide National Contact Points for Roma integration with adequate mandate, financial and human resources so that they can effectively coordinate the cross-sectoral implementation and monitoring of Roma integration policies at national, regional and local level. They should ensure that National Contact Points for Roma integration are consulted during the decision-making processes regarding the definition, funding and implementation of relevant policies. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should facilitate the participation and involvement of Roma civil society in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies and regional or local action plans. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should be clearly identifiable, including on the internet. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The Member States should provide National Contact Points for Roma integration with adequate mandate, financial and human resources so that they can effectively coordinate the cross-sectoral implementation and monitoring of Roma integration policies at national and local level. They should ensure that National Contact Points for Roma integration are consulted during the decision-making processes regarding the definition, funding and implementation of relevant policies. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should facilitate the participation and involvement of Roma civil society in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies and local action plans.

The Member States should provide National Contact Points for Roma integration with adequate mandate, financial and human resources so that they can effectively coordinate the cross-sectoral implementation and monitoring of Roma integration policies at national, regional and local level. They should ensure that National Contact Points for Roma integration are consulted during the decision-making processes regarding the definition, funding and implementation of relevant policies. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should facilitate the participation and involvement of Roma civil society in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies and regional or local action plans. The National Contact Points for Roma integration should be clearly identifiable, including on the internet.

Reason

Amendment 3

Point 5.4

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| On this basis, the Commission will monitor the situation closely and will assess in three years after its adoption the need to revise and update this Recommendation. | On this basis, the Commission will monitor the situation closely and will assess in 30 months
  three years after its adoption the need to revise and update this Recommendation. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

On this basis, the Commission will monitor the situation closely and will assess in three years after its adoption the need to revise and update this Recommendation.

On this basis, the Commission will monitor the situation closely and will assess in 30 months
  three years after its adoption the need to revise and update this Recommendation.

Reason

Leaving the European Commission one year, i.e. until June 2016, to evaluate the implementation of this recommendation may entail the risk of not integrating possible conclusions into the mid-term review of the structural funds regulations.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  Consistent with the Communication, the term ‘Roma’ here refers to a number of different groups (such as Roma, Sinti, Kale, Gypsies, Romanichels, Boyash, Ashkali, Egyptians, Yenish, Dom, Lom) and also includes Travellers..

1

(2)  Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin

2

(3)  Congress Resolution 333, October 2011(https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1855297).

3

(4)  Council of Europe, 1995 (www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/minorities/).

4

(5)  ‘An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’ (CdR 247/2011 fin); ‘The social and economic integration of the Roma in Europe’ (CdR 178/2010 fin).

5

(6)  CdR 247/2011 fin

6

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/79 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/79

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Directive on e-invoicing and on end-to-end e-procurement’

2014/C 114/13

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments on the directive

| 1. | notes that the intention of the Commission's proposal for a directive on electronic invoicing in public procurement is (1) for a new European e-invoicing standard to be drawn up by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), and (2) for Member States to have to ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities may not refuse to accept electronic invoices complying with the standard. Under the Commission's proposal, these rules will come into effect 48 months after the directive enters into force, while the Committee of the Regions proposes that they should take effect 30 months after the publication of the reference to the European standard pursuant to Article 3(2) of the directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

notes that the intention of the Commission's proposal for a directive on electronic invoicing in public procurement is (1) for a new European e-invoicing standard to be drawn up by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), and (2) for Member States to have to ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities may not refuse to accept electronic invoices complying with the standard. Under the Commission's proposal, these rules will come into effect 48 months after the directive enters into force, while the Committee of the Regions proposes that they should take effect 30 months after the publication of the reference to the European standard pursuant to Article 3(2) of the directive;

| 2. | sees the proposal as a step towards paperless public administration. The acknowledged benefits of e-invoicing have led several EU Member States to require the submission of e-invoices in public procurement in all or part of the public sector. However, these initiatives are often based on national standards that are not interoperable; |
| --- | --- |

2.

sees the proposal as a step towards paperless public administration. The acknowledged benefits of e-invoicing have led several EU Member States to require the submission of e-invoices in public procurement in all or part of the public sector. However, these initiatives are often based on national standards that are not interoperable;

| 3. | notes that in recent years a number of stakeholders have called for action at European level to stimulate e-invoicing, or even suggested that it should be made compulsory; for example, in a resolution of 20 April 2012, the European Parliament referred to market fragmentation due to national rules on e-invoicing and to the need for interoperable solutions based on common legal requirements and technical standards; |
| --- | --- |

3.

notes that in recent years a number of stakeholders have called for action at European level to stimulate e-invoicing, or even suggested that it should be made compulsory; for example, in a resolution of 20 April 2012, the European Parliament referred to market fragmentation due to national rules on e-invoicing and to the need for interoperable solutions based on common legal requirements and technical standards;

| 4. | has previously (1) expressed support for electronic exchange of information and use of electronic means in connection with various procurement procedures, although enough time needs to be allowed for preparation given that circumstances vary, particularly for small businesses; |
| --- | --- |

4.

has previously (1) expressed support for electronic exchange of information and use of electronic means in connection with various procurement procedures, although enough time needs to be allowed for preparation given that circumstances vary, particularly for small businesses;

| 5. | considers it appropriate for the invoicing process — as the final stage in the procurement process — also to use electronic means, in order to improve efficiency and reduce administrative costs; |
| --- | --- |

5.

considers it appropriate for the invoicing process — as the final stage in the procurement process — also to use electronic means, in order to improve efficiency and reduce administrative costs;

| 6. | sees the proposal for a directive as a way of improving the conditions for interoperability and the operation of the internal market. It will make things easier for public contracting authorities and entities and their suppliers, and keeps costs down. At the same time, there is currently little cross-border trade, and from that point of view there is a risk that the directive could have a disproportionately high economic impact; |
| --- | --- |

6.

sees the proposal for a directive as a way of improving the conditions for interoperability and the operation of the internal market. It will make things easier for public contracting authorities and entities and their suppliers, and keeps costs down. At the same time, there is currently little cross-border trade, and from that point of view there is a risk that the directive could have a disproportionately high economic impact;

| 7. | points out that the Commission's proposal for a directive authorises the relevant European standardisation organisation to draw up the semantic data model for electronic invoicing. The proposal under consideration thus delegates substantial discretion over the content of this European standard to a body that is not the legislator. It will not be possible to fully assess the implementation of the standard to be drawn up, the possible need for adjustment and associated costs until the specific details are available. At the current time it is therefore impossible to judge whether the proposal complies with the principle of proportionality; |
| --- | --- |

7.

points out that the Commission's proposal for a directive authorises the relevant European standardisation organisation to draw up the semantic data model for electronic invoicing. The proposal under consideration thus delegates substantial discretion over the content of this European standard to a body that is not the legislator. It will not be possible to fully assess the implementation of the standard to be drawn up, the possible need for adjustment and associated costs until the specific details are available. At the current time it is therefore impossible to judge whether the proposal complies with the principle of proportionality;

| 8. | welcomes the option for contracting authorities and entities to continue to accept invoices in other standard formats, as well as paper invoices, unless otherwise provided in national legislation, even after a common EU standard has been developed. This provides flexibility both for contracting authorities and entities and for suppliers that currently follow other standards. Requiring contracting authorities and entities that have already introduced e invoicing based on particular standards to shift to a new common standard would entail costs both for them and for their suppliers. In line with the proposed directive, the Committee of the Regions therefore feels that existing formats should be allowed to coexist during the gradual transition towards increased use of a common European standard. The development of a common semantic data model will also facilitate conversion between different technical formats. With regard to any invoice content that may be required in addition to the core content due to national legal requirements, the needs of specific sectors, etc., it should continue to be possible to submit invoices containing such information in the format currently in use, which often takes account of these needs; |
| --- | --- |

8.

welcomes the option for contracting authorities and entities to continue to accept invoices in other standard formats, as well as paper invoices, unless otherwise provided in national legislation, even after a common EU standard has been developed. This provides flexibility both for contracting authorities and entities and for suppliers that currently follow other standards. Requiring contracting authorities and entities that have already introduced e invoicing based on particular standards to shift to a new common standard would entail costs both for them and for their suppliers. In line with the proposed directive, the Committee of the Regions therefore feels that existing formats should be allowed to coexist during the gradual transition towards increased use of a common European standard. The development of a common semantic data model will also facilitate conversion between different technical formats. With regard to any invoice content that may be required in addition to the core content due to national legal requirements, the needs of specific sectors, etc., it should continue to be possible to submit invoices containing such information in the format currently in use, which often takes account of these needs;

| 9. | would nonetheless note that it is important to ensure that the work of contracting authorities and entities and of their suppliers is not hindered or made more difficult by the proposed European standard. It would be very expensive if contracting authorities and entities were required to have the capacity to accept e-invoices in all technical formats that complies with the semantic data model; |
| --- | --- |

9.

would nonetheless note that it is important to ensure that the work of contracting authorities and entities and of their suppliers is not hindered or made more difficult by the proposed European standard. It would be very expensive if contracting authorities and entities were required to have the capacity to accept e-invoices in all technical formats that complies with the semantic data model;

| 10. | therefore suggests that the proposal for a directive should be clarified with regard to the requirements for contracting authorities and entities. Amongst other things, they should only be required to accept a limited number of technical formats, not all the different national and proprietary formats in existence. Instead, contracting authorities should be required to accept electronic invoices using the European standard for the semantic data model and technical formats based on international standards by standardisation bodies recognised under EU law (such as CEN, ISO, UN/CEFACT and OASIS). The directive could then be seen as a harmonisation of international standards, ensuring that the core content of invoices meets European requirements under common legislation etc.; |
| --- | --- |

10.

therefore suggests that the proposal for a directive should be clarified with regard to the requirements for contracting authorities and entities. Amongst other things, they should only be required to accept a limited number of technical formats, not all the different national and proprietary formats in existence. Instead, contracting authorities should be required to accept electronic invoices using the European standard for the semantic data model and technical formats based on international standards by standardisation bodies recognised under EU law (such as CEN, ISO, UN/CEFACT and OASIS). The directive could then be seen as a harmonisation of international standards, ensuring that the core content of invoices meets European requirements under common legislation etc.;

| 11. | believes that basing the semantic data model on models currently available from international standardisation bodies and also restricting the permitted technical formats will help to increase interoperability and at the same time reduce costs. It creates consistency for commercial operators that develop good solutions based on standards; |
| --- | --- |

11.

believes that basing the semantic data model on models currently available from international standardisation bodies and also restricting the permitted technical formats will help to increase interoperability and at the same time reduce costs. It creates consistency for commercial operators that develop good solutions based on standards;

| 12. | would also stress that it is very important for the Commission to consider promoting e-invoicing as part of the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). This would ensure that the rules apply to the majority of WTO members, including all EU Member States. It is another reason why the standard provided for by the Commission should be based on international standards, as it would be not just a European standard, but rather an international standard that respects and includes European requirements and needs, based on common legislation etc.; |
| --- | --- |

12.

would also stress that it is very important for the Commission to consider promoting e-invoicing as part of the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). This would ensure that the rules apply to the majority of WTO members, including all EU Member States. It is another reason why the standard provided for by the Commission should be based on international standards, as it would be not just a European standard, but rather an international standard that respects and includes European requirements and needs, based on common legislation etc.;

| 13. | would also note that it is important to take account of standardisation efforts that have already been started, in particular the CEN's work to establish requirements for the information included in business messages in public procurement and the process for exchanging such messages between parties. A number of Member States are already involved in this work (2), the results of which are also intended to be used in projects launched by the Commission such as e-SENS (3) and OpenPEPPOL (4); |
| --- | --- |

13.

would also note that it is important to take account of standardisation efforts that have already been started, in particular the CEN's work to establish requirements for the information included in business messages in public procurement and the process for exchanging such messages between parties. A number of Member States are already involved in this work (2), the results of which are also intended to be used in projects launched by the Commission such as e-SENS (3) and OpenPEPPOL (4);

| 14. | considers it important, when developing the current standard or continuing with the work already initiated, to ensure that the standard is simple to use and is tested before it is recommended. It would also be useful to provide some kind of certification to show that invoices that are said to be based on the standard do in fact comply with it. Experience from Member States where certain standards are required shows that guidelines of some kind are needed to avoid each individual contracting authority or entity having to justify why they cannot accept a given e-invoice. Such a procedure could probably be developed within the aforementioned recognised international standardisation organisations; |
| --- | --- |

14.

considers it important, when developing the current standard or continuing with the work already initiated, to ensure that the standard is simple to use and is tested before it is recommended. It would also be useful to provide some kind of certification to show that invoices that are said to be based on the standard do in fact comply with it. Experience from Member States where certain standards are required shows that guidelines of some kind are needed to avoid each individual contracting authority or entity having to justify why they cannot accept a given e-invoice. Such a procedure could probably be developed within the aforementioned recognised international standardisation organisations;

| 15. | would also point out that it is very important for local and regional representatives to be involved in the work to develop the standard; and other public administrations and institutions that keep up from that state budget; |
| --- | --- |

15.

would also point out that it is very important for local and regional representatives to be involved in the work to develop the standard; and other public administrations and institutions that keep up from that state budget;

| 16. | notes that, in view of the ongoing negotiations on the proposal for a new data protection regulation, it is important to ensure that the provisions in that regulation support the use of proper e-invoicing; |
| --- | --- |

16.

notes that, in view of the ongoing negotiations on the proposal for a new data protection regulation, it is important to ensure that the provisions in that regulation support the use of proper e-invoicing;

| 17. | stresses that, under the e-invoicing rules in Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax, e-invoicing is subject to acceptance by the recipient. As already highlighted in the proposal for a directive, this must be taken into account when framing the current provisions; |
| --- | --- |

17.

stresses that, under the e-invoicing rules in Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax, e-invoicing is subject to acceptance by the recipient. As already highlighted in the proposal for a directive, this must be taken into account when framing the current provisions;

| 18. | notes that the majority of contracting authorities and entities do not currently have the facilities to accept and process electronic invoices, and therefore sees it as essential to allow for proper preparation before the directive enters into force. It should, moreover, not enter into force until the other e-procurement procedures included in the public procurement package do so. The Committee of the Regions considers that an appropriate date for entry into force would be some time, for instance 30 months, after the Commission' publication of the reference to the standard. This will ensure that there is time for the standard to be applied in software and that the contracting authorities and entities have time to acquire systems supporting the standard. The Member States should provide training and support to contracting authorities to ensure that the provisions in the proposed directive can be implemented after the stated deadline; |
| --- | --- |

18.

notes that the majority of contracting authorities and entities do not currently have the facilities to accept and process electronic invoices, and therefore sees it as essential to allow for proper preparation before the directive enters into force. It should, moreover, not enter into force until the other e-procurement procedures included in the public procurement package do so. The Committee of the Regions considers that an appropriate date for entry into force would be some time, for instance 30 months, after the Commission' publication of the reference to the standard. This will ensure that there is time for the standard to be applied in software and that the contracting authorities and entities have time to acquire systems supporting the standard. The Member States should provide training and support to contracting authorities to ensure that the provisions in the proposed directive can be implemented after the stated deadline;

| 19. | points out that the introduction of e-invoicing will mean that many contracting authorities and entities need to acquire appropriate IT solutions and generally improve skills in processing e-invoices. The necessary action in the various Member States should therefore include help in acquiring IT systems for accepting e-invoices, for example in the form of a central framework agreement that authorities can use for procurement, or assistance in drawing up requirements for their own procurement of e-invoicing processes; |
| --- | --- |

19.

points out that the introduction of e-invoicing will mean that many contracting authorities and entities need to acquire appropriate IT solutions and generally improve skills in processing e-invoices. The necessary action in the various Member States should therefore include help in acquiring IT systems for accepting e-invoices, for example in the form of a central framework agreement that authorities can use for procurement, or assistance in drawing up requirements for their own procurement of e-invoicing processes;

| 20. | feels that, in addition to measures to support training etc. for contracting authorities and entities, there is also a need for action to improve the competences of businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises; |
| --- | --- |

20.

feels that, in addition to measures to support training etc. for contracting authorities and entities, there is also a need for action to improve the competences of businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises;

| 21. | given that the aim of the proposal for a directive to solve the problem of interoperability in cross-border trade cannot be satisfactorily achieved by Member States acting alone and given that the draft directive is the appropriate instrument, considers that the proposal is in compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; |
| --- | --- |

21.

given that the aim of the proposal for a directive to solve the problem of interoperability in cross-border trade cannot be satisfactorily achieved by Member States acting alone and given that the draft directive is the appropriate instrument, considers that the proposal is in compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;

| 22. | stresses that the CoR has made e-invoicing in public procurement one of the five priorities in its 2013 subsidiarity work programme and has in this context conducted a subsidiarity-related consultation of the partners of the Subsidiarity Monitoring Network and its Subsidiarity Expert Group; |
| --- | --- |

22.

stresses that the CoR has made e-invoicing in public procurement one of the five priorities in its 2013 subsidiarity work programme and has in this context conducted a subsidiarity-related consultation of the partners of the Subsidiarity Monitoring Network and its Subsidiarity Expert Group;

| 23. | calls on the European Commission itself to lead by example and ensure that electronic invoices are accepted in the case of public procurement processes relating to EU funding programmes; |
| --- | --- |

23.

calls on the European Commission itself to lead by example and ensure that electronic invoices are accepted in the case of public procurement processes relating to EU funding programmes;

General comments on the communication

| 24. | given that the majority of contracting authorities and entities do not currently use e-invoicing, welcomes the Commission's proposals for key actions in section 5.3, which state inter alia that Member States should set up national strategies and detailed action plans for the implementation of e-procurement; |
| --- | --- |

24.

given that the majority of contracting authorities and entities do not currently use e-invoicing, welcomes the Commission's proposals for key actions in section 5.3, which state inter alia that Member States should set up national strategies and detailed action plans for the implementation of e-procurement;

| 25. | stresses that businesses — particularly small and medium-sized enterprises — also need to improve their competences in e-invoicing, and similarly that infrastructure will probably need to be developed in many Member States. The Committee therefore sees the Commission's suggestion that Member States should consider the possibility of using Structural Funds to finance training (particularly for SMEs), to strengthen administrative capacity and to build infrastructure, as a way of resolving these issues; |
| --- | --- |

25.

stresses that businesses — particularly small and medium-sized enterprises — also need to improve their competences in e-invoicing, and similarly that infrastructure will probably need to be developed in many Member States. The Committee therefore sees the Commission's suggestion that Member States should consider the possibility of using Structural Funds to finance training (particularly for SMEs), to strengthen administrative capacity and to build infrastructure, as a way of resolving these issues;

| 26. | sees infrastructure issues as a key element in the implementation of e-invoicing, and therefore feels that the Commission's proposal in section 5.2 (4) to fund and support the development of end-to-end e-procurement (including e-invoicing) infrastructure via the proposed Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) will help to support the smooth operation of infrastructure for these procedures. In the Committee's assessment, additional infrastructure measures may be needed, as circumstances vary considerably between the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

26.

sees infrastructure issues as a key element in the implementation of e-invoicing, and therefore feels that the Commission's proposal in section 5.2 (4) to fund and support the development of end-to-end e-procurement (including e-invoicing) infrastructure via the proposed Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) will help to support the smooth operation of infrastructure for these procedures. In the Committee's assessment, additional infrastructure measures may be needed, as circumstances vary considerably between the Member States;

| 27. | also endorses the Commission's intention to finance projects that promote the development of interoperable solutions (e-SENS); |
| --- | --- |

27.

also endorses the Commission's intention to finance projects that promote the development of interoperable solutions (e-SENS);

| 28. | welcomes the Commission's proposal to continue the work of the European Multi-Stakeholder Forum on e-invoicing, but at the same time urges the Commission to ensure that local and regional authorities are represented in it. |
| --- | --- |

28.

welcomes the Commission's proposal to continue the work of the European Multi-Stakeholder Forum on e-invoicing, but at the same time urges the Commission to ensure that local and regional authorities are represented in it.

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

COM(2013) 449 final

Recital 7

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The European standard for the semantic data model of the core electronic invoice should build on existing specifications, including in particular those developed by European or international organisations such as CEN (CWA 16356 and CWA 16562), ISO (Financial Invoice based on the ISO 20022 methodology), and UN/CEFACT (CII v. 2.0). It should not require electronic signatures. Such European standard should define semantic data elements referring to, in particular, complementary seller and buyer data, process identifiers, invoice attributes, invoice item details, delivery information, payment details and terms. It should also be compatible with the existing standards for payments in order to allow for automatic processing of payments. | The European standard for the semantic data model of the core electronic invoice should build on existing specifications, including in particular those developed by European or international organisations such as CEN (CWA 16356 and CWA 16562), ISO (Financial Invoice based on the ISO 20022 methodology), and UN/CEFACT (CII v. 2.0)
  and OASIS. It should not require electronic signatures. Such European standard should define semantic data elements referring to, in particular, complementary seller and buyer data, process identifiers, invoice attributes, invoice item details, delivery information, payment details and terms. It should also be compatible with the existing standards for payments in order to allow for automatic processing of payments. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The European standard for the semantic data model of the core electronic invoice should build on existing specifications, including in particular those developed by European or international organisations such as CEN (CWA 16356 and CWA 16562), ISO (Financial Invoice based on the ISO 20022 methodology), and UN/CEFACT (CII v. 2.0). It should not require electronic signatures. Such European standard should define semantic data elements referring to, in particular, complementary seller and buyer data, process identifiers, invoice attributes, invoice item details, delivery information, payment details and terms. It should also be compatible with the existing standards for payments in order to allow for automatic processing of payments.

The European standard for the semantic data model of the core electronic invoice should build on existing specifications, including in particular those developed by European or international organisations such as CEN (CWA 16356 and CWA 16562), ISO (Financial Invoice based on the ISO 20022 methodology), and UN/CEFACT (CII v. 2.0)
  and OASIS. It should not require electronic signatures. Such European standard should define semantic data elements referring to, in particular, complementary seller and buyer data, process identifiers, invoice attributes, invoice item details, delivery information, payment details and terms. It should also be compatible with the existing standards for payments in order to allow for automatic processing of payments.

Reason

The Commission's text refers to certain specifications. Invoicing standards change from time to time, and not all of the cited standards have been implemented. There is also no reference to some international standards that are currently in use in a number of Member States. It would therefore be more appropriate to refer to specifications for invoicing standards developed by European or international organisations such as CEN, ISO, UN/CEFACT and OASIS, the last of which is not mentioned in the Commission's text but is recognised as an organisation that produces de facto standards currently used in the public sector in several Member States.

Amendment 2

Article 4

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Electronic invoices complying with the European standard | Electronic invoices complying with the European standard |
| Member States shall ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities do not refuse to receive electronic invoices which comply with the European standard whose reference has been published pursuant to Article 3(2). | Member States shall ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities do not refuse to receive electronic invoices which comply with the European standard whose reference has been published pursuant to Article 3(2) and which are based on technical formats developed by international standardisation organisations recognised under EU law. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Electronic invoices complying with the European standard

Electronic invoices complying with the European standard

Member States shall ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities do not refuse to receive electronic invoices which comply with the European standard whose reference has been published pursuant to Article 3(2).

Member States shall ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities do not refuse to receive electronic invoices which comply with the European standard whose reference has been published pursuant to Article 3(2) and which are based on technical formats developed by international standardisation organisations recognised under EU law.

Reason

It would be very expensive if contracting authorities and entities were required to accept electronic invoices in all technical formats that complied with the semantic data model. One way of restricting the number of formats is to require e-invoices to comply with the European standard for the semantic data model of the core electronic invoice and to be based on technical formats (syntax) developed by standardisation organisations recognised by the EU (such as CEN, UN/CEFACT, ISO and OASIS).

Amendment 3

Article 6

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Transposition | Transposition |
| Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 48 months following the entry into force at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. | Member States shall work actively to ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities are able to receive electronic invoices which comply with the European standard whose reference has been published pursuant to Article 3(2) and which comply with technical formats based on European and international standards.


  The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 48
  by 30 months following the Commission's publication of the reference to the European standard pursuant to Article 3(2) entry into force at the latest
  . They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. |
| When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.
  Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. | When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.
  Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Transposition

Transposition

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 48 months following the entry into force at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

Member States shall work actively to ensure that contracting authorities and contracting entities are able to receive electronic invoices which comply with the European standard whose reference has been published pursuant to Article 3(2) and which comply with technical formats based on European and international standards.

The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 48
  by 30 months following the Commission's publication of the reference to the European standard pursuant to Article 3(2) entry into force at the latest
  . They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.

When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.

Reason

It makes more sense to base the deadline on a certain time after the Commission's publication of reference to the standard. This would leave time to put IT systems in place and to test the standard, and allow contracting authorities and entities to find systems based on the standard. An appropriate deadline would be 30 months from the date when the Commission's reference to the standard is published in accordance with Article 3(2). Furthermore, it is important that Member States give contracting authorities and entities the necessary support to improve their competences in e-invoicing, and possibly also in acquiring IT processes for accepting and processing e-invoices. Action in this regard could also include training for businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises. The proposed text also creates a better basis for enabling e-invoices complying with the defined standard to be accepted within the proposed deadline.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  The Committee of the Regions has previously issued an opinion on the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (COM(2011) 895 final) and the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement (COM(2011) 896 final)

1

(2)  (see www.cenbii.eu)

2

(3)  (see www.esens.eu)

3

(4)  (see www.peppol.eu)

4

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/85 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/85

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Enhanced cooperation between public employment services’

2014/C 114/14

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | strongly supports the European Commission’s proposal to strengthen and formalise cooperation between European Public Employment Services which, by improving performance of PES, should contribute: to the objective set out in Article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty of promoting full employment; to combating youth unemployment and to meeting the Europe 2020 employment targets; |
| --- | --- |

1.

strongly supports the European Commission’s proposal to strengthen and formalise cooperation between European Public Employment Services which, by improving performance of PES, should contribute: to the objective set out in Article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty of promoting full employment; to combating youth unemployment and to meeting the Europe 2020 employment targets;

| 2. | highlights the fact that Article 29 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights stipulates that ‘everyone has the right of access to a free placement service’ and is therefore surprised that there is no reference to this provision in the European Commission's proposal for a decision; |
| --- | --- |

2.

highlights the fact that Article 29 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights stipulates that ‘everyone has the right of access to a free placement service’ and is therefore surprised that there is no reference to this provision in the European Commission's proposal for a decision;

| 3. | points out that public employment services are a service of general economic interest and as such are governed by Article 14 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 36 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; |
| --- | --- |

3.

points out that public employment services are a service of general economic interest and as such are governed by Article 14 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 36 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

| 4. | underlines the diversity among PES across EU Member States in terms of structures, delivery models, activities and the fact that they operate in diverse labour market conditions and have different levels of resources; |
| --- | --- |

4.

underlines the diversity among PES across EU Member States in terms of structures, delivery models, activities and the fact that they operate in diverse labour market conditions and have different levels of resources;

| 5. | endorses the commitments made by participants at the 3 July youth employment conference in Berlin, notably the promise made by European PES representatives to play a pivotal role in promoting youth employment in Europe, to increase efficiency and boost cooperation with other stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

5.

endorses the commitments made by participants at the 3 July youth employment conference in Berlin, notably the promise made by European PES representatives to play a pivotal role in promoting youth employment in Europe, to increase efficiency and boost cooperation with other stakeholders;

Work of PES network to date

| 6. | notes that an informal advisory network of European PES has existed since 1997 with working groups on topics like New Skills for New Jobs or PES efficiency; a mutual learning programme and PES to PES dialogues; |
| --- | --- |

6.

notes that an informal advisory network of European PES has existed since 1997 with working groups on topics like New Skills for New Jobs or PES efficiency; a mutual learning programme and PES to PES dialogues;

| 7. | affirms that it has contributed significantly to EU level policy work by providing specialist feedback on issues like flexicurity, the role of PES in ‘making transitions pay’ and the youth guarantee; |
| --- | --- |

7.

affirms that it has contributed significantly to EU level policy work by providing specialist feedback on issues like flexicurity, the role of PES in ‘making transitions pay’ and the youth guarantee;

| 8. | observes that this network has been a very useful, cost-effective forum to exchange best practice between PES and a significant source of mutual learning and innovation on a wide range of areas such as digital services and customer profiling; |
| --- | --- |

8.

observes that this network has been a very useful, cost-effective forum to exchange best practice between PES and a significant source of mutual learning and innovation on a wide range of areas such as digital services and customer profiling;

| 9. | recognises that learning from the network has improved delivery and services on the ground in some Member States; |
| --- | --- |

9.

recognises that learning from the network has improved delivery and services on the ground in some Member States;

The need for an enhanced network with a legal base

| 10. | highlights that this legislative proposal would establish a PES network with the aim of expanding, reinforcing and consolidating on-going initiatives to further improve the effectiveness of PES and the operation of the labour market; |
| --- | --- |

10.

highlights that this legislative proposal would establish a PES network with the aim of expanding, reinforcing and consolidating on-going initiatives to further improve the effectiveness of PES and the operation of the labour market;

| 11. | emphasises that the proposal for a decision submitted by the Commission is still within the terms of reference of coordination and support as defined in Article 149 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and is therefore consistent with the principle of subsidiarity; |
| --- | --- |

11.

emphasises that the proposal for a decision submitted by the Commission is still within the terms of reference of coordination and support as defined in Article 149 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and is therefore consistent with the principle of subsidiarity;

| 12. | believes that the proposal gives the network higher visibility, legitimacy and a clearer political mandate but maintains that its role should remain advisory; |
| --- | --- |

12.

believes that the proposal gives the network higher visibility, legitimacy and a clearer political mandate but maintains that its role should remain advisory;

| 13. | considers that this legislation would give PES a greater degree of ownership of the network and further empower them to act in unison where appropriate; |
| --- | --- |

13.

considers that this legislation would give PES a greater degree of ownership of the network and further empower them to act in unison where appropriate;

| 14. | draws attention to the fact that not all PES have been involved in the network to the same degree, which is detrimental to the quality of the network’s output and weakens the policy response from the network; |
| --- | --- |

14.

draws attention to the fact that not all PES have been involved in the network to the same degree, which is detrimental to the quality of the network’s output and weakens the policy response from the network;

| 15. | maintains that formalising the network will ensure that all Member States become involved and would be required to systematically provide evidence of how they have implemented changes in line with EU policy decisions, thus helping to identify poor performance and related structural problems; |
| --- | --- |

15.

maintains that formalising the network will ensure that all Member States become involved and would be required to systematically provide evidence of how they have implemented changes in line with EU policy decisions, thus helping to identify poor performance and related structural problems;

| 16. | emphasises that effective PES are crucial in implementing a youth guarantee scheme and that it is essential that all PES have a profound knowledge of the structure of youth unemployment, the strengths and weaknesses of young people, job opportunities as well as job specific requirements; |
| --- | --- |

16.

emphasises that effective PES are crucial in implementing a youth guarantee scheme and that it is essential that all PES have a profound knowledge of the structure of youth unemployment, the strengths and weaknesses of young people, job opportunities as well as job specific requirements;

| 17. | asserts that the remit of the network must be very clearly defined so as to ensure that there is no duplication between its work and that of, for example, the Employment Committee (EMCO) and its sub-groups, together with other groups like the European Lifelong Guidance Policy Network and EURES; but equally considers that the enhanced network should strive to achieve synergies with these groups where appropriate; |
| --- | --- |

17.

asserts that the remit of the network must be very clearly defined so as to ensure that there is no duplication between its work and that of, for example, the Employment Committee (EMCO) and its sub-groups, together with other groups like the European Lifelong Guidance Policy Network and EURES; but equally considers that the enhanced network should strive to achieve synergies with these groups where appropriate;

| 18. | underlines that the outputs of the enhanced network should inform work on employment policy at EU level, notably that of EMCO and the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO); |
| --- | --- |

18.

underlines that the outputs of the enhanced network should inform work on employment policy at EU level, notably that of EMCO and the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO);

| 19. | acknowledges that the increasing complexity of labour markets calls for greater levels of cooperation and partnership working with the social partners and other public, private and not-for- profit stakeholders which should be reflected in the enhanced network; |
| --- | --- |

19.

acknowledges that the increasing complexity of labour markets calls for greater levels of cooperation and partnership working with the social partners and other public, private and not-for- profit stakeholders which should be reflected in the enhanced network;

Benchmarking/bench-learning

| 20. | agrees that there is scope for further benchmarking, which is a pre-requisite for benchlearning, but feels that this has to be undertaken sensitively taking full account of national/regional differences; |
| --- | --- |

20.

agrees that there is scope for further benchmarking, which is a pre-requisite for benchlearning, but feels that this has to be undertaken sensitively taking full account of national/regional differences;

| 21. | notes that the Commission's proposal will in accordance with Article 8 empower the Commission to adopt delegated acts for the delivery of the benchmarking and mutual learning initiatives. In this regard, the Committee of the Regions points out that no significant administrative burdens should be imposed on local and regional authorities by way of delegated act; |
| --- | --- |

21.

notes that the Commission's proposal will in accordance with Article 8 empower the Commission to adopt delegated acts for the delivery of the benchmarking and mutual learning initiatives. In this regard, the Committee of the Regions points out that no significant administrative burdens should be imposed on local and regional authorities by way of delegated act;

| 22. | deems that the objective should never be to create a ‘league table’ or set targets, but to facilitate learning on the basis of a shared methodology; national and/or regional and local authorities have sole responsibility for evaluating their Public Employment Services based on a set of qualitative and quantative indicators in accordance with Article 14 TFEU; |
| --- | --- |

22.

deems that the objective should never be to create a ‘league table’ or set targets, but to facilitate learning on the basis of a shared methodology; national and/or regional and local authorities have sole responsibility for evaluating their Public Employment Services based on a set of qualitative and quantative indicators in accordance with Article 14 TFEU;

| 23. | stresses that the focus of the benchmarking/benchlearning work should be qualitative rather than quantative; |
| --- | --- |

23.

stresses that the focus of the benchmarking/benchlearning work should be qualitative rather than quantative;

| 24. | calls for the output of the network to be based on rigorous independent research which makes use of the best evidence available; |
| --- | --- |

24.

calls for the output of the network to be based on rigorous independent research which makes use of the best evidence available;

| 25. | proposes that the new legislation should provide the opportunity to further develop the network's on-line presence in order to further communicate its work and involve stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

25.

proposes that the new legislation should provide the opportunity to further develop the network's on-line presence in order to further communicate its work and involve stakeholders;

| 26. | affirms that one outcome of the enhanced network will be a greater capacity to work in a more holistic way covering core PES competences and closely related areas such as apprenticeships, business creation and entrepreneurship education. The significance and effectiveness of EU funding in these areas should be highlighted; |
| --- | --- |

26.

affirms that one outcome of the enhanced network will be a greater capacity to work in a more holistic way covering core PES competences and closely related areas such as apprenticeships, business creation and entrepreneurship education. The significance and effectiveness of EU funding in these areas should be highlighted;

The local and regional dimension

| 27. | highlights that regional and local authorities in some Member States have responsibility for PES with decentralised structures and decision-making, while in many others, they are responsible for activities such as apprenticeship schemes, skills matching and anticipation, training, employment subsidies — which are either closely linked to core PES work or in some Member States part of the PES remit; |
| --- | --- |

27.

highlights that regional and local authorities in some Member States have responsibility for PES with decentralised structures and decision-making, while in many others, they are responsible for activities such as apprenticeship schemes, skills matching and anticipation, training, employment subsidies — which are either closely linked to core PES work or in some Member States part of the PES remit;

| 28. | asserts that good and best practice often occurs at the local and regional level therefore it is imperative to recognise the importance of the work undertaken at this level. The network should take best practices into account and disseminate them; |
| --- | --- |

28.

asserts that good and best practice often occurs at the local and regional level therefore it is imperative to recognise the importance of the work undertaken at this level. The network should take best practices into account and disseminate them;

| 29. | observes that often the local and regional level is that closest to job seekers and most employers and that the job market is predominantly a local one; |
| --- | --- |

29.

observes that often the local and regional level is that closest to job seekers and most employers and that the job market is predominantly a local one;

| 30. | calls for the Member State Representative to make every effort to ensure that the views and experiences of local and regional PES feed into its activities and keep local and regional PES fully informed of its work. It is also important to bear in mind that the Member State Representative has the task of ensuring that the views and experiences of local and regional bodies working with jobseekers are taken into account by the network and of finding a structure for this in the dialogue between local and regional PES; |
| --- | --- |

30.

calls for the Member State Representative to make every effort to ensure that the views and experiences of local and regional PES feed into its activities and keep local and regional PES fully informed of its work. It is also important to bear in mind that the Member State Representative has the task of ensuring that the views and experiences of local and regional bodies working with jobseekers are taken into account by the network and of finding a structure for this in the dialogue between local and regional PES;

| 31. | requests that the network include a representative appointed by the CoR as an observer in order to ensure that the views, experiences and practices from the local and regional level are reflected in the network. |
| --- | --- |

31.

requests that the network include a representative appointed by the CoR as an observer in order to ensure that the views, experiences and practices from the local and regional level are reflected in the network.

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Preamble

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 149 thereof, | Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 149 and 14 thereof,

  Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in particular Articles 29 and 36 thereof, |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 149 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 149 and 14 thereof,

Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in particular Articles 29 and 36 thereof,

Reason

Follows from points 2 and 3.

Amendment 2

Recital 8

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The PES Network should reinforce cooperation between its members, develop joint initiatives aimed at exchanges of information and best practices in all areas covered by PES, comparative analysis and advice as well as promotion of innovative approaches in the delivery of employment services. By establishing this network an inclusive, evidence-based and performance-oriented comparison of all PES leading to the identification of best practices will be possible. With these results members of the network should be able to shape the design and delivery of employment services within their specific responsibilities. The initiatives carried out by the Network should improve PES effectiveness and allow for more efficient public spending. | The PES Network should reinforce cooperation between its members, develop joint initiatives aimed at exchanges of information and best practices in all areas covered by PES, comparative analysis and advice as well as promotion of innovative approaches in the delivery of employment services.

  By establishing this network an inclusive, evidence-based and performance-oriented comparison of all PES leading to the identification of best practices will be possible. With these results members of the network should be able to shape the design and delivery of employment services within their specific responsibilities. The initiatives carried out by the Network should improve PES effectiveness and allow for more
  guarantee efficient public spending. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The PES Network should reinforce cooperation between its members, develop joint initiatives aimed at exchanges of information and best practices in all areas covered by PES, comparative analysis and advice as well as promotion of innovative approaches in the delivery of employment services. By establishing this network an inclusive, evidence-based and performance-oriented comparison of all PES leading to the identification of best practices will be possible. With these results members of the network should be able to shape the design and delivery of employment services within their specific responsibilities. The initiatives carried out by the Network should improve PES effectiveness and allow for more efficient public spending.

The PES Network should reinforce cooperation between its members, develop joint initiatives aimed at exchanges of information and best practices in all areas covered by PES, comparative analysis and advice as well as promotion of innovative approaches in the delivery of employment services.

By establishing this network an inclusive, evidence-based and performance-oriented comparison of all PES leading to the identification of best practices will be possible. With these results members of the network should be able to shape the design and delivery of employment services within their specific responsibilities. The initiatives carried out by the Network should improve PES effectiveness and allow for more
  guarantee efficient public spending.

Reason

Text proposed by the Commission in recital 8 is largely redundant as it repeats recital 4. However, the first and last sentence succinctly summarise what the aim of the network should be and how it will work.

Amendment 3

Article 1

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| An EU wide network of Public Employment Services (PES) — hereinafter referred to as ‘the Network’ — is established for the period expanding from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020.
  The Network will carry out initiatives as defined in Article 3.
  The Network comprises:






  (a) | the Public Employment Services as nominated by the Member States, and |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

An EU wide network of Public Employment Services (PES) — hereinafter referred to as ‘the Network’ — is established for the period expanding from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020.

The Network will carry out initiatives as defined in Article 3.

The Network comprises:

(a)

the Public Employment Services as nominated by the Member States, and

| (b) | the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the Commission.

Member States with regional autonomous Public Employment Services shall ensure adequate Representation in the specific initiatives of the Network

An EU wide network of Public Employment Services (PES) — hereinafter referred to as ‘the Network’ — is established for the period expanding from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020.

The Network will carry out initiatives as defined in Article 3.

The Network comprises:

| (a) | the Public Employment Services as nominated by the Member States, and |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the Public Employment Services as nominated by the Member States, and

| (b) | the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the Commission.

Member States with regional autonomous and devolved or local Public Employment Services shall have a duty to ensure adequate Representation of those services in the specific initiatives of the Network.

Reason

This amendment aims to ensure that where there are partly or wholly decentralised PES the network has a legal obligation to ensure that these services are adequately reflected in the specific initiatives of the network.

Amendment 4

Article 2

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Objectives


  Through this Network the incentive measure herewith foreseen shall contribute to: | Objectives


  Through this Network the incentive measure herewith foreseen shall contribute to: |
| (a) | the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy for jobs and smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, and its headline targets especially those dealing with employment; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Objectives

Through this Network the incentive measure herewith foreseen shall contribute to:

Objectives

Through this Network the incentive measure herewith foreseen shall contribute to:

(a)

the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy for jobs and smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, and its headline targets especially those dealing with employment;

| (b) | the better functioning of the labour markets in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the better functioning of the labour markets in the EU;

| (c) | the better integration of labour markets; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the better integration of labour markets;

| (d) | increased geographical and occupational mobility; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

increased geographical and occupational mobility;

| (e) | combatting of social exclusion and integration of persons excluded from the labour market. |
| --- | --- |

(e)

combatting of social exclusion and integration of persons excluded from the labour market.

| (a) | the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy for jobs and smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, and its headline targets especially those dealing with employment; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy for jobs and smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, and its headline targets especially those dealing with employment;

| (b | )
  promoting quality and sustainable employment; |
| --- | --- |

(b

)
  promoting quality and sustainable employment;

| (b
  c) | the better functioning of the labour markets in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

(b
  c)

the better functioning of the labour markets in the EU;

| (c
  d) | the better integration of labour markets; |
| --- | --- |

(c
  d)

the better integration of labour markets;

| (d
  e) | increased geographical and occupational mobility without unfair competition between workers, in compliance with the relevant Union legislation; |
| --- | --- |

(d
  e)

increased geographical and occupational mobility without unfair competition between workers, in compliance with the relevant Union legislation;

| (e
  f) | combatting of social exclusion and integration of persons excluded from the labour market. |
| --- | --- |

(e
  f)

combatting of social exclusion and integration of persons excluded from the labour market.

Reason

Self-explanatory.

Amendment 5

Article 4

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Cooperation


  1.   The Network shall cooperate with labour market stakeholders including other providers of employment services by involving them in relevant activities and meetings of the Network and by exchanging information and data. | Cooperation


  1.   The Network shall cooperate with labour market stakeholders including other providers of employment services by involving them in relevant activities and meetings of the Network and by exchanging information and data. |
| | 2.   The network will allow observer status to a representative appointed by the Committee of the Regions. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Cooperation

1.   The Network shall cooperate with labour market stakeholders including other providers of employment services by involving them in relevant activities and meetings of the Network and by exchanging information and data.

Cooperation

1.   The Network shall cooperate with labour market stakeholders including other providers of employment services by involving them in relevant activities and meetings of the Network and by exchanging information and data.

2.   The network will allow observer status to a representative appointed by the Committee of the Regions.

Reason

As with the previous amendment, this addition is important insofar as it reflects the fact that Regional and Local Authorities in many Member States are either fully responsible for PES or undertake activities like training, guidance, counselling, employment subsidies, skills anticipation etc. that are very closely linked to PES work (or within the PES remit in some Member States).

Amendment 6

Article 7

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 8 concerning a general framework for the delivery of the benchmarking and mutual learning initiatives as defined in Article 3.1 including the methodology, the basic quantitative and qualitative indicators to assess PES performance, the learning instruments of the integrated mutual learning programme and the terms for participation in these initiatives. | The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 8 concerning a general framework for the delivery of the benchmarking and mutual learning initiatives as defined in Article 3.1 including the methodology, the basic quantitative and qualitative indicators to assess the functioning of PES performance, the learning instruments of the integrated mutual learning programme and the terms for participation in these initiatives. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 8 concerning a general framework for the delivery of the benchmarking and mutual learning initiatives as defined in Article 3.1 including the methodology, the basic quantitative and qualitative indicators to assess PES performance, the learning instruments of the integrated mutual learning programme and the terms for participation in these initiatives.

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 8 concerning a general framework for the delivery of the benchmarking and mutual learning initiatives as defined in Article 3.1 including the methodology, the basic quantitative and qualitative indicators to assess the functioning of PES performance, the learning instruments of the integrated mutual learning programme and the terms for participation in these initiatives.

Reason

Correction of terminology in order to be consistent with point 21.

Brussels, 28 November 2013.

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/90 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/90

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Smart Borders package’

2014/C 114/15

I.   GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | welcomes the recent adoption of the Schengen Governance package, comprising the new evaluation mechanism for verifying the application of the Schengen acquis (1) and the common rules on the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances (2); |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the recent adoption of the Schengen Governance package, comprising the new evaluation mechanism for verifying the application of the Schengen acquis (1) and the common rules on the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances (2);

| 2. | acknowledges that the proper functioning of the Schengen area is dependent on mutual trust and Member States' ability to carry out surveillance of external borders in line with the common rules; |
| --- | --- |

2.

acknowledges that the proper functioning of the Schengen area is dependent on mutual trust and Member States' ability to carry out surveillance of external borders in line with the common rules;

| 3. | welcomes the fact that the Member States and the Commission are given joint responsibility under the new Schengen evaluation mechanism, so that the system is no longer purely intergovernmental, which could help to offset the shortcomings and build mutual trust; it likewise welcomes the fact that this is being extended to all aspects of the Schengen acquis, including the absence of controls at internal borders, so as to prevent illegal checks undermining the principle of free movement of persons; |
| --- | --- |

3.

welcomes the fact that the Member States and the Commission are given joint responsibility under the new Schengen evaluation mechanism, so that the system is no longer purely intergovernmental, which could help to offset the shortcomings and build mutual trust; it likewise welcomes the fact that this is being extended to all aspects of the Schengen acquis, including the absence of controls at internal borders, so as to prevent illegal checks undermining the principle of free movement of persons;

| 4. | underlines that any reintroduction of checks at internal borders must be subject to a coordination at EU level in order to prevent unilateral decisions which could jeopardise totally free movement of persons in an area without internal borders; |
| --- | --- |

4.

underlines that any reintroduction of checks at internal borders must be subject to a coordination at EU level in order to prevent unilateral decisions which could jeopardise totally free movement of persons in an area without internal borders;

| 5. | considers that migration flows at external borders do not in themselves constitute a threat to public policy or internal security that could justify the reintroduction of internal border checks; |
| --- | --- |

5.

considers that migration flows at external borders do not in themselves constitute a threat to public policy or internal security that could justify the reintroduction of internal border checks;

| 6. | points out that, in the event of pressure building up at a Member State's external border, the principle of European solidarity requires all European and national technical and financial support measures to be brought to bear, along with assistance from EU bodies such as FRONTEX and EASO; |
| --- | --- |

6.

points out that, in the event of pressure building up at a Member State's external border, the principle of European solidarity requires all European and national technical and financial support measures to be brought to bear, along with assistance from EU bodies such as FRONTEX and EASO;

| 7. | welcomes measures to ensure stricter border control, better law enforcement, contribute to the fight against terrorist offences and other serious criminal offenses and reduce illegal migration; |
| --- | --- |

7.

welcomes measures to ensure stricter border control, better law enforcement, contribute to the fight against terrorist offences and other serious criminal offenses and reduce illegal migration;

| 8. | therefore considers that the temporary reintroduction of checks at internal borders in response to persistent, serious deficiencies in external border surveillance must be framed by an objective evaluation process and only be permitted as an exceptional measure taken as a last resort; |
| --- | --- |

8.

therefore considers that the temporary reintroduction of checks at internal borders in response to persistent, serious deficiencies in external border surveillance must be framed by an objective evaluation process and only be permitted as an exceptional measure taken as a last resort;

| 9. | calls for local and regional authorities to be fully involved in identifying and evaluating persistent, serious deficiencies in external border control, in order to ensure that any reintroduction of checks at internal borders is the result of a proper assessment of the situation on the ground, based on a variety of sources of information and with input from different stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

9.

calls for local and regional authorities to be fully involved in identifying and evaluating persistent, serious deficiencies in external border control, in order to ensure that any reintroduction of checks at internal borders is the result of a proper assessment of the situation on the ground, based on a variety of sources of information and with input from different stakeholders;

| 10. | recognises the importance of surveillance of the EU's external borders as a way of ensuring not just security but also mobility within the EU (3); |
| --- | --- |

10.

recognises the importance of surveillance of the EU's external borders as a way of ensuring not just security but also mobility within the EU (3);

| 11. | welcomes the recent adoption of the European External Border Surveillance System (EUROSUR), which is a mechanism for reinforcing external border control through the sharing of operational information and cooperation between national authorities carrying out external sea and land border surveillance and with FRONTEX, stresses that the prevention of loss of lives at sea must be the key target of this mechanism in addition to its role in detecting illegal immigrants and increasing internal security by preventing cross-border crimes, such as trafficking in human beings and drug smuggling; |
| --- | --- |

11.

welcomes the recent adoption of the European External Border Surveillance System (EUROSUR), which is a mechanism for reinforcing external border control through the sharing of operational information and cooperation between national authorities carrying out external sea and land border surveillance and with FRONTEX, stresses that the prevention of loss of lives at sea must be the key target of this mechanism in addition to its role in detecting illegal immigrants and increasing internal security by preventing cross-border crimes, such as trafficking in human beings and drug smuggling;

| 12. | warns, however, that this system must not jeopardise protection of human rights or prevail over the right to asylum or the right to protection against refoulement, which are enshrined in Articles 18 and 19(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (4); |
| --- | --- |

12.

warns, however, that this system must not jeopardise protection of human rights or prevail over the right to asylum or the right to protection against refoulement, which are enshrined in Articles 18 and 19(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (4);

| 13. | is concerned at the trend towards winning back discretionary powers in ‘Europeanised’ sectors such as free movement, particularly a recent proposal by certain Member States to introduce extensive possibilities for restricting the right to free movement, which is an essential element of EU citizenship; |
| --- | --- |

13.

is concerned at the trend towards winning back discretionary powers in ‘Europeanised’ sectors such as free movement, particularly a recent proposal by certain Member States to introduce extensive possibilities for restricting the right to free movement, which is an essential element of EU citizenship;

| 14. | reiterates that the free movement of persons in an area without internal borders is one of the fundamental principles of the EU and one of the EU's most tangible and significant benefits for the public, which must not be jeopardised; |
| --- | --- |

14.

reiterates that the free movement of persons in an area without internal borders is one of the fundamental principles of the EU and one of the EU's most tangible and significant benefits for the public, which must not be jeopardised;

| 15. | believes that it is in the overall context of the operation of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice that the Smart Borders package should be assessed, with its proposals for regulations to: establish an Entry/Exit System (EES) to register entry and exit data of third country nationals (5); establish a registered traveller programme (RTP) (6); and amend the Schengen Borders Code in order to allow the two systems to be implemented (7); |
| --- | --- |

15.

believes that it is in the overall context of the operation of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice that the Smart Borders package should be assessed, with its proposals for regulations to: establish an Entry/Exit System (EES) to register entry and exit data of third country nationals (5); establish a registered traveller programme (RTP) (6); and amend the Schengen Borders Code in order to allow the two systems to be implemented (7);

II.   POLITICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Specific comments on the Smart Borders package

| 16. | recognises the importance of new technology in ensuring efficient border management and coping with the substantial increase in the number of external border crossings while ensuring secure border surveillance, as is already the case in several Member States; |
| --- | --- |

16.

recognises the importance of new technology in ensuring efficient border management and coping with the substantial increase in the number of external border crossings while ensuring secure border surveillance, as is already the case in several Member States;

| 17. | notes that the EES is intended to replace the current system of manual entry and exit passport stamps with the electronic registration of the time and place of entry and exit of third country nationals admitted for short stays to the Schengen area (up to three months), allowing automatic calculation of authorised stays; |
| --- | --- |

17.

notes that the EES is intended to replace the current system of manual entry and exit passport stamps with the electronic registration of the time and place of entry and exit of third country nationals admitted for short stays to the Schengen area (up to three months), allowing automatic calculation of authorised stays;

| 18. | welcomes the RTP's highly commendable aim of facilitating external border crossing for frequent, pre-vetted and pre-screened travellers who are third country nationals, by shifting to automated border control systems, facilitating entry into the European area for frequent, bona fide travellers; |
| --- | --- |

18.

welcomes the RTP's highly commendable aim of facilitating external border crossing for frequent, pre-vetted and pre-screened travellers who are third country nationals, by shifting to automated border control systems, facilitating entry into the European area for frequent, bona fide travellers;

Comments on the implications of the Smart Borders package for fundamental rights

| 19. | expresses its concern at the creation of the EES and the possible implications for fundamental rights, especially in terms of personal data protection (8); |
| --- | --- |

19.

expresses its concern at the creation of the EES and the possible implications for fundamental rights, especially in terms of personal data protection (8);

| 20. | recognises that collection of a substantial amount of personal data, including biometric data, creates particular tension between these systems and fundamental rights, especially the rights to privacy and protection of personal data, which require strict purpose limitation for these systems and checks on their necessity and proportionality; |
| --- | --- |

20.

recognises that collection of a substantial amount of personal data, including biometric data, creates particular tension between these systems and fundamental rights, especially the rights to privacy and protection of personal data, which require strict purpose limitation for these systems and checks on their necessity and proportionality;

| 21. | stresses its support for a high level of protection of personal data, and its concern at the exponential growth of digital information on private individuals resulting from the development of information and communication technologies (9); |
| --- | --- |

21.

stresses its support for a high level of protection of personal data, and its concern at the exponential growth of digital information on private individuals resulting from the development of information and communication technologies (9);

| 22. | warns that, in terms of the principle of non-discrimination and personal data protection, the proposed systems constitute grounds for serious concern in view of the implications they have for fundamental rights, particularly those of third country nationals and asylum-seekers trying to enter the EU; |
| --- | --- |

22.

warns that, in terms of the principle of non-discrimination and personal data protection, the proposed systems constitute grounds for serious concern in view of the implications they have for fundamental rights, particularly those of third country nationals and asylum-seekers trying to enter the EU;

Comments on the added value, necessity and proportionality of the Smart Borders package

| 23. | believes that, as both of the Smart Borders package systems involve large-scale collection of data, including biometric data, it must be demonstrated that they are necessary, legitimate and proportionate and that their objectives cannot be achieved with less intrusive, cheaper systems; |
| --- | --- |

23.

believes that, as both of the Smart Borders package systems involve large-scale collection of data, including biometric data, it must be demonstrated that they are necessary, legitimate and proportionate and that their objectives cannot be achieved with less intrusive, cheaper systems;

| 24. | notes the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), which has criticised the Smart Borders package, disputing its necessity and proportionality, as there is no reliable evidence justifying the need for new systems. In particular, the EDPS feels that the EES constitutes interference in the right to privacy; at stake is the cost-effectiveness of the system in financial terms and in relation to fundamental rights (10); |
| --- | --- |

24.

notes the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), which has criticised the Smart Borders package, disputing its necessity and proportionality, as there is no reliable evidence justifying the need for new systems. In particular, the EDPS feels that the EES constitutes interference in the right to privacy; at stake is the cost-effectiveness of the system in financial terms and in relation to fundamental rights (10);

| 25. | notes that the European Parliament, the Article 29 Working Party and the majority of civil society representatives have also expressed doubts as to the necessity and added value of the EES (11); |
| --- | --- |

25.

notes that the European Parliament, the Article 29 Working Party and the majority of civil society representatives have also expressed doubts as to the necessity and added value of the EES (11);

| 26. | recognises that the necessity and proportionality of establishing an EES in particular are controversial issues, as there is no irrefutable proof that they will be effective in achieving the proposed objectives of efficient border management, combating illegal immigration or stepping up the fight against serious forms of organised crime; |
| --- | --- |

26.

recognises that the necessity and proportionality of establishing an EES in particular are controversial issues, as there is no irrefutable proof that they will be effective in achieving the proposed objectives of efficient border management, combating illegal immigration or stepping up the fight against serious forms of organised crime;

| 27. | notes that the main objective of the EES is to identify third country nationals who enter the Schengen area legally, with or without a short-term visa, and stay longer than the authorised period. To this end, the authorised period of stay is calculated electronically and an alert is sent to the national authorities concerning overstayers, with a view to intercepting illegal immigrants and repatriating them; |
| --- | --- |

27.

notes that the main objective of the EES is to identify third country nationals who enter the Schengen area legally, with or without a short-term visa, and stay longer than the authorised period. To this end, the authorised period of stay is calculated electronically and an alert is sent to the national authorities concerning overstayers, with a view to intercepting illegal immigrants and repatriating them;

| 28. | believes that the EES's added value in terms of achieving this objective is not clear, as the existence of an alert regarding the illegal presence of an individual is based on the assumption that people who enter the EU with a short-term visa or without a visa are required to leave it within a maximum of three months, without taking into consideration particular circumstances such as an application for asylum or the regularisation of a person's presence under national law; |
| --- | --- |

28.

believes that the EES's added value in terms of achieving this objective is not clear, as the existence of an alert regarding the illegal presence of an individual is based on the assumption that people who enter the EU with a short-term visa or without a visa are required to leave it within a maximum of three months, without taking into consideration particular circumstances such as an application for asylum or the regularisation of a person's presence under national law;

| 29. | notes that the analysis of the necessity and proportionality of the EES is even more necessary, as there is no detention for unauthorised residence. The system would only be able to detect unauthorised immigrants when they leave the Schengen area, which makes the EES ‘little more than an extremely expensive mechanism for gathering migration statistics’ (12); |
| --- | --- |

29.

notes that the analysis of the necessity and proportionality of the EES is even more necessary, as there is no detention for unauthorised residence. The system would only be able to detect unauthorised immigrants when they leave the Schengen area, which makes the EES ‘little more than an extremely expensive mechanism for gathering migration statistics’ (12);

| 30. | notes that the EES is not able to detect immigrants who regularise their presence under asylum legislation or national immigration laws. These people run the risk of being illegally detained following an EES alert based on an automated calculation of the period of stay, which does not take into account this kind of circumstance; |
| --- | --- |

30.

notes that the EES is not able to detect immigrants who regularise their presence under asylum legislation or national immigration laws. These people run the risk of being illegally detained following an EES alert based on an automated calculation of the period of stay, which does not take into account this kind of circumstance;

| 31. | considers that the question of the speed of checks also needs to be raised in relation to the EES, as it requires a large amount of alphanumeric and biometric data to be collected. This will increase waiting time for travellers at border checks, with a negative impact on cross-border mobility that will not be effectively offset by the RTP. The question could also arise as to whether the costs of the RTP are proportionate to the small number of people that the Commission believes will benefit from it each year (5 million — i.e. 0,7% of the total estimated number of people who cross external borders each year, which is around 700 million) (13). The existence in some countries of frequent-traveller programmes shows that they can be implemented without an EES. Several Member States are already operating automated control systems for EU citizens carrying biometric passports; |
| --- | --- |

31.

considers that the question of the speed of checks also needs to be raised in relation to the EES, as it requires a large amount of alphanumeric and biometric data to be collected. This will increase waiting time for travellers at border checks, with a negative impact on cross-border mobility that will not be effectively offset by the RTP. The question could also arise as to whether the costs of the RTP are proportionate to the small number of people that the Commission believes will benefit from it each year (5 million — i.e. 0,7% of the total estimated number of people who cross external borders each year, which is around 700 million) (13). The existence in some countries of frequent-traveller programmes shows that they can be implemented without an EES. Several Member States are already operating automated control systems for EU citizens carrying biometric passports;

| 32. | points out that the issues of the proportionality and legitimacy of these systems should also be examined in terms of their high costs, estimated at EUR 1 100 million, to be covered by EUR 4 600 million from the Internal Security Fund over the 2014-2020 period. Points out that this amount is far higher than the Commission's 2008 estimate, with, moreover, no guarantee that it will be enough, as stated by the EPDS (14); |
| --- | --- |

32.

points out that the issues of the proportionality and legitimacy of these systems should also be examined in terms of their high costs, estimated at EUR 1 100 million, to be covered by EUR 4 600 million from the Internal Security Fund over the 2014-2020 period. Points out that this amount is far higher than the Commission's 2008 estimate, with, moreover, no guarantee that it will be enough, as stated by the EPDS (14);

| 33. | reiterates its doubts as to whether the considerable investment in border surveillance is the most effective way of significantly combating illegal immigration in the long term (15); |
| --- | --- |

33.

reiterates its doubts as to whether the considerable investment in border surveillance is the most effective way of significantly combating illegal immigration in the long term (15);

| 34. | recognises that a cost-benefit analysis must also take into consideration the high costs and administrative burdens that these systems could entail for Member States with only a small number of travellers crossing external borders; |
| --- | --- |

34.

recognises that a cost-benefit analysis must also take into consideration the high costs and administrative burdens that these systems could entail for Member States with only a small number of travellers crossing external borders;

Role of the regions and local authorities in phasing in an integrated external border management system

| 35. | considers that the coherence of a European approach to external border surveillance involves various levels and entails a number of challenges for national border authorities, who work together with different regional and local players; |
| --- | --- |

35.

considers that the coherence of a European approach to external border surveillance involves various levels and entails a number of challenges for national border authorities, who work together with different regional and local players;

| 36. | regrets that the multi-level governance dimension is not taken into sufficient consideration in the EU political debates on the Schengen area, while for the subsidiarity principle to be implemented properly more systematic integration of the local and regional dimensions is required; |
| --- | --- |

36.

regrets that the multi-level governance dimension is not taken into sufficient consideration in the EU political debates on the Schengen area, while for the subsidiarity principle to be implemented properly more systematic integration of the local and regional dimensions is required;

| 37. | calls for greater involvement of local and regional authorities and of the Committee of the Regions, to ensure a bottom-up approach in these areas, helping to ensure that the experience and concerns of local and regional authorities are taken into account in the various phases of the EU decision-making process, in particular regarding the reintroduction of internal border controls, the efficiency and added value of EU financing and the multi-level governance component of the Smart Borders package; |
| --- | --- |

37.

calls for greater involvement of local and regional authorities and of the Committee of the Regions, to ensure a bottom-up approach in these areas, helping to ensure that the experience and concerns of local and regional authorities are taken into account in the various phases of the EU decision-making process, in particular regarding the reintroduction of internal border controls, the efficiency and added value of EU financing and the multi-level governance component of the Smart Borders package;

| 38. | calls on those responsible for implementing the Schengen Borders Code locally to promote training and awareness-raising campaigns on European legislation on borders and citizens' rights, in order to involve local and regional authorities and the main stakeholders on the ground, foster mutual trust and prevent a detrimental impact on the area of free movement and on fundamental rights; |
| --- | --- |

38.

calls on those responsible for implementing the Schengen Borders Code locally to promote training and awareness-raising campaigns on European legislation on borders and citizens' rights, in order to involve local and regional authorities and the main stakeholders on the ground, foster mutual trust and prevent a detrimental impact on the area of free movement and on fundamental rights;

| 39. | points out that local and regional authorities can play a key role in promoting multi-level protection of fundamental rights (16), including at internal and external EU borders; |
| --- | --- |

39.

points out that local and regional authorities can play a key role in promoting multi-level protection of fundamental rights (16), including at internal and external EU borders;

| 40. | notes that EU financing for external border management focuses on security, neglecting the issue of fundamental rights, and therefore calls for local and regional authorities to be given a greater role in defining the EU's budgetary priorities in the field of border management and the funding of immigration and asylum policy, ensuring that financial resources are channelled into the border infrastructure and services that most need support in this area; |
| --- | --- |

40.

notes that EU financing for external border management focuses on security, neglecting the issue of fundamental rights, and therefore calls for local and regional authorities to be given a greater role in defining the EU's budgetary priorities in the field of border management and the funding of immigration and asylum policy, ensuring that financial resources are channelled into the border infrastructure and services that most need support in this area;

| 41. | therefore suggests a stricter requirement for national governments to consult local and regional authorities when programming EU financial support in these areas; |
| --- | --- |

41.

therefore suggests a stricter requirement for national governments to consult local and regional authorities when programming EU financial support in these areas;

| 42. | reiterates its call for greater consolidation of the role of local and regional authorities in the areas of migration and asylum ‘in accordance with their competences in the national context, by means of instruments which allocate Union funds to them, without the intervention of central government authorities’ (17); |
| --- | --- |

42.

reiterates its call for greater consolidation of the role of local and regional authorities in the areas of migration and asylum ‘in accordance with their competences in the national context, by means of instruments which allocate Union funds to them, without the intervention of central government authorities’ (17);

| 43. | considers that the EES and RTP entail a gradual transfer of powers concerning surveillance and the use of data collected by national authorities to EU bodies, which has subsidiarity implications; |
| --- | --- |

43.

considers that the EES and RTP entail a gradual transfer of powers concerning surveillance and the use of data collected by national authorities to EU bodies, which has subsidiarity implications;

| 44. | for this reason, calls for more consultation of local and regional authorities and of the Committee of the Regions on the design of these systems, given the impact on cross-border regions and the fact that local understanding of border management may be different from the interests guiding central or national authorities, which are more concerned with the national security dimension than with facilitating cross-border traffic, which is a concern in cross-border regions; |
| --- | --- |

44.

for this reason, calls for more consultation of local and regional authorities and of the Committee of the Regions on the design of these systems, given the impact on cross-border regions and the fact that local understanding of border management may be different from the interests guiding central or national authorities, which are more concerned with the national security dimension than with facilitating cross-border traffic, which is a concern in cross-border regions;

Recommendations on the Smart Borders package

| 45. | urges the European Parliament and the Council to carry out a proper, exhaustive cost-benefit analysis on the EES and the RTP, which is imperative at a time of economic recession and budgetary austerity, as well as a similar assessment of the necessity, proportionality and effectiveness thereof, before proceeding with the relevant negotiations; |
| --- | --- |

45.

urges the European Parliament and the Council to carry out a proper, exhaustive cost-benefit analysis on the EES and the RTP, which is imperative at a time of economic recession and budgetary austerity, as well as a similar assessment of the necessity, proportionality and effectiveness thereof, before proceeding with the relevant negotiations;

| 46. | calls on the European Parliament and the Council, if they proceed with the EES, to put in place safeguards to prevent alerts that could lead to the illegal detention of people whom the system detects as being present illegally, whereas, in reality, they have obtained a residence permit in a Member State and therefore have the right to free movement within the European area without internal borders; |
| --- | --- |

46.

calls on the European Parliament and the Council, if they proceed with the EES, to put in place safeguards to prevent alerts that could lead to the illegal detention of people whom the system detects as being present illegally, whereas, in reality, they have obtained a residence permit in a Member State and therefore have the right to free movement within the European area without internal borders;

| 47. | points to the need, at a time of budgetary austerity, to ensure that any system put in place is interoperable with existing national systems so as not to jeopardise their operation or waste national investment already made; |
| --- | --- |

47.

points to the need, at a time of budgetary austerity, to ensure that any system put in place is interoperable with existing national systems so as not to jeopardise their operation or waste national investment already made;

| 48. | recommends that steps be taken to put in place strong guarantees of non-discrimination and sufficient safeguards regarding the right to data protection, privacy and access to effective legal redress for third country nationals, particularly so as to prevent undue repatriation resulting from a false alert issued by the EES; |
| --- | --- |

48.

recommends that steps be taken to put in place strong guarantees of non-discrimination and sufficient safeguards regarding the right to data protection, privacy and access to effective legal redress for third country nationals, particularly so as to prevent undue repatriation resulting from a false alert issued by the EES;

| 49. | if these systems are implemented, suggests mounting training measures focusing on the rights of individuals and awareness-raising campaigns targeting professionals at national, regional and local levels, in particular regarding the risks and right/wrong ways of implementing the systems, thus helping to avert illicit, discriminatory use. |
| --- | --- |

49.

if these systems are implemented, suggests mounting training measures focusing on the rights of individuals and awareness-raising campaigns targeting professionals at national, regional and local levels, in particular regarding the risks and right/wrong ways of implementing the systems, thus helping to avert illicit, discriminatory use.

| II. | RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS |
| --- | --- |

II.

Amendment 1

COM(2013) 95 final

Article 8

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Each competent authority authorised to access the EES in accordance with this Regulation shall ensure that the use of the EES is necessary, appropriate and proportionate to the performance of tasks of the competent authorities. | Each competent authority authorised to access the EES in accordance with this Regulation shall ensure that the use of the EES is necessary, appropriate and proportionate to the performance of tasks of the competent authorities and respects all relevant EU and national provisions on personal data protection. |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Each competent authority authorised to access the EES in accordance with this Regulation shall ensure that the use of the EES is necessary, appropriate and proportionate to the performance of tasks of the competent authorities.

Each competent authority authorised to access the EES in accordance with this Regulation shall ensure that the use of the EES is necessary, appropriate and proportionate to the performance of tasks of the competent authorities and respects all relevant EU and national provisions on personal data protection.

Reason

It is important to establish the respect of the relevant data protection legislation by the ‘competent authorities’ as a ‘general principle’ of this regulation.

Brussels, 28 November 2013

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---

(1)  COM(2011) 559 final.

1

(2)  COM(2011) 560 final.

2

(3)  See the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Stockholm Programme — rapporteur: Anna Terrón i Cusi, OJ C 79, 27.3.2010, point 52.

3

(4)  In this connection, see also the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The global approach to migration and mobility — rapporteur: Nichi Vendola.

4

(5)  COM(2013) 95 final.

5

(6)  COM(2013) 97 final.

6

(7)  COM(2013) 96 final.

7

(8)  Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The Stockholm programme: Challenges and opportunities in view of a new multi-annual programme on the EU area of freedom, security and justice, OJ C 79, 27.3.2010, point 56.

8

(9)  Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The Stockholm programme: Challenges and opportunities in view of a new multi-annual programme on the EU area of freedom, security and justice, OJ C 79, 27.3.2010, page 37.

9

(10)  Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor of 18 July 2013, published in https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consultation/Opinions/2013/13-07-18_Smart_borders_EN.pdf. See also European Data Protection Supervisor (2008), Preliminary comments on the proposal on the Smart Borders package, 3 March 2008, p. 4, published at http://www.edps.europa.eu. See, also, the EDPS Opinion on the Stockholm Programme, OJ C 276, 17.11.2009, point 71.

10

(11)  Commission Staff Working Document — Impact Assessment accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation establishing an entry/exit system (EES), SWD(2013) 47 final, Brussels, 28.2.2013.

11

(12)  Bigo, Didier, Carrera, Sergio et al (2012), Evaluating current and forthcoming proposals on JHA data bases and a smart borders system at EU external borders, study commissioned by the European Parliament, p. 37.

12

(13)  Commission Staff Working Paper — Impact Assessment, Accompanying document to the Proposal for a Regulation establishing a Registered Traveller Programme, SWD(2013) 50 final, Brussels, 28.2.2013.

13

(14)  European Data Protection Supervisor (2008), Preliminary comments on the proposal on the Smart Borders package, 3 March 2008, p. 4, published at http://www.edps.europa.eu.

14

(15)  Opinion on EU financial instruments in home affairs — rapporteur Samuel Azzopardi, CdR12/2012, point 47.

15

(16)  See the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights by the European Union, OJ C 9, 11.1.2012.

16

(17)  Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The global approach to migration and mobility, 96th plenary session, 18-19 July 2012.

17

---

| 15.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/96 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/96

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Regulation on official controls’

2014/C 114/16

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | notes the Commission proposal on official controls and other official activities to ensure the application of food and feed law, and rules on animal health and welfare, plant health, plant reproductive material and plant protection products in view of the Regulation’s principal objectives i.e. to ensure a high level of human health protection, and to guarantee the smooth functioning of the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

1.

notes the Commission proposal on official controls and other official activities to ensure the application of food and feed law, and rules on animal health and welfare, plant health, plant reproductive material and plant protection products in view of the Regulation’s principal objectives i.e. to ensure a high level of human health protection, and to guarantee the smooth functioning of the internal market;

| 2. | welcomes the fact that the Commission acknowledges the need to strengthen the instruments available to the competent authorities in the Member States for the purposes of verifying compliance with EU legislation (controls, inspections and tests); |
| --- | --- |

2.

welcomes the fact that the Commission acknowledges the need to strengthen the instruments available to the competent authorities in the Member States for the purposes of verifying compliance with EU legislation (controls, inspections and tests);

References to the Common Agricultural Policy

| 3. | confirms that the quality of the EU’s agricultural products is one of the principal factors determining the Common Agricultural Policy’s added value and represents one of its main assets on the global market. Effective monitoring of compliance with the rules of food and feed law and other rules on animal health and welfare, plant health, plant reproductive material and plant protection products serves to build a stable market which is based on public confidence in these products; |
| --- | --- |

3.

confirms that the quality of the EU’s agricultural products is one of the principal factors determining the Common Agricultural Policy’s added value and represents one of its main assets on the global market. Effective monitoring of compliance with the rules of food and feed law and other rules on animal health and welfare, plant health, plant reproductive material and plant protection products serves to build a stable market which is based on public confidence in these products;

| 4. | it will only be possible to ensure competitiveness at both local and global level through constant improvements to the European agri-food market. Therefore welcomes this initiative which will serve to ensure the quality of agricultural products by means of various official controls and other official activities. |
| --- | --- |

4.

it will only be possible to ensure competitiveness at both local and global level through constant improvements to the European agri-food market. Therefore welcomes this initiative which will serve to ensure the quality of agricultural products by means of various official controls and other official activities.

| 5. | considers that the regulation satisfies the need to ensure the broad-based competitiveness of businesses in the food chain which are subject to official controls performed by the competent authorities; |
| --- | --- |

5.

considers that the regulation satisfies the need to ensure the broad-based competitiveness of businesses in the food chain which are subject to official controls performed by the competent authorities;

Subsidiarity, proportionality and better law making

| 6. | notes that the proposal gives the Commission the power to adopt delegated acts in practically all regulatory areas (see Articles 15 to 24); rejects, in particular, the reasons given in Articles 15 to 25 and Articles 110, 132 and 133 of the proposal for authorising the adoption of delegated acts concerning specific rules for the performance of official controls. It is imperative that any rules with significant repercussions for countries’ supervisory activities and budgets be explicitly included in the Regulation. In addition, the Commission is asked to clarify, in connection with the adoption of delegated acts under Article 139, how it intends to implement the procedure described in recital 81, under which it is to carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Committee believes that consultation with Member State experts should be included in Article 139 itself; |
| --- | --- |

6.

notes that the proposal gives the Commission the power to adopt delegated acts in practically all regulatory areas (see Articles 15 to 24); rejects, in particular, the reasons given in Articles 15 to 25 and Articles 110, 132 and 133 of the proposal for authorising the adoption of delegated acts concerning specific rules for the performance of official controls. It is imperative that any rules with significant repercussions for countries’ supervisory activities and budgets be explicitly included in the Regulation. In addition, the Commission is asked to clarify, in connection with the adoption of delegated acts under Article 139, how it intends to implement the procedure described in recital 81, under which it is to carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Committee believes that consultation with Member State experts should be included in Article 139 itself;

| 7. | confirms that it is useful and important to harmonise legislation on official controls to ensure a sufficient level of safety for food and feed and to ensure the free movement of goods on the internal market, to protect the internal market, free competition and consumer interests and information effectively against fraud and the influx of products which are non-compliant with European requirements and to maintain confidence in goods exported from or transported (transit) through the EU area; |
| --- | --- |

7.

confirms that it is useful and important to harmonise legislation on official controls to ensure a sufficient level of safety for food and feed and to ensure the free movement of goods on the internal market, to protect the internal market, free competition and consumer interests and information effectively against fraud and the influx of products which are non-compliant with European requirements and to maintain confidence in goods exported from or transported (transit) through the EU area;

| 8. | welcomes the fact that the Regulation incorporates a series of measures on official controls in the agri-food chain, including measures against pests of plants, rules governing the production, with a view to their placement on the market, of plant reproductive material and rules on animal by-products; |
| --- | --- |

8.

welcomes the fact that the Regulation incorporates a series of measures on official controls in the agri-food chain, including measures against pests of plants, rules governing the production, with a view to their placement on the market, of plant reproductive material and rules on animal by-products;

| 9. | confirms that the best way of providing effective protection for EU agri-food products is to ensure that all products sold in the EU, regardless of their origin, are subject to the same or equivalent controls in the area of hygiene and food safety and quality. Considers that in specific cases, the Regulation does not limit the right of the Member States to take action to provide a higher level of consumer protection by means of official controls; |
| --- | --- |

9.

confirms that the best way of providing effective protection for EU agri-food products is to ensure that all products sold in the EU, regardless of their origin, are subject to the same or equivalent controls in the area of hygiene and food safety and quality. Considers that in specific cases, the Regulation does not limit the right of the Member States to take action to provide a higher level of consumer protection by means of official controls;

| 10. | welcomes the simplifications in the rules concerning: the introduction of border control posts, which are governed by a common set of rules, the introduction of a Common Health Entry Document (CHED), which replaces the current system where different documents are used in each sector subject to control, the standardisation of documents and quality assurance with regard to their authenticity, and the introduction of an EU system of supervision for European official controls and its digitalisation; |
| --- | --- |

10.

welcomes the simplifications in the rules concerning: the introduction of border control posts, which are governed by a common set of rules, the introduction of a Common Health Entry Document (CHED), which replaces the current system where different documents are used in each sector subject to control, the standardisation of documents and quality assurance with regard to their authenticity, and the introduction of an EU system of supervision for European official controls and its digitalisation;

| 11. | states that the rules currently applicable to official controls on residues of veterinary medicinal products are being replaced with rules that are based to a larger extent on risk assessments, without prejudice to the need to maintain appropriate conditions for health protection; |
| --- | --- |

11.

states that the rules currently applicable to official controls on residues of veterinary medicinal products are being replaced with rules that are based to a larger extent on risk assessments, without prejudice to the need to maintain appropriate conditions for health protection;

More stringent controls of products from third countries

| 12. | welcomes the Commission’s proposal which includes, among others, rules geared towards making controls of products from third countries more stringent in order to address the challenges arising in the food chain and the related risks for the safety of EU citizens; |
| --- | --- |

12.

welcomes the Commission’s proposal which includes, among others, rules geared towards making controls of products from third countries more stringent in order to address the challenges arising in the food chain and the related risks for the safety of EU citizens;

| 13. | welcomes the simplification in the rules, involving the replacement of border inspection posts (for animals and animal by-products), designated points of entry (for food and feed products of plant origin) and points of entry (for plants and plant products) by border control posts governed by a common set of rules. This approach will make it easier to protect the European market against an influx of non-compliant agri-food products; |
| --- | --- |

13.

welcomes the simplification in the rules, involving the replacement of border inspection posts (for animals and animal by-products), designated points of entry (for food and feed products of plant origin) and points of entry (for plants and plant products) by border control posts governed by a common set of rules. This approach will make it easier to protect the European market against an influx of non-compliant agri-food products;

| 14. | welcomes the creation of mechanisms in the area of ‘administrative assistance’, which will allow national control authorities to cooperate on the cross-border enforcement of rules in a uniform and consistent manner. Draws attention to the fact that infringements of EU rules will not only be pursued in the Member State in which the infringement was reported but also in the Member State in which the infringement took place; |
| --- | --- |

14.

welcomes the creation of mechanisms in the area of ‘administrative assistance’, which will allow national control authorities to cooperate on the cross-border enforcement of rules in a uniform and consistent manner. Draws attention to the fact that infringements of EU rules will not only be pursued in the Member State in which the infringement was reported but also in the Member State in which the infringement took place;

Local and regional impact

| 15. | states that the new approach to controls based on risk assessment enables swift action and decisions to be taken on the various categories of products appropriate to the current level of knowledge; |
| --- | --- |

15.

states that the new approach to controls based on risk assessment enables swift action and decisions to be taken on the various categories of products appropriate to the current level of knowledge;

| 16. | notes that the requirement to produce a report on every official control performed, and to make it available to the operator, significantly increases the burden on the competent authorities. This is unacceptable in view of the administrative burden and the resulting by no means negligible possibility of recourse to legal protection. |
| --- | --- |

16.

notes that the requirement to produce a report on every official control performed, and to make it available to the operator, significantly increases the burden on the competent authorities. This is unacceptable in view of the administrative burden and the resulting by no means negligible possibility of recourse to legal protection.

Should the Commission not withdraw this requirement, a detailed impact assessment should be undertaken to quantify the additional administrative and financial burden. On the same grounds, Article 34 of the Commission proposal should also make it clear that the second expert opinion mentioned refers to the already customary practice of taking a second/duplicate sample, with subsequent investigations by the operator, and does not aim to introduce a new procedure.

| 17. | in principle shares the Commission’s view that the interests of small enterprises should be taken into account when calculating fees. However, the general exemption, provided for in the legislative proposal, from the payment of fees for enterprises which employ fewer than ten people and whose annual turnover or annual balance sheet total is not more than EUR 2 million is at odds with the principles of Article 76 which are designed to ensure adequate provision of staff and financial resources. It is proposed that a provision corresponding to Article 27(6) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 be included in the new cost arrangements so that the Member States can themselves determine the form and the scope of the exemptions; |
| --- | --- |

17.

in principle shares the Commission’s view that the interests of small enterprises should be taken into account when calculating fees. However, the general exemption, provided for in the legislative proposal, from the payment of fees for enterprises which employ fewer than ten people and whose annual turnover or annual balance sheet total is not more than EUR 2 million is at odds with the principles of Article 76 which are designed to ensure adequate provision of staff and financial resources. It is proposed that a provision corresponding to Article 27(6) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 be included in the new cost arrangements so that the Member States can themselves determine the form and the scope of the exemptions;

| 18. | Article 80 stipulates that consistently compliant operators should be granted more favourable conditions, when control fees are collected on the basis of a flat rate in accordance with Article 79(1)(a). Instead of this, a provision in accordance with Article 27(6) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 should be included in the new cost arrangements, so that the Member States can themselves determine the form and scope of the exceptions, including for micro-enterprises; |
| --- | --- |

18.

Article 80 stipulates that consistently compliant operators should be granted more favourable conditions, when control fees are collected on the basis of a flat rate in accordance with Article 79(1)(a). Instead of this, a provision in accordance with Article 27(6) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 should be included in the new cost arrangements, so that the Member States can themselves determine the form and scope of the exceptions, including for micro-enterprises;

| 19. | draws attention to the need to ensure an effective (appropriate) level of protection for the data and information within the systems created for implementing the rules on redundancy and unauthorised access whilst at the same time taking into account the needs and obligation of the competent authorities to notify the public about significant events in the agri-food chain. Since in some Member States different bodies share responsibility for food chain controls, it is essential, when developing the information systems, that a single document be drawn up setting out all the different official control measures and that an integrated information management system for official controls be established and developed; |
| --- | --- |

19.

draws attention to the need to ensure an effective (appropriate) level of protection for the data and information within the systems created for implementing the rules on redundancy and unauthorised access whilst at the same time taking into account the needs and obligation of the competent authorities to notify the public about significant events in the agri-food chain. Since in some Member States different bodies share responsibility for food chain controls, it is essential, when developing the information systems, that a single document be drawn up setting out all the different official control measures and that an integrated information management system for official controls be established and developed;

| 20. | alongside the expansion in the scope of the existing disciplinary measures, the Committee also welcomes the introduction of minimum compliance periods for measures involving the application of incentives in the form of exemptions or reductions in official fees for operators which meet or maintain the required level of compliance with the rules of food and feed law and other rules relating to the food chain; however, the decision on mandatory fees for routine controls should be left to the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

20.

alongside the expansion in the scope of the existing disciplinary measures, the Committee also welcomes the introduction of minimum compliance periods for measures involving the application of incentives in the form of exemptions or reductions in official fees for operators which meet or maintain the required level of compliance with the rules of food and feed law and other rules relating to the food chain; however, the decision on mandatory fees for routine controls should be left to the Member States;

| 21. | points out that the numerous powers to adopt delegated acts reduce the possibility for the Member States to participate and regions are therefore unable to anticipate whether additional staffing and financial costs will be entailed; |
| --- | --- |

21.

points out that the numerous powers to adopt delegated acts reduce the possibility for the Member States to participate and regions are therefore unable to anticipate whether additional staffing and financial costs will be entailed;

II.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Article 1.1

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   This Regulation lays down rules for: | 1.   This Regulation lays down rules for: |
| (a) | the performance of official controls and other official activities performed by the competent authorities of the Member States; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

1.   This Regulation lays down rules for:

1.   This Regulation lays down rules for:

(a)

the performance of official controls and other official activities performed by the competent authorities of the Member States;

| (b) | the financing of official controls; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the financing of official controls;

| (c) | the administrative assistance and cooperation between Member States in view of the correct application of the rules referred to in paragraph 2; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the administrative assistance and cooperation between Member States in view of the correct application of the rules referred to in paragraph 2;

| (d) | the performance of Commission controls in Member States and in third countries; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the performance of Commission controls in Member States and in third countries;

| (e) | the adoption of conditions to be met by animals and goods entering the Union from a third country; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

the adoption of conditions to be met by animals and goods entering the Union from a third country;

| (f) | the establishment of a computerised information system to manage information and data in relation to official controls. |
| --- | --- |

(f)

the establishment of a computerised information system to manage information and data in relation to official controls.

| (a) | the performance of official controls and other official activities performed by the competent authorities of the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the performance of official controls and other official activities performed by the competent authorities of the Member States;

| (b) | the financing of official controls; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the financing of official controls;

| (c) | the administrative assistance and cooperation between Member States in view of the correct application of the rules referred to in paragraph 2; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the administrative assistance and cooperation between Member States in view of the correct application of the rules referred to in paragraph 2;

| (d) | the performance of Commission controls in Member States and in third countries; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the performance of Commission controls in Member States and in third countries;

| (e) | the adoption of conditions to be met by animals and goods entering the Union from a third country; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

the adoption of conditions to be met by animals and goods entering the Union from a third country;

| (f) | the establishment of a computerised information system to manage information and data in relation to official controls including data protection mechanisms in conformity with applicable rules, namely Directive 95/46/EC, and with proposed Regulation COM(2012)11 final and proposed Directive COM(2012)10 final. |
| --- | --- |

(f)

the establishment of a computerised information system to manage information and data in relation to official controls including data protection mechanisms in conformity with applicable rules, namely Directive 95/46/EC, and with proposed Regulation COM(2012)11 final and proposed Directive COM(2012)10 final.

Reason

Data protection should be one of the issues requiring attention as the system is set up at EU level and one of its main functions is sharing the data on official controls performed.

Amendment 2

Article 13.2 d)

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| an assessment of procedures on good manufacturing practices (GMP), good hygiene practices (GHP), good farming practices and hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP); | an assessment of procedures on good manufacturing practices (GMP), good hygiene practices (GHP), good farming practices (GAP), and hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP), and other comparable systems whose use is required by the rules referred to in Article 1(2); |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

an assessment of procedures on good manufacturing practices (GMP), good hygiene practices (GHP), good farming practices and hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP);

an assessment of procedures on good manufacturing practices (GMP), good hygiene practices (GHP), good farming practices (GAP), and hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP), and other comparable systems whose use is required by the rules referred to in Article 1(2);

Reason

It is essential to broaden the range of rules (systems) which could become compulsory.

Amendment 3

Article 82

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Fees refunds and exemption for microenterprises | Fees refunds and exemption for microenterprises |
| 1.   Fees provided for in Article 77 shall not directly or indirectly be refunded, unless unduly collected. | 1.   Fees provided for in Article 77 shall not directly or indirectly be refunded, unless unduly collected. |
| 2.   Enterprises employing fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million shall be exempted from the payment of the fees provided for in Article 77. | 2.   Enterprises employing fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million may shall be exempted from the payment of the fees provided for in Article 77. |
| 3.   The costs referred to in Articles 77, 78 and 79 shall not include those incurred for the performance of official controls on the enterprises referred to in paragraph 2. | 3.   The Member States may adopt separate rules on calculating costs referred to in Articles 77, 78 and 79 shall not include those incurred for the performance of official controls on the enterprises referred to in paragraph 2, insofar as this is consistent with the principles of European Union competition policy as set out in Articles 101-109 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Fees refunds and exemption for microenterprises

Fees refunds and exemption for microenterprises

1.   Fees provided for in Article 77 shall not directly or indirectly be refunded, unless unduly collected.

1.   Fees provided for in Article 77 shall not directly or indirectly be refunded, unless unduly collected.

2.   Enterprises employing fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million shall be exempted from the payment of the fees provided for in Article 77.

2.   Enterprises employing fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 2 million may shall be exempted from the payment of the fees provided for in Article 77.

3.   The costs referred to in Articles 77, 78 and 79 shall not include those incurred for the performance of official controls on the enterprises referred to in paragraph 2.

3.   The Member States may adopt separate rules on calculating costs referred to in Articles 77, 78 and 79 shall not include those incurred for the performance of official controls on the enterprises referred to in paragraph 2, insofar as this is consistent with the principles of European Union competition policy as set out in Articles 101-109 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

Reason

Member States should be allowed to adopt separate rules in this area, given the significant variations in the balance between companies of different sizes in EU countries. In particular, this applies to countries with fragmented economies (large numbers of micro-enterprises).

Amendment 4

Article 131

| Text proposed by the Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The IMSOC shall: | The IMSOC shall: |
| (a) | allow for the computerised handling and exchange of information, data and documents necessary for the performance of official controls, resulting from the performance of official controls or the recording of the performance or outcome of official controls in all cases where the rules referred to in Article 1(2) and the delegated acts provided for in Articles 15 to 24 provide for the exchange among competent authorities, between the competent authorities and the Commission, and where appropriate with other authorities and the operators, of such information, data and documents; |

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The IMSOC shall:

The IMSOC shall:

(a)

allow for the computerised handling and exchange of information, data and documents necessary for the performance of official controls, resulting from the performance of official controls or the recording of the performance or outcome of official controls in all cases where the rules referred to in Article 1(2) and the delegated acts provided for in Articles 15 to 24 provide for the exchange among competent authorities, between the competent authorities and the Commission, and where appropriate with other authorities and the operators, of such information, data and documents;

| (b) | provide a mechanism for the exchange of data and information in accordance with the provisions of Title IV; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

provide a mechanism for the exchange of data and information in accordance with the provisions of Title IV;

| (c) | provide a tool to collect and manage the reports on official controls provided by the Member States to the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

provide a tool to collect and manage the reports on official controls provided by the Member States to the Commission;

| (d) | allow for the production, handling and transmission, including in electronic form, of the journey log referred to in Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of the records obtained by the navigation system referred to in Article 6(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of official certificates and of the common health entry document referred to in Article 54 of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

allow for the production, handling and transmission, including in electronic form, of the journey log referred to in Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of the records obtained by the navigation system referred to in Article 6(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of official certificates and of the common health entry document referred to in Article 54 of this Regulation.

| (a) | allow for the computerised handling and exchange of information, data and documents necessary for the performance of official controls, resulting from the performance of official controls or the recording of the performance or outcome of official controls in all cases where the rules referred to in Article 1(2) and the delegated acts provided for in Articles 15 to 24 provide for the exchange among competent authorities, between the competent authorities and the Commission, and where appropriate with other authorities and the operators, of such information, data and documents; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

allow for the computerised handling and exchange of information, data and documents necessary for the performance of official controls, resulting from the performance of official controls or the recording of the performance or outcome of official controls in all cases where the rules referred to in Article 1(2) and the delegated acts provided for in Articles 15 to 24 provide for the exchange among competent authorities, between the competent authorities and the Commission, and where appropriate with other authorities and the operators, of such information, data and documents;

| (b) | provide a mechanism for the exchange of data and information in accordance with the provisions of Title IV; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

provide a mechanism for the exchange of data and information in accordance with the provisions of Title IV;

| (c) | provide a tool to collect and manage the reports on official controls provided by the Member States to the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

provide a tool to collect and manage the reports on official controls provided by the Member States to the Commission;

| (d) | allow for the production, handling and transmission, including in electronic form, of the journey log referred to in Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of the records obtained by the navigation system referred to in Article 6(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of official certificates and of the common health entry document referred to in Article 54 of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

allow for the production, handling and transmission, including in electronic form, of the journey log referred to in Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of the records obtained by the navigation system referred to in Article 6(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005, of official certificates and of the common health entry document referred to in Article 54 of this Regulation.

| e) | contain data protection mechanism in conformity with applicable rules, namely Directive 95/46/EC, and proposed Regulation COM(2012)11 final and proposed Directive COM(2012)10 final. |
| --- | --- |

e)

contain data protection mechanism in conformity with applicable rules, namely Directive 95/46/EC, and proposed Regulation COM(2012)11 final and proposed Directive COM(2012)10 final.

Reason

Data protection should be one of the issues requiring attention as the system is set up at EU level and one of its main functions is sharing the data on official controls performed.

Brussels, 29 November 2013.

The President of the Committee of the Regions

Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO

---