----

----

II Preparatory Acts

Committee of the Regions

56th plenary session on 29 and 30 September 2004

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy:

(2005/C 43/01)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy: Communication from the Commission on Strengthening the implementation of the European Employment Strategy; Proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States; Recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the implementation of Member States' employment policies (presented by the Commission) (COM(2004) 239 final – 2004/0082 (CNS));

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission on 7 April 2004 and of the Council on 16 April 2004, under the first paragraph of Article 265 and of Article 128 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult it on this matter;

Having regard to the decision of its president on 5 April 2004 to instruct its Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on the subject;

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 152/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 6 July 2004 by the Commission for Economic and Social Policy (rapporteur: Ms Pauliina Haijanen, Member of the Board of the Regional Council of Southwest Finland, First Vice-chairman of Laitila Town Council (FI/EPP);

adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session on 29 and 30 September 2004 (session of 29 September).

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

Overall priorities of the Lisbon strategy

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

Mid-term review of the Lisbon strategy

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Strengthening the employment strategy

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 29 September 2004.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Frontier workers: Assessment of the situation after ten years of the Internal Market: Problems and Perspectives

(2005/C 43/02)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

HAVING REGARD TO the decision of its Bureau of (10 February 2004) in accordance with Article 265(5) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to instruct its Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up this opinion, Frontier workers: Assessment of the situation after ten years of the Internal Market: Problems and Perspectives;

HAVING REGARD TO the consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community of March 1957, and in particular Title III: Free movement of persons, services and capital, Chapter 1: Workers, Articles 39 and 42, Chapter 2: Right of establishment, Article 43;

HAVING REGARD TO the rules on the coordination of national social security systems, which are part of the free movement of persons and which are intended to contribute to the improvement of living and working conditions;

HAVING REGARD TO Council Regulation (EC) No. 118/97 of 2 December 1996 amending and updating Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, and Regulation (EEC) No. 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71, as it is to be amended;

HAVING REGARD TO Regulation (EEC) No. 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community;

HAVING REGARD TO the judgments of the European Court of Justice on cross-border workers, cross-border medical goods or services and regarding labour law and re-entry into employment;

HAVING REGARD TO the meeting of the Council of the European Union (Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Protection) of 1 December 2003, agenda item 3, proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council coordinating social security systems (reform of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71);

HAVING REGARD TO the common position of the Council of 28 January 2004 with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council coordinating social security systems;

HAVING REGARD TO the decision of the Copenhagen European Council of 13 December 2002 on the accession to the European Union on 1 May 2004 of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Cyprus and of the informal Athens European Council of 16/17 April 2003 on the signature of the Accession Treaty and the Europe Conference;

HAVING REGARD TO the Europe Agreements with the Central and Eastern European Countries: the Agreements of December 1991 concluded with Hungary and Poland, that of February 1995 with Romania and Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, that of February 1998 with Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and that of February 1999 with Slovenia, as well as the Association Agreements existing since 1964 with Turkey, 1971 with Malta and 1973 with Cyprus;

HAVING REGARD TO the accession perspectives established by the Copenhagen European Council of June 1993, as set out in the ‘Copenhagen criteria’;

HAVING REGARD TO the Treaty on European Union signed in Maastricht on 7 February 1992 (‘Maastricht Treaty’), which states that any European state may apply for membership of the EU;

HAVING REGARD TO the draft opinion adopted by the Commission for Economic and Social Policy on 30 April 2004 (CdR 95/2004 rev. 1) (rapporteur: Mr Karl-Heinz Lambertz, First Minister of the German-speaking community, (BE/PES));

Whereas:

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session of 29/30 September 2004 (meeting of 29 September):

1.   Views of the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

1.1   notes that:

1.2   considers that

1.3   welcomes

1.4   considers that

2.   Recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 29 September 2004

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Increasing the employment of older workers and delaying the exit from the labour market

(2005/C 43/03)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Communication to the Commission, the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Increasing the employment of older workers and delaying the exit from the labour market (COM(2004) 146 final);

having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 3 March 2004 to consult the Committee on this text under Article 265(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

having regard to the decision taken by the CoR President on 27 January 2004 to instruct the Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on the subject;

having regard to the Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (report requested by the Stockholm European Council): Increasing labour force participation and promoting active ageing (COM(2002) 9 final);

having regard to the CoR opinion on the Commission Report entitled Increasing labour force participation and promoting active ageing (CdR 94/2002 fin) (1);

having regard to the Commission communication: Supporting national strategies for safe and sustainable pensions through an integrated approach (COM(2001) 362 final);

having regard to the conclusions of the Stockholm European Council, 2001;

having regard to the conclusions of the Barcelona European Council, 2002;

having regard to the Report from the Commission to the Council: Delivering Lisbon-reforms for the enlarged Union (COM(2004) 29 final/2);

having regard to the Commission's working document on The Stockholm and Barcelona targets: Increasing employment of older workers and delaying the exit from the labour market (SEC(2003) 429);

having regard to the report by the Employment Taskforce chaired by Wim Kok: Jobs, jobs, jobs: creating more employment in Europe, November 2003;

having regard to the Joint report 2003-2004, Employment policies in the EU and in the Member States, 2004;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 151/2004 rev.1) adopted by the Commission for Economic and Social Policy on 6 July 2004 (rapporteur: Alvaro Ancisi, member of the municipal council of Ravenna (IT/EPP));

Whereas:

adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session on 29 and 30 September 2004 (session of 29 September)

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   Recommendations by the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

FINALLY, THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 29 September 2004

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 287 of 22.11.2002, p.1

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Crime prevention in the European Union

(2005/C 43/04)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on crime prevention in the European Union of 12 March 2004 (COM(2004) 165 final),

HAVING REGARD TO the Commission's decision of 22 September 2003 to consult it on the subject under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community,

HAVING REGARD TO the decision of its Bureau of 1 July 2003 to instruct the Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance to draw up an opinion on this subject,

HAVING REGARD TO the European Parliament resolution of 24 January 1994 on small-scale crime in urban areas and its links with organised crime (1) and the European Parliament resolution of 17 November 1998 on combating organised crime (2),

HAVING REGARD TO the 1997 Action Plan to Combat Organised Crime (3),

HAVING REGARD TO the Vienna Action Plan of 3 December 1998 on how best to implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice (4),

HAVING REGARD TO Recommendation 1531 (2001) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on security and crime prevention in cities: setting up a European observatory, and Resolution 180 (2004) of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe on local policing in Europe,

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament – The prevention of crime in the European Union. Reflection on common guidelines and proposals for Community financial support (5),

HAVING REGARD TO its opinion of 20 November 2003 on the local and regional dimension of the area of freedom, security and justice (CdR 61/2003 fin),

HAVING REGARD TO its draft opinion (CdR 355/2003 rev. 2) adopted on 2 July 2004 by the Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance (rapporteurs: Ms Mercedes Bresso, President of the Province of Turin (IT-PES) and Mr Michel Delebarre, former Minister of State – Mayor of Dunkirk (FR-PES);

Whereas:

at its plenary session of 29 and 30 September 2004 (meeting of 29 September) adopted the following opinion by a majority:

1.   The positions of the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   The Recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 29 September 2004.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 20 of 24.1.1994

(2)OJ C 379 of 7.12.1998

(3)OJ C 251 of 15.8.1997

(4)OJ C 19 of 23.1.1999

(5)  COM (2000) 786 final of 29.11.2000

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Draft Commission decision on the application of Article 86 of the Treaty to state aid in the form of public service compensation, the draft directive amending Commission Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings and the draft Community framework for state aid in the form of public service compensation

(2005/C 43/05)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Having regard to the draft Commission decision on the application of Article 86 of the Treaty to state aid in the form of public service compensation, the draft directive amending Commission Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings and the Community framework for state aid in the form of public service compensation,

Having regard to the letter sent by Mario Monti, member of the European Commission responsible for competition policy, on 19 March 2004 requesting the opinion of the Committee under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the EC Treaty,

Having regard to the decision of its president of 26 May 2004 to instruct the Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on the subject,

Having regard to Article 16 of the EC Treaty concerning services of general economic interest as well as Articles 2, 5, 73, 81, 86, 87, 88 and 295 of the Treaty,

Having regard to Article 36 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights concerning access to services of general economic interest,

Having regard to Article III-6 of the draft European Constitution,

Having regard to the White Paper on services of general interest (COM (2004) 374 final),

Having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities (hereinafter referred to as the CJEC) of 24 July 2003 in case C-280/00 (Altmark Trans),

Having regard to its opinion of 20 November 2003 on the Green Paper on services of general interest (COM (2003) 270 final, CdR 149/2003 fin) (1),

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission on services of general interest in Europe (COM (2000) 580 final – CdR 470/2000 fin) (2),

Having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 155/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 6 July 2004 by the Commission for Economic and Social Policy (rapporteur: Mr Claudio Martini, President of the Region of Tuscany (IT-PES)),

Whereas, according to the Altmark Trans judgement, compensation awarded for the provision of services of general interest does not constitute state aid and is therefore subject neither to the prior notification obligation nor to the approval of the Commission, provided four conditions are met:

Whereas the CJEC stated, inter alia, that, notwithstanding the further criteria listed in the Altmark Trans judgement, compensation does in any case not represent a notifiable type of state aid if the recipient is selected as part of an open and transparent public procurement procedure. In all other cases, the recipient is required to demonstrate that such compensation does not constitute state aid by proving that it received no more than the additional net costs less all receipts as would be incurred for the provision of the service at a reasonable price by any well-run undertaking with adequate personnel,

Whereas according to the Altmark Trans judgement, all other types of compensation fall into the category of state aid and are therefore subject to the rule governing prior notification,

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 56th plenary session of 29 and 30 September 2004 (meeting of 29 September):

1.   General comments of the Committee of the Regions

On the Altmark Trans judgment

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

On the Commission methodology

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

On the work of the intergovernmental conference

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   Comments on the draft Commission decision on the application of the provisions of Article 86 of the Treaty to state aid in the form of public service compensation

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

3.   Comments on the draft Commission Directive amending Directive 80/723/EEC of 25 June 1980 on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

4.   Draft Community framework for state aid in the form of public service compensation

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 29 September 2004

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 73, 23.3.2004, p. 7

(2)OJ C 19, 22.1.2002, p. 8

(3)  Cf. opinion of the CoR of 2 July 2003 on the Follow-up to the White Paper on European governance (rapporteur Michel Delebarre (PES/FR): COM(2001) 428 final, COM(2002) 704 final, COM(2002) 705 final, COM(2002) 709 final, COM(2002) 713 final, COM(2002) 718 final, COM(2002) 719 final, COM(2002) 725 final2

(4)  COM(2004) 374 final

(5)  Due to renumbering of the draft constitutional treaty as proposed by the Intergovernmental Conference in document CIG 87/1/04, 13 October 2004, Article III-6 has become Article III-122.

(6)  See Presidency document 76/04 of 13 May 2004.

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on services in the internal market

(2005/C 43/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on services in the internal market (COM(2004) 2 final – 2004/0001 (COD));

Having regard to the decision of the Council of 20 February 2004 to consult it on this subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 and Articles 71 and 80 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its President of 5 April 2004 to instruct its Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament entitled an internal market strategy for services (COM(2000) 888 final);

Having regard to its opinion CdR 134/2001 fin of 13 June 2001 (1) on the Commission Communication entitled an internal market strategy for services;

Having regard to the report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament entitled the state of the internal market for services (COM(2002) 441 final);

Having regard to the draft opinion CdR 154/2004 rev. 1 adopted on 6 July 2004 by its Commission for Economic and Social Policy (rapporteur: Mr Schröter, Chairman of the Thüringen Land Parliament's Committee for European and Federal Affairs (DE/EPP));

Whereas:

adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session held on 29 and 30 September 2004 (meeting of 30 September):

Comments and recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 30 September 2004

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 357 of 14.12.2001, p. 65

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission: Follow-up to the high-level reflection process on patient mobility and health-care developments in the European Union and the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Modernising social protection for the development of high-quality, accessible and sustainable health care and long-term care: support for the national strategies using the ‘open method of coordination’

(2005/C 43/07)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission: Follow-up to the high-level reflection process on patient mobility and health-care developments in the European Union and the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Modernising social protection for the development of high-quality, accessible and sustainable health care and long-term care: support for the national strategies using the ‘open method of coordination’ (COM(2004) 301 final and COM(2004) 304 final),

Having regard to the European Commission's decision of 20 April 2004, under Article 265(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the Committee on the subject,

Having regard to the CoR president's decision of 5 April 2004 to instruct the Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on the subject,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the health strategy of the European Community and the Commission's Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council adopting a programme of Community action in the field of public health (2001-2006) (COM (2000) 285 final),

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Strengthening the social dimension of the Lisbon strategy: Streamlining open coordination in the field of social protection (COM(2003) 261 final),

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: The future of health care and care for the elderly: guaranteeing accessibility, quality and financial viability (COM(2001) 723 final),

Having regard to the Commission's Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on services in the internal market (COM(2004) 2 final),

Having regard to the report submitted on 9 December 2003 entitled High-level process of reflection on patient mobility and health-care developments in the European Union,

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 153/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 6 July 2004 by the Commission for Economic and Social Policy (rapporteur: Ms Bente Nielsen, Member of Århus County Council (DK, PES);

ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION

unanimously at its 56th plenary session on 29 and 30 September 2004 (session of 30 September).

1.   The Committee of the Regions' overall views and recommendations

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Patient mobility and health-care developments in the European Union (COM(2004) 301 final)

2.   The Committee of the Regions' views and recommendations

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Modernising social protection for the development of high-quality, accessible and sustainable health care and long-term care: support for the national strategies using the ‘open method of coordination’ (COM(2004) 304 final)

3.   The Committee of the Regions' views and recommendations

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 30 September 2004.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing port security

(2005/C 43/08)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Having regard to the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing port security (COM(2004) 76 final – 2004/0031 (COD);

Having regard to the decision of the Council of 22 February 2004 to consult it on this subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 and the Article 80 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its president of 27 January 2004 to instruct its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 163/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 7 July 2004 by the Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (rapporteur: Mr Anders Knape, Municipal Commissioner, SE/EPP);

Whereas:

adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session on 29 and 30 September 2004 (meeting of 30 September).

1.   Views of the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

shares the view that unlawful acts and terrorism are among the greatest threats to the ideals of democracy and freedom and to the values of peace, which are the very essence of the European Union;

notes that terrorism and similar criminal acts are transnational in nature and, as such, must essentially be addressed using transnational measures. It is not generally possible to quantify and assess terror threats against ports or other infrastructures only from a local and regional perspective;

considers that protection against terrorist attacks and other criminal activities is chiefly a national competence and that the Member States should therefore bear both the financial and overall responsibility for the security measures decided at national or Community level. Any measures adopted to enhance port security against criminal acts must be weighed against the likely threat to individual ports. However, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, port protection plans should be drawn up at local and regional level;

notes that the Commission communication on Enhancing maritime transport security (COM(2003) 229 final) contains a proposal for the protection of ships and the ship/port interface, and that the proposal is currently going through the legislative procedure;

believes that port security will also be enhanced by the security measures for ships and ports provided for in the amended SOLAS Convention, the ISPS Code and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004. However, the Regulation only applies to that part of the port that represents the ship/port interface, i.e. the terminal;

recognises that for some ports further security measures may be required, both for ports and for coordination between ports and their hinterland, once Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004 has been implemented and evaluated. The need for protection extends to people working in or passing through ports, infrastructure and equipment, including means of transport. The Committee of the Regions notes that the IMO and ILO are currently drawing up a Code of Practice for port security;

considers that the enhanced port and shipping security measures provided for in regulations and directives must be effective without requiring any further financial or staffing resources than warranted from a security and protection standpoint, and paying particular attention to the size, geographical location and activity of ports;

considers that any regulation of activity, measures and monitoring must be commensurate with the perceived threat and the need for an efficient, competitive transport network, resulting in increased shipping activity and relieving other modes of transport;

considers that authorisation of the assessment and plans under the directive and implementation thereof should be guaranteed by means of inspections monitored by the individual Member State;

considers that the definition of a port as a ship/port interface should be extended to cover the terminal, and areas such as anchorages, waiting berths and approaches from seaward, and any goods storage areas that should be included in the port area;

considers that inside ports should be considered as an exemption

endorses the view that, in view of the diverse activities of Community ports, a directive provides the best way to achieve the necessary flexibility and common port security level;

is aware that a number of port security systems are already in operation in the Member States and that it is possible to maintain existing security measures and structures as long as they comply with the rules of the directive;

1.1   Content of the port security Directive

1.2   General principles

1.3   Legal considerations

1.4   Impact assessment

2.   The Committee of the Regions' Recommendations

Amendment

Recommendation 1

Recital (1) a (new)

Reason

The preamble should state explicitly that terrorism and similar criminal acts are transnational in nature and, as such, must essentially be addressed using transnational measures for which the Member States have overall responsibility. It is important that the level responsible for taking a regulatory decision should also be responsible for financing it, so as to reduce the risk of over-regulation and any ensuing negative socio-economic repercussions. Consequently, it would seem natural that the state should also bear financial responsibility for measures to prevent and deter such action.

Recommendation 2

Recital (4)

Reason

Measures in addition to Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004 might need to be introduced in a second stage, when the impact of the implementation of the Regulation can be assessed. In accordance with the subsidiarity principle, individual Member States should determine which ports will be affected. Additional security measures will not necessarily be needed by all ports covered by the Regulation.

Recommendation 3

Recital (5) a (new)

Reason

In order to avoid inhibiting maritime goods and passenger flows, it is important that the security measures decided should be relevant and cost-effective. Otherwise, there is a risk that the measures could have negative socio-economic repercussions. It is important that the directive should state clearly that the security measures must be cost-effective from a socio-economic perspective.

Recommendation 4

Recital (8)

Reason

Local and regional authorities may have responsibility for some aspects of port security such as port health, examination of ships' cargo by environment health officers and other civil contingencies responsibilities.

Recommendation 5

Recital (9)

Reason

The Commission's monitoring inspection proposals are more comprehensive and regulated than is warranted by the current situation. Measures, monitoring and follow-up arrangements should be commensurate with security and protection needs, bearing in mind, in particular, the size, geographical location and activity of the ports in question. It should be possible to carry out monitoring and inspection at Member State level.

Recommendation 6

Article 2(2)

Reason

The amendment is a consequence of the amendment to Recital 4. The Commission proposal covers any port located in the territory of a Member State in which one or more port facilities are situated which are covered by Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004. The Committee of the Regions is not convinced that it is necessary to adopt additional measures for all ports.

Recommendation 7

Article 3(1)

Reason

What qualifies as a ‘port area’ must be decided on a case-by-case basis and the definition of a ‘port’ must not be over-restrictive. The above amendment provides the Member States with the flexibility they need to define and demarcate these areas, without allowing port areas to extend beyond reasonable proportions.

Recommendation 8

Article 5(1)

Reason

In accordance with the subsidiarity principle, it should be possible for the regional and local level to appoint the port security authority. However, the Member States should continue to have financial and overall responsibility for port security, as argued in Recommendation 1.

Recommendation 9

Article 5(3)

Reason

In accordance with the subsidiarity principle, it should be possible for the regional and local level to appoint the port security authority. The amendment is a consequence of the amendment to Article 5(1).

Recommendation 10

Article 9(1)

Reason

Generally speaking, adjacent ports should be able to have a shared security officer, regardless of size.

Recommendation 11

Article 10(1)

Reason

It is unlikely that all ports covered by the directive will need a security committee. It is probably only the larger ports that need one. Consequently, the general rule should be that a security committee is not required and that one may be established only where necessary.

Recommendation 12

Article 14(2)

Reason

The amendment is a consequence of the amendment to Recital 9.

Recommendation 13

Article 14(3)

Reason

The amendment is a consequence of amendments to Article 14(2) and Recital 9.

Recommendation 14

Article 14(4)

Reason

The amendment is a consequence of amendments to Articles 14(2), 14(3) and Recital 9.

Recommendation 15

Article 17(2)

Reason

The amendment is a consequence of amendments to Articles 14(2), 14(3), 14(4) and Recital 9.

Recommendation 16

Reason

The proposals and arguments put forward by the CoR in its reasons for amendments to the directive make it clear that the coordination of security measures extending beyond the port/ship interface is a matter which should as far as possible be dealt with by individual Member States.

Brussels, 30 September 2004.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Towards a thematic strategy on the urban environment

(2005/C 43/09)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission: Towards a thematic strategy on the urban environment (COM(2004) 60 final);

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 11 February 2004 to consult it on this subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 10 February 2004 to instruct its Commission for Sustainable Development to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to its opinion on the Commission Communication: Sustainable Urban Development in the European Union: A Framework for Action: (COM(1998) 605 final - CdR 115/99 fin (1));

Having regard to its opinion on the Commission Communication: Towards an urban agenda in the European Union (COM(1997) 197 –final CdR 319/97 fin (2));

Having regard to the Commission Communication on European Governance (COM(2001) 428 final);

Having regard to the Protocol on the Application of the Principles of Subsidiarity and Proportionality, appended to the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the definition of ‘sustainable development ’ in the Amsterdam Treaty;

Having regard to the Commission Communication on A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development (Commission's proposal to the Gothenburg European Council) (COM(2001) 264 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Towards a global partnership for sustainable development (COM(2002) 82 final);

Having regard to its opinion on the Commission Communication on the sixth environment action programme of the European Community ‘Environment 2010: our future, our choice - the Sixth Environment Action Programme’, and the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Community Environment Action Programme 2001–2010 (COM(2001) 31 final - CdR 36/2001 fin (3));

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘A European environment and health strategy’ (COM(2003) 338 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Biodiversity Strategy (COM(1998) 42 final) and the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Biodiversity Action Plan (COM(2001) 162 final);

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 93/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 8 July 2004 by its Commission for sustainable development (rapporteur: Ms Tarras-Wahlberg, member of Stockholm City Council, SE/PES);

WHEREAS

Unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session held on 29 and 30 September 2004 in Brussels (meeting of 30 September):

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General

Sustainable urban management

Sustainable urban transport systems

Sustainable construction

Sustainable urban design

2.   Committee of the Regions' recommendations

Brussels, 30 September 2004

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 293, 13.10.1999, p.58

(2)OJ C 251, 10.8.1998, p.11

(3)OJ C 357, 14.12.2001, p. 44.

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on reinforcing the civil protection capacity of the European Union

(2005/C 43/10)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Reinforcing the civil protection capacity of the European Union (COM(2004) 200 final);

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 25 March 2004 to consult the Committee of the Regions on this subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 19 June 2003 to instruct its Commission for Sustainable Development to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to its Opinion on the management and consequences of natural disasters: the role of European structural policy of 3 July 2003 (CdR 104/2003 fin) (1);

Having regard to Council Decision 1999/847/EC of 9 December 1999establishing an action programme in the field of civil protection (2000-2004) (2);

Having regard to Council Decision 2001/792/EC, Euratom of 23 October 2001establishing a community mechanism to facilitate reinforced cooperation in civil protection assistance (3);

Having regard to the initiatives of the Commission in late 2003 to adopt the implementing instruments for Council Decision 2001/792;

Having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 4 September 2003 (PE T5-0373/2003) on the effects of the summer heat wave (2003) and the European Parliament report (PE-A5-0278/2003) on improving safety at sea in response to the Prestige accident;

Having regard to Article III-184 and Article I-42 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, wherein the fundamental principles underlying cooperation and solidarity in the field of civil protection are laid down;

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 241/2003 rev. 1) adopted on 8 July 2004 by its Commission for sustainable development (rapporteur: Mr Isidoro Gottardo, Member of the Friuli Venezia Giulia Regional Council (IT/EPP);

Whereas:

Unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session held on 29 and 30 September 2004 in Brussels (meeting of 30 September):

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

Database

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Joint exercises

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Communication and improved coordination

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Financial resources

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 30 September 2004.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 256 of 24.10.2003, p. 74

(2)OJ L 327 of 21.12.1999, p. 53

(3)OJ L 297 of 15.11.2001, p. 7

----

----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication on the follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for voluntary activities among young people in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field Communication on the follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field

(2005/C 43/11)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council – Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth, in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the field of youth (COM(2004) 336 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council – Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for voluntary activities among young people in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the field of youth (COM (2004) 337 final);

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 30 April 2004 to consult it on this subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its President of 5 April 2004 to instruct its Commission for Culture and Education to draw up an Opinion on this subject;

Having regard to its opinion on the working document of the European Commission entitled Towards a European voluntary service for young people (CdR 191/96 fin) (1);

Having regard to its opinion on the Community action programme on European voluntary service for young people (CdR 86/97 fin) (2);

Having regard to the resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field (3);

Having regard to its opinion on the European Commission White Paper on A new impetus for European youth (CdR 389/2001 fin) (4);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council on the Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for the participation and information of young people, in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field (COM(2003) 184 final);

Having regard to the Council resolution of 25 November 2003 on common objectives for participation by and information for young people (5);

Having regard to the Commission report to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Follow-up to the Recommendation of the European Parliament and the Council of 10 July 2001 on mobility within the Community of students, persons undergoing training, volunteers and teachers and trainers (COM(2004) 21 final);

Having regard to its opinion on the Commission's Communication to the Council on the Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for the participation and information of young people, in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field (CdR 309/2003 fin);

Having regard to its Draft Opinion (CdR 192/2004 rev. 1 adopted on 9 July 2004 by its Commission for Culture and Education, (Rapporteur: Mr Roberto Pella, President of Biella Provincial Council (IT/EPP);

Whereas

adopted the following opinion at its 56th plenary session on 29-30 September 2004 (meeting of 30th September).

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2.   Specific recommendations of the Committee of the Regions regarding a greater understanding and knowledge of youth

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

3.   Specific recommendations of the Committee of the Regions regarding voluntary activities among young people

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

4.   General recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Brussels, 30 September 2004.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

----

(1)OJ C 42 of 10.2.1997, p.1

(2)OJ C 244 of 11.8.1997, p.47

(3)OJ C 168 of 13.7.2002.

(4)OJ C 287 of 22.11.2002, p.6

(5)OJ C 295 of 5.12.2003

(6)  COM(2004) 21 final.

----