# Official Journal C 188/30 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 188 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6630 May 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 188

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6630 May 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | RESOLUTIONS |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | 154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023 |
| 2023/C 188/01 | Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions | 1 |
| 2023/C 188/02 | Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the initiative for strengthening social dialogue | 6 |
| | OPINIONS |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | 154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023 |
| 2023/C 188/03 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the Future of the Eastern Partnership from a local and regional perspective | 10 |
| 2023/C 188/04 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on targets and tools for a smart rural Europe | 14 |

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Committee of the Regions

154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023

2023/C 188/01

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions

1

2023/C 188/02

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the initiative for strengthening social dialogue

6

OPINIONS

Committee of the Regions

154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023

2023/C 188/03

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the Future of the Eastern Partnership from a local and regional perspective

10

2023/C 188/04

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on targets and tools for a smart rural Europe

14

---

| | III   Preparatory acts |
| --- | --- |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | 154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023 |
| 2023/C 188/05 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on short-term accommodation rental services: balancing the needs of local communities, entrepreneurs and travellers | 19 |
| 2023/C 188/06 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on sustainable use of pesticides | 43 |
| 2023/C 188/07 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the proposal for a directive on asbestos | 70 |
| 2023/C 188/08 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the European Media Freedom Act | 79 |

III   Preparatory acts

Committee of the Regions

154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023

2023/C 188/05

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on short-term accommodation rental services: balancing the needs of local communities, entrepreneurs and travellers

19

2023/C 188/06

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on sustainable use of pesticides

43

2023/C 188/07

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the proposal for a directive on asbestos

70

2023/C 188/08

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the European Media Freedom Act

79

---

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

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Committee of the Regions

154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/1

---

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions

(2023/C 188/01)

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

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 harnessing talent in Europe’s regions;

General observations

| 1. | welcomes the European Commission’s Communication on Harnessing talent in Europe’s regions and supports the overall objectives of the proposal, with particular regard to the prevention of disparities and geographic divide between regions and cities based on size and on the skills of their working-age population; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | underlines the serious challenge of regions that are at risk of falling into a talent-development trap, which currently involves 82 regions in 16 Member States (accounting for almost 30 % of the EU population), which are severely affected by this decline of the working-age population, a low share of university and higher-education graduates, and a negative mobility of their population aged 15 to 39 years; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | expresses its appreciation for the Talent Booster Mechanism and underlines its expectations for the rapid and effective implementation of its eight proposals at European, local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | recognises the need for cities and regions to swiftly capitalise on the potential of these strategies in order to create talent-attraction ecosystems that are tailored-made, interoperable and place-based. This is particularly relevant for regions that are falling into a talent-development trap, and particularly affected by low birth rates, a decline of the working-age population, a low share of university and higher-education graduates, and brain drain; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | highlights that demographic change, its multifaceted consequences and their territorial impact were addressed in several recommendations of the Conference on the Future of Europe (CoFoE), to be followed up by the EU institutions (notably proposal No 47.7). Citizens asked for specific policies to avoid brain drain from certain regions and countries within the EU, and to prevent the drain of European talents and workforce to third countries (proposal No 47.7), and to ensure the sustainable development and demographic resilience of regions lagging behind (proposal No 15.9); |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | considers regions specifically affected by the green and digital transition, such as coal and carbon-intensive regions, as well as automotive regions, to be prime candidates for the Talent Booster Mechanism, as they will have a significant number of workers in need of upskilling and reskilling; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | calls for local and regional governments to take advantage of the European Year of Skills (EYS) when implementing their strategy for attracting and retaining talent in their territories. The EYS promotes skills policies and social investments to address labour shortages for a better skilled and adaptable workforce for the future. Youth organisations, including youth branches of political parties at local, regional, national and European levels, should also be closely involved in the spirit of youth mainstreaming and the legacy of the European Year of Youth (EYY); |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | in this context underlines the importance of developing evidence-based policy-making, including the need to undertake strategic foresight activities at the appropriate regional and local levels, as well as using the established foresight methodology, in order to build place-based scenarios and prepare for different futures according to the interaction of different long-term trends and factors; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | highlights the importance of dedicated investments in work-life balance initiatives, and encourages LRA’s to share knowledge of best practice examples concerning family-friendly policies; |
| --- | --- |

9.

Untapping talent development with the support of place-based policies

| 10. | highlights the need to build on the potentials of mentoring schemes and to promote partnerships between areas (whether cities, rural areas or whole regions), incorporating the principles of multi-level governance cooperation to support the vital role of small towns and villages in integrated territorial development; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | recommends that the European Commission step up its efforts to reduce regional disparities with the support of place-based policies through a reinforced cohesion policy addressing the challenge of harnessing talent in all EU regions, ensuring that all regions in the European Union have a fair chance to reap the benefits of the single market, generating a positive impact on EU competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | advocates for territorial impact assessments and rural proofing to become effective tools for implementing the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle introduced by the European Commission in its 8th Cohesion Report (1), according to which ‘no action should hamper the convergence process or contribute to regional disparities’; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | suggests deepening the analysis on the regions in a talent-development trap or at risk of falling into one, to uncover the diversities, challenges and opportunities within the regions. The policy response should encompass a comprehensive set of measures, elaborated and implemented through tailor-made approaches steered by cohesion policy and complemented by sectoral strategies; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | reiterates that the European Semester with a stronger focus on partnership and multi-level governance should play an active role in fostering the reforms needed, notably in the labour market and in education and training systems in order to stimulate the development of talent; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | highlights that the EU labour market is currently impacted in quality and numbers by the digital and the green transitions requiring a fundamental shift of skills. The importance of upskilling and reskilling workers to prepare them for new jobs or new tasks within existing occupations, combined with new ways of working and the flexibility of companies to adapt to new realities and societal demands, are strategic objectives to be addressed and supported by public authorities at all levels of governance, and in accordance to the principle of subsidiarity; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | highlights the need for a continuation of the Just Transition Fund and the design of a future Just Transition Fund (JTF 2.0), as an instrument of sustainable transition, based on the local and regional perspective, and on experience gained through the drafting and implementation of the territorial just transition plans. Detailed analyses will be needed to determine which regions and sectors are most affected, as well as their associated supply chains and workforces; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | considers it necessary to introduce a range of policies on rural areas in order to tackle depopulation resulting in the loss of talent, and especially for the areas most impacted by climate change and areas with severe and permanent natural or demographic obstacles, such as the outermost regions, islands and more remote and isolated regions where access to resources is often more limited. The Committee reiterates that the future of such areas is dependent on retaining and attracting young talent to pursue their life goals there and on fully involving young people when seeking solutions to local challenges; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | calls for education and training to be accessible to all ages and social groups, both physically on-site and through remote access, as well as sharing knowledge on innovative approaches on skill-obtaining processes, and developing community centres with a range of services from libraries to social work; also agrees on the importance of broadening labour and training opportunities and encouraging measures to promote work-life balance; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | considers it essential to boost public policies which promote the modernisation and adaptation to climate change of farms, as well as to encourage young professionals to join the agricultural sector in order to tackle the problem of generational renewal. To this end, access to social and labour market integration programmes, to education, upskilling and reskilling options offered at local level, as well as to cultural activities, needs to be rethought and supported; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | highlights that smart villages create new opportunities for a diversified rural economy and access to the job market, and requests intensive support for rural areas to fulfil the 2030 policy program, especially strengthening digital skills and education, secure and sustainable digital infrastructures, the digital transformation of businesses and the digitalisation of public services; welcomes the inclusion of rural areas in the European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | recognises the important role women play in areas at risk of depopulation and therefore promotes and supports measures to create equal opportunities for women in innovative, sustainable and creative jobs and services; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | underscores the need for Member States to give firm support to policies fostering girls’ and women’s participation in STEAM education (information and communications technology, science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics), and provide incentives to create jobs in sectors where their knowledge can be applied; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | emphasises that boosting the digital transition of regions caught in a talent-development trap is essential and also in the interest of strong economic, social and territorial cohesion. The CoR proposes promoting digital cohesion as an objective of the European Union so that suitable digital infrastructure can be put in place to ensure that teleworking, e-services and digital education are accessible to everyone. Particular attention should be paid to access to digital tools for disadvantaged and vulnerable groups; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | notes that citizens and businesses in Europe’s border regions face numerous legal and administrative obstacles that hamper economic growth and cross-border cooperation, and stresses the need for a border-free Schengen area for all Member States so as to facilitate the mobility of students, workers and business, especially in the border regions; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | highlights the role of social innovation for developing new ideas, services and models to better address societal challenges, notably in the fields of employment, education, skills and social inclusion, and its added value for community development and the improvement of social services on the ground. To this effect the Committee highlights the potential of the social economy in the areas of vocational training, in universities and at all levels of education, and in active employment policies, as well as in the development of skills and competencies; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | encourages tapping into the ESF Social Innovation+ funding to strengthen innovation capacity and facilitate the transfer and upscaling of innovative solutions; |
| --- | --- |

26.

Upgrading the effectiveness of education and responding to labour market needs

| 27. | notes that although the situation varies widely across the EU, one of the main challenges when designing and implementing new standards and practices for education and training is the extent to which they successfully respond to labour market needs. Skills gaps and mismatches exacerbate territorial disparities, and this needs to be addressed through well-designed, place-based and adequately financed policies; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | observes that rapid labour market changes put increasing numbers of people at risk of losing their jobs due to outdated skills or lack thereof. Up-to-date skills and access to lifelong learning are more important than ever, especially given the growing impact of artificial intelligence on the European labour market due to the large-scale automation of existing jobs. A holistic and forward-looking approach must therefore be applied for talent development for people with different educational and professional backgrounds; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | considers it crucial that LRAs understand the importance of universities and vocational education and training providers in stimulating dynamic innovation ecosystems through smart specialisation strategies, and through technological and social innovation. Local universities and polytechnics can effectively harness talent, develop knowledge clusters and attract businesses into their areas by partnering with them on programmes to train workers in the new skills needed in the area. By the same token, public authorities need to develop partnerships with universities and also be aware of the need to support universities, including through investment in local infrastructures, including digital ones; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | emphasises the need to also create conditions for SMEs and micro-enterprises to become part of innovation ecosystems in order to optimise their limited budgetary and human resources. To this effect the Committee supports the Commission’s view that SMEs can benefit from Digital Innovation Hub support for innovation and digitisation; |
| --- | --- |

30.

Targeted enhancement of talent attraction, retention and mobility

| 31. | notes that brain drain and related phenomena need to be understood and assessed in the EU in the context of multi-level governance. In this regard, draws attention to the risk brain drain poses to the long-term sustainability of the European project, especially where disparities between sending and receiving regions are widening; suggests that LRAs set up local alliances, involving all stakeholders (public authorities, businesses, universities, NGOs, etc.), contributing to the design and implementation of local policies that help to mitigate brain drain and to invite social partners to play an active role in talent development; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | in light of increasing opportunities offered by remote working, encourages LRA’s to conduct targeted information campaigns seeking to promote life outside densely populated cities, focusing on the various attractive features of regions; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | points out that demographic trends mean that the only way for many regions in Europe to fill gaps in their labour markets is through regular migration; stresses that innovative businesses are particularly suffering from the growing labour shortage; on this subject, calls for more dialogue between regional authorities, businesses, universities and NGOs, particularly in border regions; advocates transparent and fair immigration systems that also respond to labour shortages at both national and European level; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | stresses that the loss of young people in regions characterised by outward migration and against a backdrop of declining birth rates presents an extraordinary disadvantage for smaller municipalities in terms of maintaining essential public services and boosting economies, which are essential factors in retaining and attracting talent in the territory; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | calls for the implementation of a strategic approach to the integration of third-country nationals into the EU as a potential driver of local growth. The Committee welcomes the measures set out in the Skills and Talent package, including the launch of a new online job-search tool, the EU Talent Pool pilot initiative specifically for people fleeing Ukraine, and the plan to extend it to skilled non-EU workers expressing their interest in migrating to the EU, thus paving the way towards a more sustainable and inclusive approach to labour mobility and third-country solutions; |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | emphasises citizen recommendations formulated in the course of the CoFoE, including the recommendation that the EU encourage Member States to simplify the process of reception and integration of legal migrants and their access to the EU labour market, and ensure better interoperability between the different competent administrations, better communication, easier recognition of qualifications and more effective tools, such as online matching between skill supply and demand; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | calls for the portability of an EU long-term resident status of third-country nationals in order to ensure their effective intra-EU mobility, which can improve their prospects for becoming a valuable part of European society, allow them to avoid precarious work and instead fill in jobs where there are needs, thereby helping to offset regional imbalances; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | instructs its President to forward this Resolution to the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Swedish and Spanish Presidencies of the Council of the EU and the President of the European Council. |
| --- | --- |

38.

Brussels, 16 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(1)  COM(2022) 34 final.

1

---

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/6

---

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the initiative for strengthening social dialogue

(2023/C 188/02)

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

| — | having regard to the proposal for a Council Recommendation on strengthening social dialogue in the European Union (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the proposal for a Council Recommendation on strengthening social dialogue in the European Union (1);

| — | 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 strengthening social dialogue in the European Union: harnessing its full potential for managing fair transitions (2); |
| --- | --- |

—

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 strengthening social dialogue in the European Union: harnessing its full potential for managing fair transitions (2);

1.

welcomes the European Commission’s Strengthening Social Dialogue initiative, as it aims to put social dialogue at the heart of decision-making at the European and national levels, addresses the need for strong social dialogue at all levels, and provides guidance on how best to strengthen social dialogue and collective bargaining;

2.

points out that, in accordance with Article 152 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union shall facilitate dialogue between the social partners, respecting their autonomy, while the Commission is responsible for promoting and facilitating European social dialogue, in accordance with Article 154 TFEU. The Commission’s initiative also represents an implementation measure for Principle 8 of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), according to which social partners are to be consulted on the design and implementation of economic, employment and social policies. The CoR therefore emphasises the importance of such synergies, highlighting its own request for increased transparency, multi-level participation, democratisation and meaningful involvement of social partners within the European Semester process;

3.

considers that labour market reforms at national level must contribute to the implementation of the EPSR. The CoR expects the Commission to analyse labour reforms in the national recovery and resilience plans related to these specific aspects;

4.

stresses that the Commission initiative is consistent with the proposals of the Conference on the Future of Europe (COFE), in particular with COFE proposal No 13 on social dialogue and collective bargaining as a way to make labour markets inclusive, and with COFE proposal No 39.5, according to which proper civil and social dialogue mechanisms and processes should be guaranteed at every step of the EU decision-making process;

5.

believes that there is a urgent need to strengthen social dialogue at EU, national, local and sectoral levels, due to the many pressures deriving from the impact of transitions on work and the fall in the share of workers covered by collective agreements (from 66 % in 2000 to 56 % in 2019);

6.

stresses the fact that workers in smaller companies or in non-standard employment situations are often either not covered or under-represented in collective bargaining agreements. The Committee also points out that platform workers are often prevented from exercising their fundamental rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining, not least due to the lack of shared means of communication and opportunities to meet online or in person (3);

7.

points out that, in order for social dialogue to become the standard way in which the EU and the Member States develop policies impacting the world of work, social dialogue needs to be promoted at both cross-sectoral and sectoral levels. This should include collective bargaining, support for capacity building, the conditions for higher collective bargaining coverage, and active promotion of the added value of social dialogue;

8.

shares the Commission’s assessment of the relevant contribution of social dialogue in delivering social fairness, effective crisis management — especially during COVID-19 — and fair management of change; during the pandemic, social partners at the local and regional level have been crucial in continuing to provide essential public services despite the difficult economic and financial context;

9.

shares the Commission’s opinion that social dialogue is far from being adequately achieved everywhere in Europe; recalls that sectoral social dialogue, including at the local and regional level, is a fundamental precondition to achieving a high level of collective bargaining coverage;

10.

urges Member States to implement the Directive on adequate minimum wages (4), which requires Member States to ensure that, in the awarding and performance of public procurement or concession contracts, economic operators and their subcontractors comply with the applicable obligations regarding wages, the right to organise and collective bargaining on wage-setting;

11.

welcomes the proposal to appoint a social dialogue coordinator in each Commission directorate-general and to commit to the enhanced involvement of cross-industry social partners ahead of the Commission Work Programme. This would ensure a more consistent approach to consultations of social partners and ensure that social partners are properly consulted according to Article 154 TFEU;

12.

insists that the Commission initiative be followed by a sustained administrative, financial, legal and political support for European sectoral social partners and their national affiliates in strengthening the capacity of social partners to engage in social dialogue at both national and European level, while respecting their autonomy and complying with the principle of subsidiarity and Member States’ competences;

13.

underlines that local and regional authorities (LRAs) are crucial in promoting social dialogue, as local and regional public administrations employ more than 12,3 million workers providing a wide range of public services (5) and remain closest to SMEs and the local labour force in the regions. Local and regional authorities, along with labour organisations, have local knowledge, which provides the best basis for holding social dialogue and producing flexible and sustainable agreements. Member States should therefore ensure that adequate social dialogue structures are in place to encourage collective bargaining and to address relevant challenges in relation to employment in local and regional administrations;

14.

points out the importance of the European sectoral social dialogue committee for local and regional employers (6) in ensuring that the needs, interests and specificities of local and regional governments and their workers are taken into account within EU legislation on organisation and working conditions. The CoR also highlights the significant work done so far by this committee on relevant issues such as restructuring, digitalisation, migration and anti-discrimination, health and safety at work, the fight against violence by third parties, gender equality etc., and calls for a broader commitment from social dialogue partners to implementing the recommendations;

15.

underlines the reference made to the recently adopted Commission Communication on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions, which states that enhancing the involvement of social partners in the regions facing or at risk of a talent development trap appears crucial for the development of place-based solutions to support better working conditions as well as adequate wages, and to tackle skills and labour shortages;

16.

calls on the European social partners to interact with the CoR’s consultation platforms such as the network of regional hubs (RegHubs) (7), which will in 2023 dedicate one of its consultations to the Working Time Directive (WTD) (8), a topic of particular relevance for the European social dialogue;

17.

notes the need to analyse the impact on social dialogue and collective bargaining procedures of the privatisation of public services traditionally provided by national, regional or local authorities (energy, water, transport, postal services etc.); reiterates the need to maintain social dialogue and collective bargaining procedures, as well as to put in place measures to avoid deterioration of working conditions following a change of ownership;

18.

points out the increasing rates of third-party violence, particularly against women (9), which also affects workers employed by local and regional governments given the high levels of female representation in services typically provided by LRAs (such as healthcare and social services) and the proximity between the perpetrators and victims of third-party violence;

19.

stresses the importance of social dialogue in improving labour migration policy and dialogue and points in this regard to its opinion on Legal migration — Attracting skills and talent to the EU (10) and to the joint guidelines on migration and strengthening anti-discrimination in local and regional governments, adopted by the sectoral social dialogue committee on local and regional governments (11). In this context, the CoR also points to COFE proposal No 41.1 to launch a communication campaign across the EU aimed at increasing awareness among EU companies recruiting non-EU nationals of the existence of the European Cooperation Network of Employment Services (EURES), the EU Immigration Portal and the EU Skills Profile Tool for Third Country Nationals. In addition, the Commission should encourage Member States to simplify the process for the reception and integration of legal migrants and their access to the EU labour market;

20.

calls for a strengthening of the equal treatment of workers coming from non-EU countries, in particular as regards working conditions, freedom of association and affiliation and social security benefits, taking into account intersectional forms of disadvantage such as gender, age, sexual orientation and identity, religion, and others;

21.

points out that the International Labour Organisation (ILO) advocates for labour migration to be addressed by labour authorities in cooperation with social partners with the aim of developing credible and sustainable labour migration and anti-discrimination policies that are rights-based and consistent, take into account local and regional circumstances and, as such, can contribute to regional inclusion processes;

22.

welcomes the further measures set out in the ‘Skills and talent’ package, including the creation of an EU talent pilot project specifically for people fleeing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the proposed EU Talent Pool, as well as the plan to extend it to refugees residing in the EU. The CoR points out that, when designing these tools, more needs to be done to also consider relevant soft skills that job seekers can provide, and to develop fair, accessible and user-friendly labour migration schemes, as excessively bureaucratic procedures may affect refugees’ access to the labour market, thus making them increasingly at risk of having to resort to precarious work and exposed to abuse and exploitation;

23.

highlights the role of the European Labour Authority (ELA) in ensuring that the EU rules on labour mobility and social security coordination are enforced in a fair, simple and effective way, including through the provision of information, concerted and joint inspections, enhanced administrative cooperation, and the promotion of labour mobility, particularly through EURES;

24.

welcomes the inclusion in the EU social partners work programme of issues linked to skills shortages and how to best achieve just transition. The CoR highlights the role of regions and cities as employers in these areas and therefore requests their adequate representation in relevant meetings of the cross-industry social partners;

25.

welcomes the Council Recommendation on ensuring a fair transition towards climate neutrality, including the need to integrate fair transition objectives into policy-making at all levels and encourage regional and local authorities to play an active role in the development, implementation and monitoring of fair transition policies, and to actively involve social partners at national, regional and local levels, while respecting their autonomy;

26.

highlights the key role of local and regional authorities as employers, and encourages their active involvement, in ensuring adequate participation and tailored capacity-building for social partners in the delivery of policies supported by the European Social Fund Plus. Welcomes in this context, the requirement to spend at least 0,25 % of the funds on supporting capacity-building of social partners for those countries who received a country-specific recommendation on social dialogue. Action taken solely at Member State level will lead to missing valuable synergies;

27.

instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Swedish and Spanish Presidencies of the Council of the EU and the President of the European Council.

Brussels, 16 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(1)  COM(2023) 38 final.

1

(2)  COM(2023) 40 final.

2

(3)  Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Improving working conditions in platform work (OJ C 375, 30.9.2022, p. 45).

3

(4)  Directive (EU) 2022/2041 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on adequate minimum wages in the European Union (OJ L 275, 25.10.2022, p. 33).

4

(5)  Eurofound, Representativeness of the European social partner organisations: Local and regional government sector and social services, 2020.

5

Representativeness of the European social partner organisations: Local and regional government sector and social services

(6)  The sectoral social dialogue committee on local and regional governments is composed of the two mutually recognised sectoral social partners in the LRG sector: the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) and EPSU (European Federation of Public Service Unions).

6

(7)  https://portal.cor.europa.eu/reghub/Pages/default.aspx

7

(8)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p. 9).

8

(9)  https://www.etuc.org/en/document/safe-home-safe-work-final-report-national-country-studies

9

(10)  Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on legal migration: Attracting skills and talent to the EU (OJ C 79, 2.3.2023, p. 59).

10

(11)  Social dialogue texts database — Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion — European Commission (europa.eu).

11

---

OPINIONS

Committee of the Regions

154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/10

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the Future of the Eastern Partnership from a local and regional perspective

(2023/C 188/03)

| Rapporteur: | Alin-Adrian NICA (RO/EPP) |
| --- | --- |
| Reference document: | Own initiative opinion |

Rapporteur:

Alin-Adrian NICA (RO/EPP)

Reference document:

Own initiative opinion

I.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

| 1. | whereas Russia’s war in Ukraine, aided by Belarus, and the continuous threat to the territorial integrity of Moldova and Georgia, demonstrates the urgent need for the EU to support the free and democratic path of countries in the EU’s neighbourhood more firmly; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | whereas there is a commitment among EU Member States and the current Eastern European Partner countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine) to continue, renew and strengthen the Eastern Partnership (EaP) so that it remains the leading forum and framework for cooperation with the neighbouring countries east of the EU; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | whereas the most powerful long-term European response to the Russian invasion will be free and democratic states in Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and beyond, with strong regional and local authorities, economically vibrant cities and resilient societies committed to European values; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | whereas all partnership countries with all the rights and obligations embedded in the Helsinki Accords and OSCE founding statutes are free to perpetuate a European perspective, provided they also meet the Copenhagen criteria; |
| --- | --- |

4.

II.   REDEFINING THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP

| 5. | welcomes the decision of the European Council in June 2022 to grant EU candidate status to the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine and to recognise a future European perspective for Georgia; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | commends the considerable progress made by the three countries, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine (the Trio), on the implementation of their Association Agreements and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | welcomes the entry into force of Armenia’s Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) on 3 March 2021 as a milestone for EU-Armenia relations; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | considers that the ‘fundamentals’ should remain the common ground for bringing the Eastern Partnership closer together, i.e. a shared commitment to freedom, democracy, the rule of law, and human rights, while continuing to work on shared objectives such as promoting gender equality, protection of minorities and language rights, counteracting climate change, advancing the green and digital transitions, supporting a strong and independent civil society, increasing resilience and prosperity, and deepening economic relations; underlines that continued support for the Belarusian democratic opposition at all levels of governance as well as support for civil society are essential for promoting democratic values in the country; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | points to the significant role that regional and local authorities can play in defending the ‘fundamentals’ in regions and local communities, and in attaining the shared objectives, guaranteeing at the same time the subsidiarity principle of the EU by bringing local citizens closer to the European Union and its values; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | stresses, nevertheless, that a redefinition of the Eastern Partnership’s policy objectives and its multilateral architecture is needed to keep the Partnership prospering; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | recognises that, after more than a decade of EaP cooperation, the country-specific priorities among the Eastern partner countries are now diverging due to their different development needs, national priorities, and integrational aspirations, but also due to Russia’s policy of aggression, destabilising tactics and disinformation. The CoR therefore awaits eagerly the European Commission’s proposal to assess the future of the Eastern Partnership; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | acknowledges that the EaP remains a relevant framework, which has not exhausted its full regional potential and can continue to have a purpose for all partners, if it is reformed to define country-specific objectives towards the EU. Flexible formats and tools within that framework should complement the needs of both the new EU candidate countries and the other partners, while maintaining the common values and rules, mutual interests and commitments; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | points out that the EaP should be more results-oriented, by adapting its tools and operating formats to respond to the needs of the partners, including by helping the most advanced partners on their way towards EU membership; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | calls for both the European Commission and the partner governments to involve regional and local authorities in the setting of cooperation priorities with territorial impact (e.g. on energy efficiency, environment and climate adaptation, transport connectivity, decentralisation and public administration reform, support for civil society), and to engage them in the relevant EaP platforms and panels, which should be enlarged to representatives of CORLEAP; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | notes the positive impacts of Eastern Partnership cooperation on the lives of ordinary citizens but underlines the fact that the visibility of the Partnership and the EU’s contribution needs to be increased based on past achievements; this could also be achieved by working systematically with local and regional authorities and their associations on the ground; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | notes that local self-government, which is a basic pillar and cornerstone of democracy, needs to be further supported in order to achieve the EaP objectives, and welcomes the work of the Congress of the Council of Europe in this field; |
| --- | --- |

16.

III.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

| 17. | favours adopting a tailor-made approach to the Eastern Partnership objectives to reflect the different needs of the EU candidates, potential candidates and other partners, as the one-size-fits-all approach is no longer justified; the country-specific needs should be designed in a way that also takes into account the specific interests of regional and local communities; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | recommends a more flexible geographical scope for the EaP opening up the possibility of cooperating more closely with countries such as certain countries in Central Asia, as well as identifying areas for cooperation with the countries of the Western Balkans; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | points out that a regional and local networking dimension should be reaffirmed within a revamped Eastern Partnership through a political dialogue (CORLEAP) and through territorial cooperation. In this context, the European Committee of the Regions and CORLEAP, via its members and partners, could contribute to the implementation of a territorial agenda of the Eastern Partnership in the form of peer-to-peer cooperation and peer-learning mechanisms; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | recognises that the Partnership has served well in providing a framework for a number of projects aimed at good governance, and strengthening civil society; considers, nevertheless, that actions for bolstering resilience should be mainstreamed and new tools to that end offered to all levels of governance; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | points out that within the Eastern Partnership a multi-level platform for the localisation of the Sustainable Development Goals should be set up; achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in the region would be conducive to introducing local energy measures and installing alternatives to create environmentally friendly systems independent of Russian energy resources, while consequently improving the livelihoods and resilience of local communities and their citizens; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | suggests creating an Eastern Partnership Joint Secretariat, in which the EU and each partner are duly represented, including representatives of the local and regional level, and aimed at leveraging funds, and identifying and shaping projects in accordance with the main political objectives of the Partnership; considers that a joint secretariat would enhance members’ ownership of the project, and increase transparency, coordination and visibility; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | recommends implementing without further delay the project for a virtual Academy for Local and Regional Public Administration (1) in order to strengthen the capacity-building of local and regional authorities in the Eastern Partnership, promote transparency and good governance, fight corruption, and assist partner members in conducting decentralisation reforms; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | advocates the extension of the TAIEX and Twinning programmes to regional and local authorities in the EaP countries in order to improve their administrative capacities; the extension of the network of stakeholders for twinning projects to regional and local authorities will have a trickle-down effect and will contribute to the easier implementation of project objectives; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | believes that dedicated financial allocations addressed to local and regional authorities of the EU and the Eastern Partnership, to be identified within the EUR 17 billion Economic and Investment Plan for the Eastern Partnership, would help the proliferation of cross-border and territorial cooperation, including through the use of the European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs), thus stimulating the sharing of best practices and the implementation of projects tailored to the needs of identified territorial goals; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | considers that the EaP could focus more on practical projects and initiatives for increasing the connectivity of the EaP partners with the EU, in particular in the area of physical infrastructure (road and rail transport, electricity and digital cables, sea routes, energy interconnections etc.), as well as for integrating them into the EU digital and telecoms market (e.g. eliminating roaming charges); suggests, therefore, offering immediate economic sectoral integration opportunities, including steps towards integration into the EU internal market, and financial assistance at unprecedented levels and pace, also by boosting local and regional entrepreneurship, particularly among SMEs in the Trio countries; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | calls for the creation of an investment platform under the Eastern Partnership which would link the efforts of the international financial institutions and put local and regional authorities in a position to facilitate projects within the Eastern Partnership in terms of capacity-building, technical assistance, and good governance, as a way to stimulate sustainable territorial development, prevent social and economic disparities, and support the localisation and achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals in the area; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | suggests, therefore, developing a model for local investments in the Eastern Partnership, following the experience of the Development Bank of the Council of Europe, with a view to financing a wide range of social and economic projects implemented by governmental, local, and regional stakeholders as well as public institutions; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | considers that the partnership countries should be given flexibility in choosing programmes that are the most relevant for them, and, at the same time, in prioritising programmes directed towards local and regional bodies, which would give the European Committee of the Regions a key role in identifying European partners ready to further engage with their counterparts; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | recommends prioritising measures and projects aimed at addressing in particular the green and digital transitions and boosting socioeconomic recovery, and calls for an agenda for recovery, resilience and reform to be adopted at the forthcoming EaP summit of heads of state; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | underlines the fact that the partner countries have signed an agreement of cooperation in order to combat the deterioration of the environment, particularly stressing climate action, including energy and infrastructure, as well as waste reduction and the conservation of biodiversity; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | stresses that administrative decentralisation and an increased share of public affairs being managed by local authorities in the partner countries is a key factor for ensuring and maintaining an all-embracing democracy to improve people’s participation, including supporting new methods of public consultation (citizens’ panels, participatory democracy), anti-corruption measures, protection of human rights, including of minorities and the improvement of justice systems while demonstrating EU core values; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | recommends that local and regional authorities of the Eastern Partnership further engage with all partners geared towards fostering policies for local development beyond the EU’s enlargement policy, including the Council of Europe and the European Political Community. |
| --- | --- |

33.

Brussels, 15 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(1)  Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Local and regional authorities shaping the future Eastern Partnership (OJ C 79, 10.3.2020, p. 45).

1

---

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/14

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on targets and tools for a smart rural Europe

(2023/C 188/04)

| Rapporteur: | Radim SRŠEŇ (CZ/EPP), Mayor of the Municipality of Dolní Studénky |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Radim SRŠEŇ (CZ/EPP), Mayor of the Municipality of Dolní Studénky

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

The challenges we are facing

| 1. | reiterates its support for the Long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas 2040 (LTVRA) (1), which will support territorial cohesion and create new opportunities to attract innovative businesses, ensure access to quality jobs, promote new and better skills, ensure better infrastructure and services and strengthen the role of sustainable agriculture and diversified economic activities; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | considers that achievement of carbon neutrality by 2050 through the European Green Deal is essential for growing prosperity of the European society, maintaining good conditions for life in the EU and supporting innovation that will lead to the achievement of this goal and ensure the EU’s competitiveness on the global scale; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | recognises that the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s aggression against Ukraine have shown the extraordinary need for resilience at all levels within the EU — by municipalities, cities, regions and Member States; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | considers that the implementation of a number of sectoral and cross-cutting strategies and policies (2) twinning the green and digital transitions in the new geopolitical context (3) is key to achieving major European goals; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | is convinced, in the spirit of the Lednice Declaration (4), that all these plans, activities and support can lead to a common goal only if they are addressed holistically and implemented for the benefit of all EU residents and the entire EU territory using all available EU funds, policies and tools; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | is convinced that rural areas must be appreciated as a space without which it is impossible to achieve long-term sustainable development of the EU in the spirit of the above-mentioned objectives; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | underlines that the Smart Villages concept is an innovative EU policy and a rural development tool that can help bring about the rural revival which is the essential goal of the LTVRA; |
| --- | --- |

7.

The current state indicates our vulnerability

| 8. | recognises the vulnerability of the EU in all three pillars of sustainable development — society, the environment and the economy; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | emphasises that rural areas make up 80 % of the territory of the EU and are home to 30 % of the EU population; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | recognises the difference in living conditions between rural and urban areas; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | perceives the risks arising from the potential lack of energy from non-European sources, high soil erosion in a number of EU countries and the potential lack of water; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | underlines the necessity of adapting the EU’s territory to climate change, the need for ensuring biodiversity as well as the need for extended use of renewable energy sources; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | points out that many of these fundamental challenges facing the EU cannot be solved other than by proper support for rural areas, which is still insufficient; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | is concerned about the lack of access to digitisation and shortcomings in infrastructure and services, which limit the economic development of rural areas. Maintaining a vibrant countryside requires providing the conditions for remote work and for businesses to be able to get established and operate on an equal footing with those in urban areas. Stable, high-quality connectivity would allow both high-tech, data-intensive enterprises and manufacturing industries to operate in sparsely populated areas. Today, there are significant differences in access to connectivity, with rural and sparsely populated areas far behind urban areas and cities. The possibility of providing welfare services via broadband or mobile networks is very important to municipalities and regions and requires better coverage and higher network transmission speeds. In municipalities with poor connectivity, citizens are at risk of digital exclusion; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | reiterates that the labour market is fundamentally changing due to digitisation and that in 2040, 40 % of the EU population of working age will have a higher education (5), with the predominance of the ‘digital’ generation Y and Z on the labour market; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | is convinced that examples of the implementation of the concept of smart villages show the importance of this new instrument of change for a holistic approach to people and the territory (6), connecting smart municipalities, smart cities and smart regions in a smart EU; |
| --- | --- |

16.

Call to action

| 17. | is convinced that the prosperity of the EU depends on the quality of its entire territory and the creation of comparable conditions for the life of its citizens of every age, every education and every social status in every part of the EU; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | calls therefore on the European Commission and the co-legislators to adopt a holistic view of EU development which acknowledges that the development of rural areas is vital for all EU citizens; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | invites the EU institutions, Member States and regions to harness the full potential of the smart village concept as a new, innovative tool for the European policy and for the development of rural areas; digital and technological transformations provide new challenges and opportunities to also bring a higher quality of life and services to rural areas. They create new opportunities for a diversified rural economy and access to the job market. As a result, they can help to address current demographic challenges, keep young people in rural areas and reverse the tides of depopulation and brain drain; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | calls for more support of rural areas at the European and Member State levels in order to enable the development of smart villages and functioning urban-rural linkages — with special focus on mountainous, border, outermost, economically, socially and demographically endangered rural areas and islands, which are all to be treated as particularly vulnerable — where the conditions for life are as much as possible comparable to those in urban areas, and rural areas are considered as a cultural territory managed from smart villages with a diversified economy, an integral and non-negligible part of which is agriculture; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | insists that all EU policies should promote the attractiveness of these areas and protect their quality of life and the rural population by ensuring equal access to basic services and opportunities. This concerns not just cohesion policy but also the EU’s agricultural, single market, competition, environmental and energy policies and should take account of the changing technological possibilities and changes in society, triggered by efforts to achieve pan-European goals; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | suggests applying seven principles when creating smart villages:






  — | the principle of change of direction, where changing technological tools allow people to work remotely from home or from their community and get services at home; |
| --- | --- | --- |

22.

—

the principle of change of direction, where changing technological tools allow people to work remotely from home or from their community and get services at home;

| — | the principle of short distances, which leads to local production and consumption, using the 3E principles (7); |
| --- | --- |

—

the principle of short distances, which leads to local production and consumption, using the 3E principles (7);

| — | the principle of resilience of people and communities, the local economy and the environment; |
| --- | --- |

—

the principle of resilience of people and communities, the local economy and the environment;

| — | the principle of one solution with several equivalent effects, i.e. a holistic approach; |
| --- | --- |

—

the principle of one solution with several equivalent effects, i.e. a holistic approach;

| — | the principle of cooperation to achieve effective solutions, connecting municipalities to solve issues of common interest, which is not bound by the administrative boundaries of regions; |
| --- | --- |

—

the principle of cooperation to achieve effective solutions, connecting municipalities to solve issues of common interest, which is not bound by the administrative boundaries of regions;

| — | the principle of cohesion and complementarity, when smart villages and smart cities in smart regions are developed through cooperation in the territory both horizontally and vertically, opportunities are equalised and tensions are reduced; |
| --- | --- |

—

the principle of cohesion and complementarity, when smart villages and smart cities in smart regions are developed through cooperation in the territory both horizontally and vertically, opportunities are equalised and tensions are reduced;

| — | the principle of ‘evidence-based’ decision-making based on open data and transparency of procedures, where data generated with support from public sources are available to public administration, citizens and entrepreneurs in the interest of new solutions for the development of good conditions for people’s lives, communities and for business; |
| --- | --- |

—

the principle of ‘evidence-based’ decision-making based on open data and transparency of procedures, where data generated with support from public sources are available to public administration, citizens and entrepreneurs in the interest of new solutions for the development of good conditions for people’s lives, communities and for business;

| 23. | considers that this approach will require a number of new solutions, tailored to different regions and specific rural areas, which also means significant support for innovation, research and development both at the European and Member State levels; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | points out the importance of providing services to all citizens in every EU location within a time limit to be determined based on the characteristics of individual rural areas. Support for research and development for all areas of life in a changing ‘smart’ rural environment will be necessary; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | requests that the infrastructure should be built compliant with this criterion, taking into account that the development of road and rail transport infrastructure is as important as the development of 5G networks and related digital infrastructure; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | requests intensive support for rural areas to fulfil the 2030 policy program I (8), especially strengthening digital skills and education, secure and sustainable digital infrastructures, the digital transformation of businesses and digitalisation of public services. Welcomes the inclusion of rural areas in the European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade (9); |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | emphasises the need to prevent the emergence of digitally excluded communities and digitally excluded localities so as not to deepen differences in society; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | requests that all realistically available RES (renewable energy sources) potentially existing in the territory should be used and the localisation of energy production and consumption be supported massively (development of ‘prosumers’); |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | requests that energy-efficient construction and renovation of housing in rural areas should be supported in order to create good conditions for existing residents and the arrival of new people; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | calls for better conditions to be created for the development of diversified small and medium-sized businesses and for start-ups to become a natural part of the development of smart municipalities in rural areas; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | understands the initiative of start-up villages as an important part of developing smart villages in their economic pillar; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | emphasises that the implementation of smart specialisation strategies is equally important for innovation throughout the EU, including rural areas; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | calls for the development of ‘good governance’, including digital public administration, which will enable people in rural areas to remotely access municipal, regional and state services. This must be accompanied by streamlined administration; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | calls for education to be accessible to all ages, both physically on-site and through remote access, as well as for the development of community centres with a range of services from libraries to social work; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | calls for quality healthcare and social care to be decentralised, interconnected and organised so that people can live in their homes throughout their lives; |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | notes that it is very useful to develop the possibilities of telemedicine, in general eHealth, and also of new fields (e.g. virtual reality), which can help in a number of areas from professional education to social care; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | calls for an integrated rescue system to function not only within individual Member States, but also through mutual cooperation across borders, especially in border areas, thus enabling a quick response to emergencies; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | requests support for the development of modern agriculture and the bioeconomy (in coastal areas of the blue economy), for the responsible management of raw materials and materials in the sense of the circular economy. Is convinced that agroforestry, smart agriculture, aquaponics and other fields and practices will ease the work of people in agriculture and also increase Europe’s food self-sufficiency and help fight erosion; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | asks that an expected increase in the number of people working in qualified jobs regardless of location (e.g. people in creative fields) and making rural areas their home should be taken into account; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | requests that new solutions in the area should be supported with the understanding that the New European Bauhaus does not only apply to cities, but also to the creation of a landscape whose diversity is taken into account, remembering the necessity of preserving and developing biodiversity; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | requests that financial consideration should be given to the fact that the ability to adapt to climate change, the maintaining of biodiversity and of the quality of forests primarily depend on the smart development of rural areas. Points out the potential of decentralised water treatment in small municipalities for improving water retention in the landscape; |
| --- | --- |

41.

| 42. | calls for the creation of conditions for active mobility (infrastructure for non-motorised transport) to enable the strengthening of the healthy lifestyle of local residents and the further development of sustainable tourism; |
| --- | --- |

42.

| 43. | highlights the fundamental contribution of autonomous clean mobility to the development of smart villages; |
| --- | --- |

43.

| 44. | asks that it be ensured that the support of community work will be conducted in such a way as to protect vulnerable groups of the population, especially women. Social work leads to the improvement of the living conditions of marginalised groups of the population in rural areas and to the improvement of life perspectives of children from excluded communities; |
| --- | --- |

44.

| 45. | emphasises that smart villages should become an integral part of regional development policy and create synergies with existing tools, e.g. LEADER/CLLD. In this work, governments and institutions at all levels should include Local Action Groups (LAGs) in their programming in a more holistic manner. Smart villages, potentially managed by LAGs, have the potential to increase economic, social and territorial cohesion; |
| --- | --- |

45.

| 46. | is convinced that by supporting the development of rural areas with the above measures, a significant strengthening of Europe’s resilience will be achieved, a higher quality of life will be ensured not only in these areas, but also in cities as a result of changes in rural areas, the competitiveness of the EU will be increased, the quality of the environment will be improved and social cohesion will be strengthened; |
| --- | --- |

46.

| 47. | points out that the magnitude of the challenges requires a strong concentration of financial resources and all activities in rural areas, including for the development of urban-rural linkages; considers it necessary to connect development tools, reduce their fragmentation and strengthen synergies between LEADER/CLLD, smart villages initiatives and LAGs, multifunded through all European funds, including the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, CAP plans or Next Generation EU funds. All of these tools are key to promoting the cohesive development of rural areas; |
| --- | --- |

47.

| 48. | calls for a gradual change in the criteria for the distribution of support from EU sources so that the territorial share of rural areas in the EU and the number of municipalities in them are taken into account; |
| --- | --- |

48.

| 49. | calls for post-2027 Cohesion Policy to include specific EU-level regional targeting and earmarking for rural areas, with a minimum aid threshold in Partnership Agreements. In the perspective of Rural Proofing and in line with the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle, this should also apply to other policies in the EU budget that have a territorial dimension, including any successor to Next Generation EU; |
| --- | --- |

49.

Monitoring system

| 50. | welcomes the creation of the Rural Observatory for the creation of indicators for monitoring the development of rural areas, considering that the availability of data at the level of at least NUTS3 in all EU countries is essential. Highlights the importance for Member States to provide this data annually in an open data format, available to the public, including the scientific community; |
| --- | --- |

50.

| 51. | draws attention to the urgent need to go beyond the new Territorial Agenda 2030 and the LTVRA in order to put in place a European Rural Agenda that can mobilise specific indicators to verify the use of structural funds in Article 174 regions. Indicators should be established both as basic indicators for the entire territory of rural areas, e.g. in the field of digital infrastructure, and then as specific indicators, taking into account the specific situation in individual territories — with specific data on mountainous regions, islands, rural areas, areas experiencing demographic and industrial decline, etc. These indicators should be defined at sub-regional level (such as NUTS 3 and LAU), where the greatest disparities in development are to be found, and should be used when rural-proofing all EU policies; |
| --- | --- |

51.

| 52. | invites the Commission to include proposals for targets and indicators in its evaluation report on the implementation of the LTVRA. Invites the Commission to propose how to integrate these targets in existing EU monitoring systems (e.g. the European Semester); |
| --- | --- |

52.

| 53. | calls on Member States and regions to cooperate on the creation and application of these indicators for measuring changes in rural areas; |
| --- | --- |

53.

| 54. | realises the possibilities offered by the systematic continuous collection of data, e.g. through satellites, and calls for their appropriate use; |
| --- | --- |

54.

| 55. | is aware that quality of life cannot be assessed only quantitatively; therefore asks for EU support for research projects that will lead to the creation of other, especially qualitative indicators and methods that allow for analysing the state and dynamics of development in rural areas, which will enable a holistic view of this development and the support of the most effective interventions in the further development of the EU’s territory and society. |
| --- | --- |

55.

Brussels, 15 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(1)  COM(2021) 345 final

1

(2)  For example, the 8th Environmental Action Plan, Zero Pollution Action Plan, Biodiversity Strategy to 2030, REPowerEU, Digital Compass 2030, 2030 policy program Path to the Digital Decade

2

Path to the Digital Decade

(3)  COM(2022) 289

3

(4)  https://memportal.cor.europa.eu/Handlers/ViewDoc.ashx?doc=COR-2022-05357-00-00-DECL-TRA-EN.docx

4

(5)  Lutz, W., Goujon, A., Kc, S., Stonawski, M. and Stilianakis, N., Demographic and Human Capital Scenarios for the 21st Century: 2018 assessment for 201 countries, EUR 29113 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2018, ISBN 978-92-79-78024-0 (online), JRC111148.

5

Demographic and Human Capital Scenarios for the 21st Century: 2018 assessment for 201 countries

(6)  See examples of good practice presented at the Innovative Region — Opportunities and Challenges conference, held in Jeseník 2022 as part of the Czech Presidency of the European Council: https://mmr.cz/en/microsites/pres/akce/cz-pres-konference-inovativni-region-prilezitosti.

6

(7)  Economy, efficiency, effectiveness.

7

(8)  COM(2021) 574 final.

8

(9)  https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/european-declaration-digital-rights-and-principles.

9

---

III Preparatory acts

Committee of the Regions

154th CoR Plenary Session, 15.3.2023–16.3.2023

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/19

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on short-term accommodation rental services: balancing the needs of local communities, entrepreneurs and travellers

(2023/C 188/05)

| Rapporteur: | Roberto CIAMBETTI (ECR/IT), President and member of the Veneto Regional Council |
| --- | --- |
| Reference document: | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on data collection and sharing relating to short-term accommodation rental services and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724
  COM(2022) 571 final |

Rapporteur:

Roberto CIAMBETTI (ECR/IT), President and member of the Veneto Regional Council

Reference document:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on data collection and sharing relating to short-term accommodation rental services and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724

COM(2022) 571 final

I.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Recital 1

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (1) | Short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts have existed for many years as a complement to other accommodation services such as hotels, hostels, or bed and breakfasts. The volume of short-term accommodation rental services is increasing significantly across the Union as a result of the growth of the platform economy. While short-term accommodation rental services create many opportunities for guests, hosts and the entire tourism ecosystem, their rapid growth has also triggered concerns and challenges, in particular for local communities and public authorities. One of the main challenges is the lack of reliable information about short-term accommodation rental services, such as the identity of the host, the location where those services are being offered, and their duration, making it difficult for authorities to assess the impact of short-term accommodation rental services and develop and enforce appropriate and proportionate policy responses. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(1)

Short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts have existed for many years as a complement to other accommodation services such as hotels, hostels, or bed and breakfasts. The volume of short-term accommodation rental services is increasing significantly across the Union as a result of the growth of the platform economy. While short-term accommodation rental services create many opportunities for guests, hosts and the entire tourism ecosystem, their rapid growth has also triggered concerns and challenges, in particular for local communities and public authorities. One of the main challenges is the lack of reliable information about short-term accommodation rental services, such as the identity of the host, the location where those services are being offered, and their duration, making it difficult for authorities to assess the impact of short-term accommodation rental services and develop and enforce appropriate and proportionate policy responses.

| (1) | Short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts have existed for many years as a complement to other accommodation services such as hotels, hostels, or bed and breakfasts. The volume of short-term accommodation rental services is increasing significantly across the Union as a result of the growth of the platform economy
  . Some platforms have been acting in the spirit of non-compliance and non-cooperation with laws and rules
  . While short-term accommodation rental services create many opportunities for guests, hosts and the entire tourism ecosystem, their rapid growth has also triggered concerns and challenges, in particular for local communities and public authorities. One of the main challenges is the lack of reliable information about short-term accommodation rental services, such as the identity of the host, the location where those services are being offered, and their duration, making it difficult for authorities to assess the impact of short-term accommodation rental services and develop and enforce appropriate and proportionate policy responses. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts have existed for many years as a complement to other accommodation services such as hotels, hostels, or bed and breakfasts. The volume of short-term accommodation rental services is increasing significantly across the Union as a result of the growth of the platform economy
  . Some platforms have been acting in the spirit of non-compliance and non-cooperation with laws and rules
  . While short-term accommodation rental services create many opportunities for guests, hosts and the entire tourism ecosystem, their rapid growth has also triggered concerns and challenges, in particular for local communities and public authorities. One of the main challenges is the lack of reliable information about short-term accommodation rental services, such as the identity of the host, the location where those services are being offered, and their duration, making it difficult for authorities to assess the impact of short-term accommodation rental services and develop and enforce appropriate and proportionate policy responses.

Amendment 2

Recital 3

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (3) | To that end, harmonised rules on data generation and data sharing for short-term accommodation rental services should be laid down to increase access to and quality of data for public authorities on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, which in turn should enable them to design and implement policies on such services in an effective and proportionate manner. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(3)

To that end, harmonised rules on data generation and data sharing for short-term accommodation rental services should be laid down to increase access to and quality of data for public authorities on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, which in turn should enable them to design and implement policies on such services in an effective and proportionate manner.

| (3) | To that end, harmonised rules on data generation and data sharing for short-term accommodation rental services should be laid down to increase access to and quality of data for public authorities on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, which in turn should enable them to design and implement policies on such services in an effective and proportionate manner.
  This implies maintaining opportunities for platforms while respecting public policy objectives like available and affordable housing and protecting urban centres, especially when economic conditions in Europe are deteriorating. Short-term accommodation rental services via platforms and their impact shall not undermine the high acceptance of tourism in Europe’s regions and cities and degrade the liveability of neighbourhoods. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

To that end, harmonised rules on data generation and data sharing for short-term accommodation rental services should be laid down to increase access to and quality of data for public authorities on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, which in turn should enable them to design and implement policies on such services in an effective and proportionate manner.
  This implies maintaining opportunities for platforms while respecting public policy objectives like available and affordable housing and protecting urban centres, especially when economic conditions in Europe are deteriorating. Short-term accommodation rental services via platforms and their impact shall not undermine the high acceptance of tourism in Europe’s regions and cities and degrade the liveability of neighbourhoods.

Amendment 3

Recital 5

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (5) | This Regulation is not intended to ensure compliance with customs or taxation rules and does not affect Member States’ competences in the area of criminal offences. Accordingly, it does not affect the competence of Member States or of the Union in those fields or any instruments of national or Union law adopted pursuant to such competence for the access, sharing, and use of data in those areas. Therefore, possible future use of personal data processed pursuant to the Regulation for law enforcement or for taxation and customs purposes should be excluded. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(5)

This Regulation is not intended to ensure compliance with customs or taxation rules and does not affect Member States’ competences in the area of criminal offences. Accordingly, it does not affect the competence of Member States or of the Union in those fields or any instruments of national or Union law adopted pursuant to such competence for the access, sharing, and use of data in those areas. Therefore, possible future use of personal data processed pursuant to the Regulation for law enforcement or for taxation and customs purposes should be excluded.

| (5) | This Regulation is not intended to ensure compliance with customs or taxation rules and does not affect Member States’ competences in the area of criminal offences. Accordingly, it does not affect the competence of Member States or of the Union in those fields or any instruments of national or Union law adopted pursuant to such competence for the access, sharing, and use of data in those areas. Therefore, possible future use of personal data processed pursuant to the Regulation for law enforcement or for taxation and customs purposes should be excluded
  . In all areas of legislation and enforcement, the term ‘national’ always includes the regional, and municipal and rural level as well
  . |
| --- | --- |

(5)

This Regulation is not intended to ensure compliance with customs or taxation rules and does not affect Member States’ competences in the area of criminal offences. Accordingly, it does not affect the competence of Member States or of the Union in those fields or any instruments of national or Union law adopted pursuant to such competence for the access, sharing, and use of data in those areas. Therefore, possible future use of personal data processed pursuant to the Regulation for law enforcement or for taxation and customs purposes should be excluded
  . In all areas of legislation and enforcement, the term ‘national’ always includes the regional, and municipal and rural level as well
  .

Amendment 4

Recital 9

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (9) | Registration procedures enable competent authorities to collect information on hosts and units relating to short-term accommodation rental services. The registration number, which is a unique identifier of a unit rented, should ensure that the data collected and shared by platforms can be properly attributed to hosts and units. It should therefore be for competent authorities, where they wish to receive data from providers of online short-term rental platforms, to put in place or maintain registration procedures for hosts and their units, either at national, regional or local level. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(9)

Registration procedures enable competent authorities to collect information on hosts and units relating to short-term accommodation rental services. The registration number, which is a unique identifier of a unit rented, should ensure that the data collected and shared by platforms can be properly attributed to hosts and units. It should therefore be for competent authorities, where they wish to receive data from providers of online short-term rental platforms, to put in place or maintain registration procedures for hosts and their units, either at national, regional or local level.

| (9) | Registration procedures enable competent authorities to collect information on hosts and units relating to short-term accommodation rental services. The registration number, which is a unique identifier of a unit rented, should ensure that the data collected and shared by platforms can be properly attributed to hosts and units. It should therefore be for competent authorities, where they wish to receive data from providers of online short-term rental platforms, to put in place or maintain registration procedures for hosts and their units, either at national, regional or local level.
  The registration procedure under this regulation is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

Registration procedures enable competent authorities to collect information on hosts and units relating to short-term accommodation rental services. The registration number, which is a unique identifier of a unit rented, should ensure that the data collected and shared by platforms can be properly attributed to hosts and units. It should therefore be for competent authorities, where they wish to receive data from providers of online short-term rental platforms, to put in place or maintain registration procedures for hosts and their units, either at national, regional or local level.
  The registration procedure under this regulation is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics.

Reason

Reporting obligations laid down on hosts and platforms based on other laws or rules — being in in line with Union law — should not be touched by this regulation.

Amendment 5

Recital 12

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (12) | It should be possible for Member States to require hosts to submit additional information and documentation attesting compliance with requirements established by national law, such as health and safety and consumer protection requirements. Member States may, in particular, in order to ensure equal access and inclusion, require hosts to provide information concerning the accessibility for persons with disabilities of the units offered for short-term accommodation rental services in relation to national or local accessibility requirements. However, any requirements should comply with the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, meaning that they must be appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate regulatory objective, and with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2006/123/EC. Furthermore, Member States should be able to impose information requirements on hosts that comply with Union law concerning issues not covered by this Regulation, such as non-remunerated stays including where hosting arrangements concern vulnerable individuals, such as refugees or beneficiaries of temporary protection. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(12)

It should be possible for Member States to require hosts to submit additional information and documentation attesting compliance with requirements established by national law, such as health and safety and consumer protection requirements. Member States may, in particular, in order to ensure equal access and inclusion, require hosts to provide information concerning the accessibility for persons with disabilities of the units offered for short-term accommodation rental services in relation to national or local accessibility requirements. However, any requirements should comply with the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, meaning that they must be appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate regulatory objective, and with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2006/123/EC. Furthermore, Member States should be able to impose information requirements on hosts that comply with Union law concerning issues not covered by this Regulation, such as non-remunerated stays including where hosting arrangements concern vulnerable individuals, such as refugees or beneficiaries of temporary protection.

| (12) | It should be possible for Member States to require hosts to submit additional information and documentation attesting compliance with requirements established by national law, such as
  tax,
  health and safety and consumer protection requirements. Member States may, in particular, in order to ensure equal access and inclusion, require hosts to provide information concerning the accessibility for persons with disabilities of the units offered for short-term accommodation rental services in relation to national or local accessibility requirements. However, any requirements should comply with the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, meaning that they must be appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate regulatory objective, and with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2006/123/EC. Furthermore, Member States should be able to impose information requirements on hosts that comply with Union law concerning issues not covered by this Regulation, such as non-remunerated stays including where hosting arrangements concern vulnerable individuals, such as refugees or beneficiaries of temporary protection. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

It should be possible for Member States to require hosts to submit additional information and documentation attesting compliance with requirements established by national law, such as
  tax,
  health and safety and consumer protection requirements. Member States may, in particular, in order to ensure equal access and inclusion, require hosts to provide information concerning the accessibility for persons with disabilities of the units offered for short-term accommodation rental services in relation to national or local accessibility requirements. However, any requirements should comply with the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, meaning that they must be appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate regulatory objective, and with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2006/123/EC. Furthermore, Member States should be able to impose information requirements on hosts that comply with Union law concerning issues not covered by this Regulation, such as non-remunerated stays including where hosting arrangements concern vulnerable individuals, such as refugees or beneficiaries of temporary protection.

Amendment 6

Recital 16

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (16) | Article 31 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 lays down certain due diligence requirements for providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders. Those requirements apply to online short-term rental platforms with respect to short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts that qualify as traders. However, the short-term accommodation rental sector is characterised by the fact that hosts are often private individuals offering short-term accommodation rental services on an occasional peer-to-peer basis, who do not necessarily meet the conditions to be categorised as ‘traders’ under Union law. Therefore, in line with the concept and objective of ‘compliance by design’ under Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, and in order to enable competent authorities to verify whether applicable registration obligations are complied with, it is appropriate to apply specific conditions for compliance by design in the context of short-term accommodation rental services, including those offered by hosts that do not qualify as traders pursuant to Union law. Online short-term rental platforms should ensure that services are not offered where no registration number has been provided, in cases where a host declares that such a registration number applies. This should
  not amount to an obligation for
  online short-term rental platforms
  to generally monitor the services offered by hosts through their platform, nor
  to a general fact-finding obligation aimed at assessing the accuracy of the registration number prior to the publication of the offer of short-term accommodation rental services. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(16)

Article 31 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 lays down certain due diligence requirements for providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders. Those requirements apply to online short-term rental platforms with respect to short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts that qualify as traders. However, the short-term accommodation rental sector is characterised by the fact that hosts are often private individuals offering short-term accommodation rental services on an occasional peer-to-peer basis, who do not necessarily meet the conditions to be categorised as ‘traders’ under Union law. Therefore, in line with the concept and objective of ‘compliance by design’ under Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, and in order to enable competent authorities to verify whether applicable registration obligations are complied with, it is appropriate to apply specific conditions for compliance by design in the context of short-term accommodation rental services, including those offered by hosts that do not qualify as traders pursuant to Union law. Online short-term rental platforms should ensure that services are not offered where no registration number has been provided, in cases where a host declares that such a registration number applies. This should
  not amount to an obligation for
  online short-term rental platforms
  to generally monitor the services offered by hosts through their platform, nor
  to a general fact-finding obligation aimed at assessing the accuracy of the registration number prior to the publication of the offer of short-term accommodation rental services.

| (16) | Article 31 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 lays down certain due diligence requirements for providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders. Those requirements apply to online short-term rental platforms with respect to short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts that qualify as traders. However, the short-term accommodation rental sector is characterised by the fact that hosts are often private individuals offering short-term accommodation rental services on an occasional peer-to-peer basis, who do not necessarily meet the conditions to be categorised as ‘traders’ under Union law. Therefore, in line with the concept and objective of ‘compliance by design’ under Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, and in order to enable competent authorities to verify whether applicable registration obligations are complied with, it is appropriate to apply specific conditions for compliance by design in the context of short-term accommodation rental services, including those offered by hosts that do not qualify as traders pursuant to Union law. Online short-term rental platforms should ensure that services are not offered where no registration number has been provided, in cases where a host declares that such a registration number applies. This should
  oblige
  online short-term rental platforms to a general fact-finding obligation aimed at assessing the accuracy of the registration number prior to the publication of the offer of short-term accommodation rental services. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

Article 31 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 lays down certain due diligence requirements for providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders. Those requirements apply to online short-term rental platforms with respect to short-term accommodation rental services offered by hosts that qualify as traders. However, the short-term accommodation rental sector is characterised by the fact that hosts are often private individuals offering short-term accommodation rental services on an occasional peer-to-peer basis, who do not necessarily meet the conditions to be categorised as ‘traders’ under Union law. Therefore, in line with the concept and objective of ‘compliance by design’ under Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, and in order to enable competent authorities to verify whether applicable registration obligations are complied with, it is appropriate to apply specific conditions for compliance by design in the context of short-term accommodation rental services, including those offered by hosts that do not qualify as traders pursuant to Union law. Online short-term rental platforms should ensure that services are not offered where no registration number has been provided, in cases where a host declares that such a registration number applies. This should
  oblige
  online short-term rental platforms to a general fact-finding obligation aimed at assessing the accuracy of the registration number prior to the publication of the offer of short-term accommodation rental services.

Reason

Platforms should be obliged to check the accuracy of the registration number.

Amendment 7

Recital 18

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (18) | Competent authorities that wish to receive from online short-term rental platforms information about hosts’ activities and have registration systems in place should be able to obtain activity data from online platforms on a regular basis. The type of data that may be obtained should be fully harmonised and include information on the number of nights for which a registered unit has been rented, the number of guests that
  stayed in
  the unit per night, the registration number
  and
  the URL of the listing of the unit, which is needed in order to facilitate the identification of the host and the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services in cases where the registration number is missing or incorrect. Only online platforms that have effectively facilitated the conclusion of direct transactions between hosts and guests are covered by the obligation to provide the activity data, the registration number and the URL of the listing of the unit, as only those platforms are in a position to collect data, such as on the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests that stayed in the unit per night. Member States should not maintain or introduce measures that require platforms to report on short-term accommodation rental service providers and their activities diverging from those laid down in this Regulation, unless otherwise provided under Union law. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(18)

Competent authorities that wish to receive from online short-term rental platforms information about hosts’ activities and have registration systems in place should be able to obtain activity data from online platforms on a regular basis. The type of data that may be obtained should be fully harmonised and include information on the number of nights for which a registered unit has been rented, the number of guests that
  stayed in
  the unit per night, the registration number
  and
  the URL of the listing of the unit, which is needed in order to facilitate the identification of the host and the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services in cases where the registration number is missing or incorrect. Only online platforms that have effectively facilitated the conclusion of direct transactions between hosts and guests are covered by the obligation to provide the activity data, the registration number and the URL of the listing of the unit, as only those platforms are in a position to collect data, such as on the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests that stayed in the unit per night. Member States should not maintain or introduce measures that require platforms to report on short-term accommodation rental service providers and their activities diverging from those laid down in this Regulation, unless otherwise provided under Union law.

| (18) | Competent authorities that wish to receive from online short-term rental platforms information about hosts’ activities and have registration systems in place should be able to obtain activity data from online platforms on a regular basis. The type of data that may be obtained should be fully harmonised and include information on the number of nights for which a registered unit has been rented, the number of guests that the unit
  was rented for
  per night, the registration number and the URL of the listing of the unit
  . In case the registration number is missing or incorrect, the data should also include the address
  of the unit
  including the exact flat number
  , which is needed in order to
  enable
  the identification of the host and the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services. Only online platforms that have effectively facilitated the conclusion of direct transactions between hosts and guests are covered by the obligation to provide the activity data, the registration number and the URL of the listing of the unit, as only those platforms are in a position to collect data, such as on the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests that stayed in the unit per night. Member States should not maintain or introduce measures that require platforms to report on short-term accommodation rental service providers and their activities diverging from those laid down in this Regulation, unless otherwise provided under Union law. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

Competent authorities that wish to receive from online short-term rental platforms information about hosts’ activities and have registration systems in place should be able to obtain activity data from online platforms on a regular basis. The type of data that may be obtained should be fully harmonised and include information on the number of nights for which a registered unit has been rented, the number of guests that the unit
  was rented for
  per night, the registration number and the URL of the listing of the unit
  . In case the registration number is missing or incorrect, the data should also include the address
  of the unit
  including the exact flat number
  , which is needed in order to
  enable
  the identification of the host and the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services. Only online platforms that have effectively facilitated the conclusion of direct transactions between hosts and guests are covered by the obligation to provide the activity data, the registration number and the URL of the listing of the unit, as only those platforms are in a position to collect data, such as on the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests that stayed in the unit per night. Member States should not maintain or introduce measures that require platforms to report on short-term accommodation rental service providers and their activities diverging from those laid down in this Regulation, unless otherwise provided under Union law.

Reason

In cases where the registration number is missing or incorrect, the URL does not help in order to identify the host and the unit. The exact address including the flat number is needed.

Amendment 8

Recital 23

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (23) | The Single Digital Entry Points should facilitate the ability of online short-term rental platforms to
  randomly
  check the validity of a registration number or the accuracy of self-declarations, in order to reduce errors and inconsistencies as regards data transmission and to ease their compliance burden. The Single Digital Entry Point should, while not requiring the actual storage of the registration number, allow the performance of random checks either automatically by means of Application Programming Interface allowing the verification of a registration number against the given entries in the registry of the individual registration procedures in a Member State connected to the Single Digital Entry Point or manually, for example, by entering a registration number in an online interface and receiving a confirmation on its validity. Online short-term rental platforms should be free to perform additional checks through the Single Digital Entry Point. Member States should continue enforcing registration obligations using the tools already available to them. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(23)

The Single Digital Entry Points should facilitate the ability of online short-term rental platforms to
  randomly
  check the validity of a registration number or the accuracy of self-declarations, in order to reduce errors and inconsistencies as regards data transmission and to ease their compliance burden. The Single Digital Entry Point should, while not requiring the actual storage of the registration number, allow the performance of random checks either automatically by means of Application Programming Interface allowing the verification of a registration number against the given entries in the registry of the individual registration procedures in a Member State connected to the Single Digital Entry Point or manually, for example, by entering a registration number in an online interface and receiving a confirmation on its validity. Online short-term rental platforms should be free to perform additional checks through the Single Digital Entry Point. Member States should continue enforcing registration obligations using the tools already available to them.

| (23) | The Single Digital Entry Points should facilitate the ability of online short-term rental platforms to check the validity of a registration number or the accuracy of self-declarations, in order to reduce errors and inconsistencies as regards data transmission and to ease their compliance burden. The Single Digital Entry Point should, while not requiring the actual storage of the registration number, allow the performance of random checks either automatically by means of Application Programming Interface allowing the verification of a registration number against the given entries in the registry of the individual registration procedures in a Member State connected to the Single Digital Entry Point or manually, for example, by entering a registration number in an online interface and receiving a confirmation on its validity. Online short-term rental platforms should be free to perform additional checks through the Single Digital Entry Point. Member States should continue enforcing registration obligations using the tools already available to them. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

The Single Digital Entry Points should facilitate the ability of online short-term rental platforms to check the validity of a registration number or the accuracy of self-declarations, in order to reduce errors and inconsistencies as regards data transmission and to ease their compliance burden. The Single Digital Entry Point should, while not requiring the actual storage of the registration number, allow the performance of random checks either automatically by means of Application Programming Interface allowing the verification of a registration number against the given entries in the registry of the individual registration procedures in a Member State connected to the Single Digital Entry Point or manually, for example, by entering a registration number in an online interface and receiving a confirmation on its validity. Online short-term rental platforms should be free to perform additional checks through the Single Digital Entry Point. Member States should continue enforcing registration obligations using the tools already available to them.

Reason

Random checks are not enough. The registration numbers have a given format; they can be checked automatically, therefore reducing burdens.

Amendment 9

Recital 26

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (26) | A proportionate, limited and predictable framework at Union level is necessary for the transparent sharing of activity data and registration numbers, in compliance with the requirements of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (31). To achieve this, Member States should list the competent authorities at national, regional and local level that have established or maintain a registration procedure to request activity data for units located on their territory. Such data should only be processed for purposes of monitoring compliance with registration procedures or implementing rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services. In the latter case, such processing should only be permitted if the rules in question are non-discriminatory, proportionate, and comply with Union law, including the rules on free movement of services, freedom of establishment, and the rules in Directive 2006/123. For purposes of complying with Union law on data protection, any rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services should set out the purpose of processing the data in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 2016/679. Activity data, not including personal data, is also essential for authorities that are developing such rules as part of efforts to promote a balanced tourism ecosystem, including effective and proportionate rules for the access to, and the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services. A retention period of maximum 1 year should allow competent authorities to ensure compliance with rules and regulations applicable to hosts or concerning units rented and for policy development. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(26)

A proportionate, limited and predictable framework at Union level is necessary for the transparent sharing of activity data and registration numbers, in compliance with the requirements of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (31). To achieve this, Member States should list the competent authorities at national, regional and local level that have established or maintain a registration procedure to request activity data for units located on their territory. Such data should only be processed for purposes of monitoring compliance with registration procedures or implementing rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services. In the latter case, such processing should only be permitted if the rules in question are non-discriminatory, proportionate, and comply with Union law, including the rules on free movement of services, freedom of establishment, and the rules in Directive 2006/123. For purposes of complying with Union law on data protection, any rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services should set out the purpose of processing the data in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 2016/679. Activity data, not including personal data, is also essential for authorities that are developing such rules as part of efforts to promote a balanced tourism ecosystem, including effective and proportionate rules for the access to, and the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services. A retention period of maximum 1 year should allow competent authorities to ensure compliance with rules and regulations applicable to hosts or concerning units rented and for policy development.

| (26) | A proportionate, limited and predictable framework at Union level is necessary for the transparent sharing of activity data and registration numbers, in compliance with the requirements of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (31). To achieve this, Member States should list the competent authorities at national, regional and local level that have established or maintain a registration procedure to request activity data for units located on their territory. Such data should only be processed for purposes of monitoring compliance with registration procedures or implementing rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services. In the latter case, such processing should only be permitted if the rules in question are non-discriminatory, proportionate, and comply with Union law, including the rules on free movement of services, freedom of establishment, and the rules in Directive 2006/123/EC.
  A violation of these provisions can only be assumed if this violation has been conclusively established before a court.
  For purposes of complying with Union law on data protection, any rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services should set out the purpose of processing the data in accordance with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Activity data, not including personal data, is also essential for authorities that are developing such rules as part of efforts to promote a balanced tourism ecosystem, including effective and proportionate rules for the access to, and the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services. A retention period of maximum 1 year should allow competent authorities to ensure compliance with rules and regulations applicable to hosts or concerning units rented and for policy development. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

A proportionate, limited and predictable framework at Union level is necessary for the transparent sharing of activity data and registration numbers, in compliance with the requirements of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (31). To achieve this, Member States should list the competent authorities at national, regional and local level that have established or maintain a registration procedure to request activity data for units located on their territory. Such data should only be processed for purposes of monitoring compliance with registration procedures or implementing rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services. In the latter case, such processing should only be permitted if the rules in question are non-discriminatory, proportionate, and comply with Union law, including the rules on free movement of services, freedom of establishment, and the rules in Directive 2006/123/EC.
  A violation of these provisions can only be assumed if this violation has been conclusively established before a court.
  For purposes of complying with Union law on data protection, any rules concerning access to and provision of short-term accommodation rental services should set out the purpose of processing the data in accordance with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Activity data, not including personal data, is also essential for authorities that are developing such rules as part of efforts to promote a balanced tourism ecosystem, including effective and proportionate rules for the access to, and the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services. A retention period of maximum 1 year should allow competent authorities to ensure compliance with rules and regulations applicable to hosts or concerning units rented and for policy development.

Amendment 10

Recital 34

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (34) | The Commission should periodically evaluate this Regulation and monitor its effects on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered through online short-term rental platforms in the Union. That evaluation should include any effects on providers of online short-term rental platforms and any effects of the increased availability
  of data on the content and proportionality of national
  ,
  regional
  and
  local rules relating to the provision
  of
  short-term accommodation rental services
  . In order to obtain a broad view of developments in the sector, the evaluation should take into account the experiences of Member States and relevant stakeholders. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(34)

The Commission should periodically evaluate this Regulation and monitor its effects on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered through online short-term rental platforms in the Union. That evaluation should include any effects on providers of online short-term rental platforms and any effects of the increased availability
  of data on the content and proportionality of national
  ,
  regional
  and
  local rules relating to the provision
  of
  short-term accommodation rental services
  . In order to obtain a broad view of developments in the sector, the evaluation should take into account the experiences of Member States and relevant stakeholders.

| (34) | The Commission should periodically evaluate this Regulation and monitor its effects on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered through online short-term rental platforms in the Union. That evaluation should include any effects on providers of online short-term rental platforms and any effects of the increased availability,
  usability
  and
  quality
  of
  data
  . In order to obtain a broad view of developments in the sector, the evaluation should take into account the experiences of Member States
  competent authorities
  and relevant stakeholders. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

The Commission should periodically evaluate this Regulation and monitor its effects on the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered through online short-term rental platforms in the Union. That evaluation should include any effects on providers of online short-term rental platforms and any effects of the increased availability,
  usability
  and
  quality
  of
  data
  . In order to obtain a broad view of developments in the sector, the evaluation should take into account the experiences of Member States
  competent authorities
  and relevant stakeholders.

Reason

The proportionality of rules is guaranteed through the notification procedure of national, regional and local rules in line with the Services Directive.

Amendment 11

Article 2(2) and (3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   This Regulation is without prejudice to: | 2.   This Regulation is without prejudice to: |
| (a) | national, regional or local rules regulating access to, or the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services by hosts, unless otherwise specifically provided for under this Regulation; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   This Regulation is without prejudice to:

2.   This Regulation is without prejudice to:

(a)

national, regional or local rules regulating access to, or the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services by hosts, unless otherwise specifically provided for under this Regulation;

| (a) | national, regional or local rules regulating access to, or the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services by hosts, unless otherwise specifically provided for under this Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

national, regional or local rules regulating access to, or the provision of, short-term accommodation rental services by hosts, unless otherwise specifically provided for under this Regulation;

| (b) | national, regional or local rules regulating the development or use of land, town and country planning
  or
  building standards; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

national, regional or local rules regulating the development or use of land, town and country planning
  or
  building standards;

or

| (b) | national, regional or local rules regulating the development or use of land, town and country planning, building standards
  or residential law
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

national, regional or local rules regulating the development or use of land, town and country planning, building standards
  or residential law
  ;

or residential law

| (c) | Union or national law regulating the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Union or national law regulating the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties;

| (c) | Union or national law regulating the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Union or national law regulating the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties;

| (d) | Union or national law regulating the administration, collection, enforcement and recovery of taxes, customs and other duties. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Union or national law regulating the administration, collection, enforcement and recovery of taxes, customs and other duties.

| (d) | Union or national law regulating the administration, collection, enforcement and recovery of taxes, customs and other duties. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Union or national law regulating the administration, collection, enforcement and recovery of taxes, customs and other duties.

3.   This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by other Union legal acts regulating other aspects of the provision of services by online short-term rental platforms and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, in particular:

3.   This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by other Union legal acts regulating other aspects of the provision of services by online short-term rental platforms and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, in particular:

| (a) | Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37); |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37);

37

| (b) | Regulation (EU) 2022/2065; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;

| (c) | Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council (38); |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council (38);

38

| (d) | Directive 2000/31/EC; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Directive 2000/31/EC;

| (e) | Directive 2006/123/EC; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

Directive 2006/123/EC;

| (f) | Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council (39); |
| --- | --- |

(f)

Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council (39);

39

| (g) | Council Directive (EU) 2010/24/EU (40);
  and |
| --- | --- |

(g)

Council Directive (EU) 2010/24/EU (40);
  and

40

and

| (h) | Council Directive (EU) 2011/16/EU (41)
  . |
| --- | --- |

(h)

Council Directive (EU) 2011/16/EU (41)
  .

41

.

| (a) | Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37); |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (37);

37

| (b) | Regulation (EU) 2022/2065; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;

| (c) | Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council (38); |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council (38);

38

| (d) | Directive 2000/31/EC; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Directive 2000/31/EC;

| (e) | Directive 2006/123/EC; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

Directive 2006/123/EC;

| (f) | Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council (39); |
| --- | --- |

(f)

Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council (39);

39

| (g) | Council Directive 2010/24/EU (40); |
| --- | --- |

(g)

Council Directive 2010/24/EU (40);

40

| (h) | Council Directive 2011/16/EU (41)
  ;

  and |
| --- | --- |

(h)

Council Directive 2011/16/EU (41)
  ;

  and

41

;

and

| (i) | Regulation (EU) No 692/2011
  . |
| --- | --- |

(i)

(i)

Regulation (EU) No 692/2011
  .

Regulation (EU) No 692/2011

Reason

Reason

Laws regulating housing are missing here, e.g. Tenancy Law, Social Tenancy Law as well as an important EU Regulation with detailed rules on statistics.

Amendment 12

Amendment 12

Article 3, points (2), (10) and (11)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (2) | ‘host’ means a natural or legal person that provides, or intends to provide, on a professional or non-professional basis, a short-term accommodation rental service against remuneration through an online short-term rental platform; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(2)

‘host’ means a natural or legal person that provides, or intends to provide, on a professional or non-professional basis, a short-term accommodation rental service against remuneration through an online short-term rental platform;

| (2) | ‘host’ means a natural or legal person that provides, or intends to provide, on a professional or non-professional,
  permanent or temporary
  basis,
  and regardless of whether such rental service is provided directly or through a tourist management or marketing company or similar,
  a short-term accommodation rental service against remuneration through an online short-term rental platform; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

‘host’ means a natural or legal person that provides, or intends to provide, on a professional or non-professional,
  permanent or temporary
  basis,
  and regardless of whether such rental service is provided directly or through a tourist management or marketing company or similar,
  a short-term accommodation rental service against remuneration through an online short-term rental platform;

permanent or temporary

and regardless of whether such rental service is provided directly or through a tourist management or marketing company or similar,

| [...] | |
| --- | --- |

[...]

| [...] | |
| --- | --- |

[...]

| (10) | ‘competent authority’ means a national, regional or local authority of a Member State that is competent to manage and enforce registration procedures, and/or to collect data on short-term accommodation rental services; |
| --- | --- |

(10)

‘competent authority’ means a national, regional or local authority of a Member State that is competent to manage and enforce registration procedures, and/or to collect data on short-term accommodation rental services;

| (10) | ‘competent authority’ means a national, regional or local authority of a Member State that is competent to manage and enforce registration procedures, and/or to collect data on short-term accommodation rental services
  and/or authorities responsible for verifying compliance with national provisions regarding ‘units’ and ‘hosts’ e.g. country planning or building standards
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(10)

‘competent authority’ means a national, regional or local authority of a Member State that is competent to manage and enforce registration procedures, and/or to collect data on short-term accommodation rental services
  and/or authorities responsible for verifying compliance with national provisions regarding ‘units’ and ‘hosts’ e.g. country planning or building standards
  ;

and/or authorities responsible for verifying compliance with national provisions regarding ‘units’ and ‘hosts’ e.g. country planning or building standards

| (11) | ‘activity data’ means the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests that stayed in the unit
  per night
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(11)

‘activity data’ means the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests that stayed in the unit
  per night
  ;

per night

| (11) | ‘activity data’ means the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests
  per night
  that stayed in the unit; |
| --- | --- |

(11)

‘activity data’ means the number of nights for which a unit is rented and the number of guests
  per night
  that stayed in the unit;

per night

Reason

Reason

Under Article 4(1) of Directive 2006/123/EC the concept of ‘service’ means any self-employed economic activity, normally provided for remuneration. Short- term rental services are ‘services’ within the meaning of the Services Directive and are therefore covered by its scope.

Amendment 13

Amendment 13

Article 4(2) and (5) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   Member States shall ensure that: | 2.   Member States shall ensure that: |
| (a) | registration procedures operate on the basis of declarations made by hosts; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   Member States shall ensure that:

2.   Member States shall ensure that:

(a)

registration procedures operate on the basis of declarations made by hosts;

| (a) | registration procedures operate on the basis of declarations made by hosts; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

registration procedures operate on the basis of declarations made by hosts;

| (b) | registration procedures allow for the automatic and immediate issue of a registration number for a specific unit upon the submission by the host of the information referred to in Article 5(1) and, where appropriate, any supporting documentation required pursuant to Article 5(2); |
| --- | --- |

(b)

registration procedures allow for the automatic and immediate issue of a registration number for a specific unit upon the submission by the host of the information referred to in Article 5(1) and, where appropriate, any supporting documentation required pursuant to Article 5(2);

| (b) | registration procedures allow for the automatic and immediate issue of a registration number for a specific unit upon the submission by the host of the information referred to in Article 5(1) and, where appropriate, any supporting documentation required pursuant to Article 5(2); |
| --- | --- |

(b)

registration procedures allow for the automatic and immediate issue of a registration number for a specific unit upon the submission by the host of the information referred to in Article 5(1) and, where appropriate, any supporting documentation required pursuant to Article 5(2);

| (c) | a unit is not subject to more than one registration procedure; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

a unit is not subject to more than one registration procedure;

| (c) | a unit is not subject to more than one registration procedure
  in the meaning of this regulation. This is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations in compliance with Union law, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics
  . |
| --- | --- |

(c)

a unit is not subject to more than one registration procedure
  in the meaning of this regulation. This is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations in compliance with Union law, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics
  .

in the meaning of this regulation. This is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations in compliance with Union law, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics

| (d) | technical means are in place to allow for information and documentation to be updated by a host; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

technical means are in place to allow for information and documentation to be updated by a host;

| (d) | technical means are in place to allow for information and documentation to be updated by a host; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

technical means are in place to allow for information and documentation to be updated by a host;

| (e) | technical means are in place to assess the validity of registration numbers; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

technical means are in place to assess the validity of registration numbers;

| (e) | technical means are in place to assess the validity of registration numbers
  , for the purpose of which a common structure of the registration numbers shall be established, as provided for in Article 11
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

technical means are in place to assess the validity of registration numbers
  , for the purpose of which a common structure of the registration numbers shall be established, as provided for in Article 11
  ;

, for the purpose of which a common structure of the registration numbers shall be established, as provided for in Article 11

| (f) | technical means are in place to allow a host to remove a unit from the registry referred to in paragraph 3; |
| --- | --- |

(f)

technical means are in place to allow a host to remove a unit from the registry referred to in paragraph 3;

| (f) | technical means are in place to allow a host to remove a unit from the registry referred to in paragraph 3; |
| --- | --- |

(f)

technical means are in place to allow a host to remove a unit from the registry referred to in paragraph 3;

| (g) | hosts are required, when offering their short-term accommodation rental services via an online short-term rental platform, to declare whether the unit offered is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies and, if so, to provide the registration number. |
| --- | --- |

(g)

hosts are required, when offering their short-term accommodation rental services via an online short-term rental platform, to declare whether the unit offered is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies and, if so, to provide the registration number.

| (g) | hosts are required, when offering their short-term accommodation rental services via an online short-term rental platform, to declare whether the unit offered is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies and, if so, to provide the registration number. |
| --- | --- |

(g)

hosts are required, when offering their short-term accommodation rental services via an online short-term rental platform, to declare whether the unit offered is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies and, if so, to provide the registration number.

[...]

[...]

5.
     
  Where an authorisation scheme applies (list in Art. 13.1 c), the issued registration number must not be used to offer a unit on an online rental platform until the authorisation procedure is finished and the host has been authorised by the competent authority to offer short term rental.

Amendment 14

Amendment 14

Article 5(1) and (2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Information to be provided by hosts | Information to be provided by hosts |
| 1.   When registering pursuant to a registration procedure referred to in Article 4, a host shall submit the following information by way of declaration: | 1.   When registering pursuant to a registration procedure referred to in Article 4, a host shall submit the following information by way of declaration: |
| (a) | for each unit: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Information to be provided by hosts

Information to be provided by hosts

1.   When registering pursuant to a registration procedure referred to in Article 4, a host shall submit the following information by way of declaration:

1.   When registering pursuant to a registration procedure referred to in Article 4, a host shall submit the following information by way of declaration:

(a)

for each unit:

| (a) | for each unit: |
| --- | --- |

(a)

for each unit:

| | (1) | the address of the unit; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

the address of the unit;

| (2) | the type of unit; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

the type of unit;

| (3) | whether the unit is offered as a part or whole of the host’s primary or secondary residence, or for other purposes; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

whether the unit is offered as a part or whole of the host’s primary or secondary residence, or for other purposes;

| (4) | the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate;

| | (1) | the address of the unit; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

the address of the unit;

| (2) | the type of unit; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

the type of unit;

| (3) | whether the unit is offered as a part or whole of the host’s primary or secondary residence, or for other purposes; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

whether the unit is offered as a part or whole of the host’s primary or secondary residence, or for other purposes;

| (4) | the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate;

| (
  5) | whether the unit is subject to, and if so, whether the host has obtained an authorisation to offer short-term rental accommodation services from the relevant authorities, where such authorisation requirement is in line with Union law; |
| --- | --- |

(
  5)

5)

whether the unit is subject to, and if so, whether the host has obtained an authorisation to offer short-term rental accommodation services from the relevant authorities, where such authorisation requirement is in line with Union law;

whether the unit is subject to, and if so, whether the host has obtained an authorisation to offer short-term rental accommodation services from the relevant authorities, where such authorisation requirement is in line with Union law;

| (b) | where the hosts are natural persons: |
| --- | --- |

(b)

where the hosts are natural persons:

| (b) | where the hosts are natural persons: |
| --- | --- |

(b)

where the hosts are natural persons:

| | (1) | their name; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

their name;

| (2) | a national identification number or, if not available, other information allowing the identification of the person; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

a national identification number or, if not available, other information allowing the identification of the person;

| (3) | their address; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

their address;

| (4) | their contact telephone number; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

their contact telephone number;

| (5) | the electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication; |
| --- | --- |

(5)

the electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication;

| | (1) | their name; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

their name;

| (2) | a national identification number or, if not available, other information allowing the identification of the person; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

a national identification number or, if not available, other information allowing the identification of the person;

| (3) | their address; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

their address;

| (4) | their contact telephone number; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

their contact telephone number;

| (5) | the electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication; |
| --- | --- |

(5)

the electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication;

| (c) | where the hosts are legal persons: |
| --- | --- |

(c)

where the hosts are legal persons:

| (c) | where the hosts are legal persons: |
| --- | --- |

(c)

where the hosts are legal persons:

| | (1) | their name; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

their name;

| (2) | the national business registration number; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

the national business registration number;

| (3) | the name of all its legal representatives; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

the name of all its legal representatives;

| (4) | their registered address; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

their registered address;

| (5) | a contact telephone number, of a representative of that legal person; |
| --- | --- |

(5)

a contact telephone number, of a representative of that legal person;

| (6) | an electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

an electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication.

| | (1) | their name; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

their name;

| (2) | the national business registration number; |
| --- | --- |

(2)

the national business registration number;

| (3) | the name of all its legal representatives; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

the name of all its legal representatives;

| (4) | their registered address; |
| --- | --- |

(4)

their registered address;

| (5) | a contact telephone number, of a representative of that legal person; |
| --- | --- |

(5)

a contact telephone number, of a representative of that legal person;

| (6) | an electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

an electronic mail address that the competent authority can use for written communication.

2.   Member States may require that the information submitted pursuant to paragraph 1 is accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation.

2.   Member States may require that the information submitted pursuant
  to paragraph points 1
  to
  4 of subparagraph (a) and in subparagraphs (b) and (c) of
  paragraph 1 is accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation
  . With respect to the information referred to in point 5 of subparagraph (a) of paragraph 1, where the host declares that the unit is subject to authorisation, or where the other information referred to in paragraph 1 allows an automatic determination that an authorisation requirement applies, Member States may request a copy of, or reference to, the authorisation
  .

Reason

Reason

It should be illegal to place an offer before the authorization is completed. Otherwise the mere purpose of authorisation schemes would be undermined. In areas where an authorisation scheme is in place a copy of or reference to the authorisation may be requested.

Amendment 15

Amendment 15

Article 6(5) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | 5.
     
  Where a
  competent
  authority, after verification pursuant to paragraph
  1
  , finds that applicable rules of the Member State concerning the access to an provision of short-term accommodation stand against the offering of short term accommodation in a specific unit, it shall have the power to suspend the validity of the affected registration numbers and to issue an order requesting online short-term rental platforms to remove or disable access to any listing relating to the unit or units in question without undue delay
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

5.
     
  Where a
  competent
  authority, after verification pursuant to paragraph
  1
  , finds that applicable rules of the Member State concerning the access to an provision of short-term accommodation stand against the offering of short term accommodation in a specific unit, it shall have the power to suspend the validity of the affected registration numbers and to issue an order requesting online short-term rental platforms to remove or disable access to any listing relating to the unit or units in question without undue delay
  .

Reason

Reason

Measures should also be possible in cases where violations against national regulations are identified.

Amendment 16

Amendment 16

Article 7

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Compliance by design | Compliance by design |
| 1.   Online short-term rental platforms shall: | 1.   Online short-term rental platforms shall: |
| (a) | design
  and
  organise their online interface in a way that
  requires hosts to self-declare whether
  the unit
  offered for short-term accommodation rental services
  is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Compliance by design

Compliance by design

1.   Online short-term rental platforms shall:

1.   Online short-term rental platforms shall:

(a)

design
  and
  organise their online interface in a way that
  requires hosts to self-declare whether
  the unit
  offered for short-term accommodation rental services
  is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies;

and

requires hosts to self-declare whether

offered for short-term accommodation rental services

| (a) | design, organise
  and constantly update
  their online interface in a way that
  entering the registration number is obligatory in cases where
  the
  address of a specific
  unit is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies
  (list in Article 13)
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

design, organise
  and constantly update
  their online interface in a way that
  entering the registration number is obligatory in cases where
  the
  address of a specific
  unit is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies
  (list in Article 13)
  ;

and constantly update

entering the registration number is obligatory in cases where

address of a specific

(list in Article 13)

| (b) | where the host declares that the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies, design and organise their online interface in a way that enables hosts to let users identify the unit through a registration number, and to ensure that hosts have provided a registration number prior to allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services with respect to that unit; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

where the host declares that the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies, design and organise their online interface in a way that enables hosts to let users identify the unit through a registration number, and to ensure that hosts have provided a registration number prior to allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services with respect to that unit;

| (b) | where the host declares that the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies, design and organise their online interface in a way that
  makes it mandatory to
  hosts to let users identify the unit through a registration number, and to ensure that hosts have provided a registration number prior to allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services with respect to that unit; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

where the host declares that the unit offered for short-term accommodation rental services is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or applies, design and organise their online interface in a way that
  makes it mandatory to
  hosts to let users identify the unit through a registration number, and to ensure that hosts have provided a registration number prior to allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services with respect to that unit;

makes it mandatory to

| (c) | make reasonable efforts to randomly check
  the declaration
  of the
  hosts
  concerning the existence or not of a registration procedure, taking into account the list made available pursuant to Article 13(1), point (a), and, where such a procedure exists, the validity of the registration number provided by the host, including through the use of the functionalities offered by the Single Digital Entry Points referred to in Article 10(2), point (b), after allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services by the host. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

make reasonable efforts to randomly check
  the declaration
  of the
  hosts
  concerning the existence or not of a registration procedure, taking into account the list made available pursuant to Article 13(1), point (a), and, where such a procedure exists, the validity of the registration number provided by the host, including through the use of the functionalities offered by the Single Digital Entry Points referred to in Article 10(2), point (b), after allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services by the host.

the declaration

hosts

| (c) | make reasonable efforts to randomly check
  at least 20 %
  of the
  listings on the platform
  concerning the existence or not of a registration procedure, taking into account the list made available pursuant to Article 13(1), point (a), and, where such a procedure exists, the validity of the registration number provided by the host, including through the use of the functionalities offered by the Single Digital Entry Points referred to in Article 10(2), point (b), after allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services by the host
  ; the platforms should also perform additional ad hoc checks at the request of competent authorities
  . |
| --- | --- |

(c)

make reasonable efforts to randomly check
  at least 20 %
  of the
  listings on the platform
  concerning the existence or not of a registration procedure, taking into account the list made available pursuant to Article 13(1), point (a), and, where such a procedure exists, the validity of the registration number provided by the host, including through the use of the functionalities offered by the Single Digital Entry Points referred to in Article 10(2), point (b), after allowing the offering of the short-term accommodation rental services by the host
  ; the platforms should also perform additional ad hoc checks at the request of competent authorities
  .

at least 20 %

listings on the platform

; the platforms should also perform additional ad hoc checks at the request of competent authorities

2.   Online short-term rental platforms shall inform without delay the competent authorities and the hosts of the results of the random checks referred to in paragraph 1, point (c), concerning incorrect declarations of hosts or invalid registration numbers.

2.   Online short-term rental platforms shall inform without delay the competent authorities
  , the authority referred to in Article 14,
  and the hosts of the results of the random checks referred to in paragraph 1, point (c), concerning incorrect declarations of hosts or invalid registration numbers
  and also including the number of correct listings
  .

3.   Online short-term rental platforms shall include, in a specific section of the online interface that is directly and easily accessible, a reference to the information to be made available by Member States pursuant to Article 17(1).

3.   Online short-term rental platforms shall include, in a specific section of the online interface that is directly and easily accessible, a reference to the information to be made available by Member States pursuant to Articles 13(1)
  , 13 (2) and
  17(1).

Amendment 17

Amendment 17

Article 9(1) and (3) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Obligation on online short-term rental platforms to transmit activity data and registration numbers | Obligation on online short-term rental platforms to transmit activity data and registration numbers |
| 1.   When a listing concerns a unit located in an area included in the list referred to in Article 13(1), point (b), providers of online short-term rental platforms shall collect and, on a monthly basis, transmit to the Single Digital Entry Point of the Member State where the unit is located, activity data per unit, together with the corresponding registration number as provided by the host and the URL of the listing. That transmission shall take place by machine-to-machine communication means. | 1.   When a listing concerns a unit located in an area included in the list referred to in Article 13(1), point (b), providers of online short-term rental platforms shall collect and, on a monthly basis, transmit to the Single Digital Entry Point of the Member State where the unit is located, activity data per unit, together with the
  address of the unit including the exact flat number,
  corresponding registration number as provided by the host and the URL of the listing. That transmission shall take place by machine-to-machine communication means.
  [...] |
| | 3.
     
  Where a competent authority, after verification finds that there are manifest and serious doubts as regards the correctness and completeness of the transmitted datasets it shall have the power to issue an order requesting online short- term rental platforms to rectify the dataset within a reasonable period to be specified by the competent authority. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Obligation on online short-term rental platforms to transmit activity data and registration numbers

Obligation on online short-term rental platforms to transmit activity data and registration numbers

1.   When a listing concerns a unit located in an area included in the list referred to in Article 13(1), point (b), providers of online short-term rental platforms shall collect and, on a monthly basis, transmit to the Single Digital Entry Point of the Member State where the unit is located, activity data per unit, together with the corresponding registration number as provided by the host and the URL of the listing. That transmission shall take place by machine-to-machine communication means.

1.   When a listing concerns a unit located in an area included in the list referred to in Article 13(1), point (b), providers of online short-term rental platforms shall collect and, on a monthly basis, transmit to the Single Digital Entry Point of the Member State where the unit is located, activity data per unit, together with the
  address of the unit including the exact flat number,
  corresponding registration number as provided by the host and the URL of the listing. That transmission shall take place by machine-to-machine communication means.

[...]

3.
     
  Where a competent authority, after verification finds that there are manifest and serious doubts as regards the correctness and completeness of the transmitted datasets it shall have the power to issue an order requesting online short- term rental platforms to rectify the dataset within a reasonable period to be specified by the competent authority.

Amendment 18

Amendment 18

Article 12(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   Access to the information transmitted pursuant to Article 9 shall be granted to the competent authority only where the intended purpose of the processing is one of the following: | 2.   Access to the information transmitted pursuant to Article 9 shall be granted to the competent authority only where the intended purpose of the processing is one of the following: |
| (a) | monitoring compliance with the registration procedures referred to in Article 8; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   Access to the information transmitted pursuant to Article 9 shall be granted to the competent authority only where the intended purpose of the processing is one of the following:

2.   Access to the information transmitted pursuant to Article 9 shall be granted to the competent authority only where the intended purpose of the processing is one of the following:

(a)

monitoring compliance with the registration procedures referred to in Article 8;

| (a) | monitoring compliance with the registration procedures referred to in Article 8; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

monitoring compliance with the registration procedures referred to in Article 8;

| (b) | implementing rules governing the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services,
  provided that those rules are non-discriminatory, proportionate and comply with Union law; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

implementing rules governing the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services,
  provided that those rules are non-discriminatory, proportionate and comply with Union law;

provided that those rules are non-discriminatory, proportionate and comply with Union law;

| (b) | implementing rules governing the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

implementing rules governing the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services;

| (c) | for use in verifying compliance with other national regulations and to the extent necessary, in complete, non-anonymous form to the respective authorities responsible for the enforcement of those regulations (e.g. country planning or building standards)
  . |
| --- | --- |

(c)

(c)

for use in verifying compliance with other national regulations and to the extent necessary, in complete, non-anonymous form to the respective authorities responsible for the enforcement of those regulations (e.g. country planning or building standards)
  .

for use in verifying compliance with other national regulations and to the extent necessary, in complete, non-anonymous form to the respective authorities responsible for the enforcement of those regulations (e.g. country planning or building standards)

Reason

Reason

| (b) | See amendment to Recital 26. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

See amendment to Recital 26.

| (c) | According to Article 12(3) the data can only be passed on to other authorities without the possibility of identifying individual units and hosts. For enforcement individual data are needed. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

According to Article 12(3) the data can only be passed on to other authorities without the possibility of identifying individual units and hosts. For enforcement individual data are needed.

Amendment 19

Amendment 19

Article 12(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   Member States shall aggregate the activity data obtained pursuant to Article 9 and transmit it on a monthly basis to national statistical offices and Eurostat for the purposes of compiling statistics in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). Activity data shall be aggregated at national, regional and municipal level, and shall include information on the total number of units and on the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate in each geographical subdivision. Those data shall be broken down by the type of unit as described in Article 5(1), point (a), of this Regulation. Member States shall designate the national entity responsible for aggregating activity data and transmitting it to national statistical offices and Eurostat. | 4.   Member States shall aggregate the activity data obtained pursuant to Article 9 and transmit it on a monthly basis to national
  and where appropriate regional
  statistical offices and Eurostat for the purposes of compiling statistics in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). Activity data shall be aggregated at national, regional and municipal level, and shall include information on the total number of units and on the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate in each geographical subdivision. Those data shall be broken down by the type of unit as described in Article 5(1), point (a), of this Regulation
  . The data should be made available to local and regional authorities to inform policy-making and support planning, implementation and enforcement of local rules
  . Member States shall designate the national entity responsible for aggregating activity data and transmitting it to national statistical offices and Eurostat. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

4.   Member States shall aggregate the activity data obtained pursuant to Article 9 and transmit it on a monthly basis to national statistical offices and Eurostat for the purposes of compiling statistics in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). Activity data shall be aggregated at national, regional and municipal level, and shall include information on the total number of units and on the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate in each geographical subdivision. Those data shall be broken down by the type of unit as described in Article 5(1), point (a), of this Regulation. Member States shall designate the national entity responsible for aggregating activity data and transmitting it to national statistical offices and Eurostat.

4.   Member States shall aggregate the activity data obtained pursuant to Article 9 and transmit it on a monthly basis to national
  and where appropriate regional
  statistical offices and Eurostat for the purposes of compiling statistics in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). Activity data shall be aggregated at national, regional and municipal level, and shall include information on the total number of units and on the maximum number of guests that the unit can accommodate in each geographical subdivision. Those data shall be broken down by the type of unit as described in Article 5(1), point (a), of this Regulation
  . The data should be made available to local and regional authorities to inform policy-making and support planning, implementation and enforcement of local rules
  . Member States shall designate the national entity responsible for aggregating activity data and transmitting it to national statistical offices and Eurostat.

Reason

Reason

It is important to include a reference to regional statistics and also to insist that LRAs need to see the data too.

Amendment 20

Amendment 20

Article 13(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Information obligations | Information obligations |
| 1.   Member States shall draw up and make available, free of charge, the following lists: | 1.   Member States shall draw up and make available, free of charge, the following lists: |
| (a) | list of areas where a registration procedure applies in their territory; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Information obligations

Information obligations

1.   Member States shall draw up and make available, free of charge, the following lists:

1.   Member States shall draw up and make available, free of charge, the following lists:

(a)

list of areas where a registration procedure applies in their territory;

| (a) | list of areas where a registration procedure applies in their territory; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

list of areas where a registration procedure applies in their territory;

| (b) | list of areas for which competent authorities have requested data from providers of online short-term rental platforms. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

list of areas for which competent authorities have requested data from providers of online short-term rental platforms.

| (b) | list of areas for which competent authorities have requested data from providers of online short-term rental platforms; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

list of areas for which competent authorities have requested data from providers of online short-term rental platforms;

| (c) | list of areas where an authorisation scheme applies in their territory
  . |
| --- | --- |

(c)

(c)

list of areas where an authorisation scheme applies in their territory
  .

list of areas where an authorisation scheme applies in their territory

Reason

Reason

It is possible to have an authorization scheme applying in a territory. Such a list of areas is easy to draw up by the Member States and gives useful information especially to hosts. it is also useful to avoid illegal offers.

Amendment 21

Amendment 21

Article 15(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 3.   Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements by online short-term rental platforms of Articles 7(2), 7(3) and 9. Member States shall ensure that those penalties are effective, proportionate and dissuasive. | 3.   Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements by online short-term rental platforms
  and by hosts
  of Articles
  6, 7(1),
  7(2), 7(3) and 9. Member States shall ensure that those penalties are effective, proportionate and dissuasive. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

3.   Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements by online short-term rental platforms of Articles 7(2), 7(3) and 9. Member States shall ensure that those penalties are effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

3.   Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements by online short-term rental platforms
  and by hosts
  of Articles
  6, 7(1),
  7(2), 7(3) and 9. Member States shall ensure that those penalties are effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

Reason

Reason

Infringements can also be committed by hosts. Articles with obligations should be sanctioned. The impact assessment and explanatory memorandum underline the lack of an effective and enforceable framework.

Amendment 22

Amendment 22

Article 16

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Committee | Committee |
| 1.   The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. | 1.   The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. |
| 2.   Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article
  4
  of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. | 2.   Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article
  5
  of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Committee

Committee

1.   The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

1.   The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

2.   Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article
  4
  of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

2.   Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article
  5
  of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

Reason

Reason

Due to the important decisions taken the examination procedure should apply for implementing acts.

Amendment 23

Amendment 23

Article 18

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Evaluation and review | Evaluation and review |
| 1.   No later than 5 years after the date of application of this Regulation, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and submit a report on its main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee. This report shall be based on the evaluations submitted by national supervisory authorities pursuant to Article 14. | 1.   No later than 5 years after the date of application of this Regulation, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and submit a report on its main findings to the European Parliament, the Council
  , the European Committee of the Regions
  and to the European Economic and Social Committee. This report shall be based on the evaluations submitted by national supervisory authorities pursuant to Article 14. |
| 2.   The evaluation made pursuant to paragraph 1 shall assess in particular: | 2.   The evaluation made pursuant to paragraph 1 shall assess in particular: |
| (a) | the impact of this Regulation on the obligations imposed on online short-term rental platforms; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Evaluation and review

Evaluation and review

1.   No later than 5 years after the date of application of this Regulation, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and submit a report on its main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee. This report shall be based on the evaluations submitted by national supervisory authorities pursuant to Article 14.

1.   No later than 5 years after the date of application of this Regulation, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and submit a report on its main findings to the European Parliament, the Council
  , the European Committee of the Regions
  and to the European Economic and Social Committee. This report shall be based on the evaluations submitted by national supervisory authorities pursuant to Article 14.

2.   The evaluation made pursuant to paragraph 1 shall assess in particular:

2.   The evaluation made pursuant to paragraph 1 shall assess in particular:

(a)

the impact of this Regulation on the obligations imposed on online short-term rental platforms;

| (a) | the impact of this Regulation on the obligations imposed on online short-term rental platforms; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the impact of this Regulation on the obligations imposed on online short-term rental platforms;

| (b) | the impact of this Regulation on the availability of data relating to the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered in the Union by hosts through online short-term rental platforms; and |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the impact of this Regulation on the availability of data relating to the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered in the Union by hosts through online short-term rental platforms; and

| (b) | the impact of this Regulation on the availability of data relating to the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered in the Union by hosts through online short-term rental platforms; and |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the impact of this Regulation on the availability of data relating to the provision of short-term accommodation rental services offered in the Union by hosts through online short-term rental platforms; and

| c) | to the extent possible, the impact of this Regulation on the content and proportionality of national legislative, regulatory or administrative measures relating to access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, including where such services are provided cross-border. |
| --- | --- |

c)

to the extent possible, the impact of this Regulation on the content and proportionality of national legislative, regulatory or administrative measures relating to access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, including where such services are provided cross-border.

| (c) | to the extent possible, the impact of this Regulation on the content and proportionality of national legislative, regulatory or administrative measures relating to access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, including where such services are provided
  cross-border; and |
| --- | --- |

(c)

to the extent possible, the impact of this Regulation on the content and proportionality of national legislative, regulatory or administrative measures relating to access to and the provision of short-term accommodation rental services, including where such services are provided
  cross-border; and

cross-border; and

| (d) | an assessment of the impact on local and regional authorities and their ability to devise policies based on the data shared by the platforms with the competent authorities. Also the availability, quality and usability of data as well as the functioning of
  cross-border
  -enforcement and administrative cooperation should be included
  . |
| --- | --- |

(d)

(d)

an assessment of the impact on local and regional authorities and their ability to devise policies based on the data shared by the platforms with the competent authorities. Also the availability, quality and usability of data as well as the functioning of
  cross-border
  -enforcement and administrative cooperation should be included
  .

an assessment of the impact on local and regional authorities and their ability to devise policies based on the data shared by the platforms with the competent authorities. Also the availability, quality and usability of data as well as the functioning of

-enforcement and administrative cooperation should be included

Reason

Reason

Inclusion of reference to European Committee of the Regions is self-evident and the addition of the last part is to ensure consistency with paragraph 56.

II.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

| 1. | welcomes the publication of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on data collection and sharing relating to short-term accommodation rental services and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (1) and its primary objective, which is ‘to harmonise and streamline the framework for data generation and data sharing’ and to make the sector more transparent, ensuring better tracking and accountability; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the publication of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on data collection and sharing relating to short-term accommodation rental services and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (1

| 2. | endorses the proposal, which aims to bolster transparency by means of data collection and sharing, while the EU Member States will retain responsibility for regulating the short-term rental sector, including health and safety standards, housing policy and tax issues; |
| --- | --- |

2.

endorses the proposal, which aims to bolster transparency by means of data collection and sharing, while the EU Member States will retain responsibility for regulating the short-term rental sector, including health and safety standards, housing policy and tax issues;

| 3. | underscores the importance of a properly functioning single market, including its digital dimension, and considers that this is the cornerstone of growth in the EU and a prerequisite for a flourishing European tourism sector; reiterates the Council conclusions of May 2019 (9707/19) calling for ‘more clarity regarding the rules applicable to new business models, including with respect to short-term accommodation rental services in the EU’; |
| --- | --- |

3.

underscores the importance of a properly functioning single market, including its digital dimension, and considers that this is the cornerstone of growth in the EU and a prerequisite for a flourishing European tourism sector; reiterates the Council conclusions of May 2019 (9707/19) calling for ‘more clarity regarding the rules applicable to new business models, including with respect to short-term accommodation rental services in the EU’;

| 4. | considers that local authorities’ right to regulate public interest objectives in sectors for which they have responsibility (such as housing and town planning) is key for delivering cohesion and is integral to subsidiarity; |
| --- | --- |

4.

considers that local authorities’ right to regulate public interest objectives in sectors for which they have responsibility (such as housing and town planning) is key for delivering cohesion and is integral to subsidiarity;

| 5. | considers that the European legal framework is compatible with respect for local and regional characteristics; |
| --- | --- |

5.

considers that the European legal framework is compatible with respect for local and regional characteristics;

| 6. | expects the regulation to provide for a series of standards and clear obligations at European level, and ensure that a series of tools and options are made available for towns and regions to monitor the situation on the ground and select the policies best suited to their specific needs. |
| --- | --- |

6.

expects the regulation to provide for a series of standards and clear obligations at European level, and ensure that a series of tools and options are made available for towns and regions to monitor the situation on the ground and select the policies best suited to their specific needs.

The role of sharing economy platforms in the tourism sector

The role of sharing economy platforms in the tourism sector

| 7. | points out that tourism is a strategic sector, a tool for integration and a key driver of social and economic recovery: it comprises over 10 % of the EU’s gross domestic product, provides jobs for 26 million people and makes up 6 % of total EU exports; |
| --- | --- |

7.

points out that tourism is a strategic sector, a tool for integration and a key driver of social and economic recovery: it comprises over 10 % of the EU’s gross domestic product, provides jobs for 26 million people and makes up 6 % of total EU exports;

| 8. | notes that tourism was hit very hard by the COVID-19 pandemic and that the sector has not yet gotten back to pre-2020 levels, although 2022 data show that it is recovering and that Europeans are keen to visit other countries; |
| --- | --- |

8.

notes that tourism was hit very hard by the COVID-19 pandemic and that the sector has not yet gotten back to pre-2020 levels, although 2022 data show that it is recovering and that Europeans are keen to visit other countries;

| 9. | acknowledges that short-term accommodation rental services make up a significant part of the EU’s tourism ecosystem; this is clear from the fact that 29 % of overnight stays are currently booked through these platforms, and this figure is rising; |
| --- | --- |

9.

acknowledges that short-term accommodation rental services make up a significant part of the EU’s tourism ecosystem; this is clear from the fact that 29 % of overnight stays are currently booked through these platforms, and this figure is rising;

| 10. | acknowledges that, in many cases, short-term rentals are a positive driver for the renewal and redevelopment of properties in cities and suburbs, from a sustainability point of view as well. Short-term rentals are bringing back into use a large portion of accommodation that would otherwise not have been available on the market, and properties that would have remained in disuse; |
| --- | --- |

10.

acknowledges that, in many cases, short-term rentals are a positive driver for the renewal and redevelopment of properties in cities and suburbs, from a sustainability point of view as well. Short-term rentals are bringing back into use a large portion of accommodation that would otherwise not have been available on the market, and properties that would have remained in disuse;

| 11. | points out that in 2019, over 512 million overnight stays in the EU were booked through one of the four main platforms active in this sector, or an average of 1,4 million guests each day. This means that about 90 stays were booked every minute, and about 130 000 were booked every day (2); |
| --- | --- |

11.

points out that in 2019, over 512 million overnight stays in the EU were booked through one of the four main platforms active in this sector, or an average of 1,4 million guests each day. This means that about 90 stays were booked every minute, and about 130 000 were booked every day (2

| 12. | notes that the platforms do not have the same impact across EU regions; |
| --- | --- |

12.

notes that the platforms do not have the same impact across EU regions;

| 13. | points to the outflow of added value since many platforms have their headquarters outside the EU; |
| --- | --- |

13.

points to the outflow of added value since many platforms have their headquarters outside the EU;

| 14. | Taking into consideration, that in the less-developed regions short-term accommodation services are mainly specific to rural areas the EU should ensure support for short-term accommodation traders, in sense of developing their digital capacities, foreign language skills and other skills related to tourism for the benefit of cooperation with local authorities. In this regard local authorities should be supported to enhance the capacity building of short-term accommodation traders, to strengthen the trust between them, and by this means contributing to the strengthening of rural tourism, which after the COVID-19 is an added value to local and regional economic development. |
| --- | --- |

14.

Taking into consideration, that in the less-developed regions short-term accommodation services are mainly specific to rural areas the EU should ensure support for short-term accommodation traders, in sense of developing their digital capacities, foreign language skills and other skills related to tourism for the benefit of cooperation with local authorities. In this regard local authorities should be supported to enhance the capacity building of short-term accommodation traders, to strengthen the trust between them, and by this means contributing to the strengthening of rural tourism, which after the COVID-19 is an added value to local and regional economic development.

| 15. | flags up that in 2019, before the pandemic, 42 EU cities recorded over one million overnight stays; Paris, Barcelona, Lisbon and Rome each recorded over 10 million. In fact, urban tourism and visits to historical cities were those hit hardest by COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021, along with tourism in sun and sea holiday destinations; |
| --- | --- |

15.

flags up that in 2019, before the pandemic, 42 EU cities recorded over one million overnight stays; Paris, Barcelona, Lisbon and Rome each recorded over 10 million. In fact, urban tourism and visits to historical cities were those hit hardest by COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021, along with tourism in sun and sea holiday destinations;

| 16. | considers that it is a good thing that travellers have turned to smaller towns and rural communities, and is pleased that visitors are increasingly getting off the beaten paths; in this respect, strongly supports the objective of the EU smart mobility strategy (3) to double high-speed rail traffic across Europe; firmly believes that modern, sustainable models for travel will give a further boost to rural tourism; |
| --- | --- |

16.

considers that it is a good thing that travellers have turned to smaller towns and rural communities, and is pleased that visitors are increasingly getting off the beaten paths; in this respect, strongly supports the objective of the EU smart mobility strategy (3

| 17. | emphasises that, while the EU portrays itself as the world’s number one tourism destination, in the last two years EU tourism has recovered largely thanks to domestic and European tourists. With a view to assisting Europeans travelling in the EU, the CoR calls for further efforts to improve existing cross-border rail links (149 of the 265 links are not operational (4)). This will promote zero-emission transport, spur on the development of the EU’s rail network and make it fit for the challenges of the 21st century by making the best possible use of cutting-edge rail technologies. |
| --- | --- |

17.

emphasises that, while the EU portrays itself as the world’s number one tourism destination, in the last two years EU tourism has recovered largely thanks to domestic and European tourists. With a view to assisting Europeans travelling in the EU, the CoR calls for further efforts to improve existing cross-border rail links (149 of the 265 links are not operational (4

Impact on the housing sector

Impact on the housing sector

| 18. | acknowledges that the big European cities in particular are faced with a growing demand for affordable housing for people wanting to study, work and live there. Ensuring affordable housing is in the public interest: it is up to the local authorities to manage this issue by identifying the best possible solutions that are able to avoid clashing with people engaged in renting accommodation to tourists; |
| --- | --- |

18.

acknowledges that the big European cities in particular are faced with a growing demand for affordable housing for people wanting to study, work and live there. Ensuring affordable housing is in the public interest: it is up to the local authorities to manage this issue by identifying the best possible solutions that are able to avoid clashing with people engaged in renting accommodation to tourists;

| 19. | points out that short-term rentals (STRs) combine two separate markets: residential housing and tourism. Consequently, financial or tax incentives for renovating buildings can encourage people to convert them from residential properties to tourist facilities. Operating such accommodation for commercial purposes can harm residents, students and workers; |
| --- | --- |

19.

points out that short-term rentals (STRs) combine two separate markets: residential housing and tourism. Consequently, financial or tax incentives for renovating buildings can encourage people to convert them from residential properties to tourist facilities. Operating such accommodation for commercial purposes can harm residents, students and workers;

| 20. | each competent authority should decide if short term accommodation rental should take place in buildings of social housing; |
| --- | --- |

20.

each competent authority should decide if short term accommodation rental should take place in buildings of social housing;

| 21. | points out that in areas where online platforms are very active, the impact on the real estate market is considerable (5); house rentals and house prices go up, consequently leaving fewer properties available for locals. |
| --- | --- |

21.

points out that in areas where online platforms are very active, the impact on the real estate market is considerable (5

| 22. | emphasises that, while granting opportunities for platforms, it is central to respect public policy objectives like available and affordable housing and protecting urban centres, especially when economic conditions in Europe are deteriorating. Short-term accommodation rental services via platforms and their impact shall not undermine the high acceptance of tourism in Europe’s regions and cities and degrade the liveability of neighbourhoods; |
| --- | --- |

22.

emphasises that, while granting opportunities for platforms, it is central to respect public policy objectives like available and affordable housing and protecting urban centres, especially when economic conditions in Europe are deteriorating. Short-term accommodation rental services via platforms and their impact shall not undermine the high acceptance of tourism in Europe’s regions and cities and degrade the liveability of neighbourhoods;

Data sharing

Data sharing

| 23. | therefore considers that, with due regard for the rules on data protection, platforms in the STR market should be required to abide by the rules on information sharing, as the authorities need access to this information in order to ensure the availability of affordable housing; |
| --- | --- |

23.

therefore considers that, with due regard for the rules on data protection, platforms in the STR market should be required to abide by the rules on information sharing, as the authorities need access to this information in order to ensure the availability of affordable housing;

| 24. | is concerned that the platforms are finding it difficult to share critical information with the authorities, despite signs that they are willing to help local and regional governmental bodies to take informed policy decisions and to simplify the enforcement and understanding of local rules; |
| --- | --- |

24.

is concerned that the platforms are finding it difficult to share critical information with the authorities, despite signs that they are willing to help local and regional governmental bodies to take informed policy decisions and to simplify the enforcement and understanding of local rules;

| 25. | points out that the authorities have to deal with a significant administrative burden: they must cope with an increasing number of complaints from local residents, and have to investigate reports of illegal STR activity in order to impose penalties; deplores the fact that local and regional authorities must counter illegal activities in court to enforce compliance with existing rules; |
| --- | --- |

25.

points out that the authorities have to deal with a significant administrative burden: they must cope with an increasing number of complaints from local residents, and have to investigate reports of illegal STR activity in order to impose penalties; deplores the fact that local and regional authorities must counter illegal activities in court to enforce compliance with existing rules;

| 26. | refers to judgement C-674/20 (6) of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which ruled that imposing an obligation on providers of property intermediation services, and managers of an electronic accommodation platform in particular, to provide the competent tax authorities with data on transactions relating to tourist accommodation does not contravene EU law; |
| --- | --- |

26.

refers to judgement C-674/20 (6

| 27. | points out that the EU legislation on electronic commerce (Directive 2000/31/EC) (7), upholding the right of platforms to provide bulk services, does not exempt them from local and regional rules on the collection of tax data; |
| --- | --- |

27.

points out that the EU legislation on electronic commerce (Directive 2000/31/EC) (7

| 28. | would, however, refer to CJEU judgement (C-390/18 (8)), which classifies platforms as intermediation service providers rather than accommodation providers, and cautions that they cannot be treated as online real estate agents; |
| --- | --- |

28.

would, however, refer to CJEU judgement (C-390/18 (8

| 29. | stresses that as of 1 January 2023, platforms must start communicating information to the tax authorities on income earned by people renting out property through the platforms in question (Directive (EU) 2021/514) (9). It is expected that this requirement will increase compliance with tax obligations and enable the public authorities to tackle illegal operators more effectively; underlines in this respect the importance of consistency between the different pieces of legislation; |
| --- | --- |

29.

stresses that as of 1 January 2023, platforms must start communicating information to the tax authorities on income earned by people renting out property through the platforms in question (Directive (EU) 2021/514) (9

| 30. | hopes that the rules laid down in the proposal for a regulation are also applied to short-term rental services not provided via online platforms, so as to prevent potential unequal treatment between hosts. This is bearing in mind that short-term rental services provided without the use of such platforms are not subject to registration obligations and there is a risk of them falling under the public authorities’ radar; |
| --- | --- |

30.

hopes that the rules laid down in the proposal for a regulation are also applied to short-term rental services not provided via online platforms, so as to prevent potential unequal treatment between hosts. This is bearing in mind that short-term rental services provided without the use of such platforms are not subject to registration obligations and there is a risk of them falling under the public authorities’ radar;

| 31. | expects that the platforms, in agreement with the national, regional and local authorities, will initiate procedures to remove illegal listings from their sites; |
| --- | --- |

31.

expects that the platforms, in agreement with the national, regional and local authorities, will initiate procedures to remove illegal listings from their sites;

| 32. | For the benefit of cooperation with local authorities stresses the need of ensuring support for capacity building, development of digital competencies and possibilities for short-term accommodation traders from rural areas and less developed regions; |
| --- | --- |

32.

For the benefit of cooperation with local authorities stresses the need of ensuring support for capacity building, development of digital competencies and possibilities for short-term accommodation traders from rural areas and less developed regions;

| 33. | is concerned that the maximum period for retaining data, as defined by Article 12(3) of the proposal for a regulation and set at ‘no longer than 1 year’, could prove to be inadequate, and calls for an extension to a minimum of two years. |
| --- | --- |

33.

is concerned that the maximum period for retaining data, as defined by Article 12(3) of the proposal for a regulation and set at ‘no longer than 1 year’, could prove to be inadequate, and calls for an extension to a minimum of two years.

Local and regional solutions

Local and regional solutions

| 34. | points out that a significant number of EU cities and regions have implemented individual measures to monitor and limit the activity of STR services in their various neighbourhoods; these include putting a cap on the number of days that a given property can be rented out, tax collection, banning STRs in some specific types of buildings or specific areas; |
| --- | --- |

34.

points out that a significant number of EU cities and regions have implemented individual measures to monitor and limit the activity of STR services in their various neighbourhoods; these include putting a cap on the number of days that a given property can be rented out, tax collection, banning STRs in some specific types of buildings or specific areas;

| 35. | stresses the need to provide national, regional and local authorities with ample leeway to define appropriate rules for hospitality services; these include mandatory registration, a limit on permits, specific zoning policies, a limit on the timeframe in which STRs may be active, and rules to prevent town and city centres becoming overrun by tourists, with residents paying the price in terms of declining quality of life; |
| --- | --- |

35.

stresses the need to provide national, regional and local authorities with ample leeway to define appropriate rules for hospitality services; these include mandatory registration, a limit on permits, specific zoning policies, a limit on the timeframe in which STRs may be active, and rules to prevent town and city centres becoming overrun by tourists, with residents paying the price in terms of declining quality of life;

| 36. | warns that any measures taken must not distort the market or favour one type of accommodation over another; they must allow for the diversity of tourist accommodation markets and not focus solely on towns and cities, given that platforms are also active in rural areas and in sun and sea holiday destinations; |
| --- | --- |

36.

warns that any measures taken must not distort the market or favour one type of accommodation over another; they must allow for the diversity of tourist accommodation markets and not focus solely on towns and cities, given that platforms are also active in rural areas and in sun and sea holiday destinations;

The rules on STRs

The rules on STRs

| 37. | considers that the rules applicable to STR providers and local and regional authorities are not clear; therefore welcomes the proposal for a regulation which aims to improve the collection and sharing of information between the platforms and the authorities; |
| --- | --- |

37.

considers that the rules applicable to STR providers and local and regional authorities are not clear; therefore welcomes the proposal for a regulation which aims to improve the collection and sharing of information between the platforms and the authorities;

| 38. | notes that before this proposal was presented, various towns, cities, regions and Member States endeavoured to regulate this new sector by means of various requirements, such as limits on the number of overnight stays, registration and authorisation schemes, zoning requirements and permits; |
| --- | --- |

38.

notes that before this proposal was presented, various towns, cities, regions and Member States endeavoured to regulate this new sector by means of various requirements, such as limits on the number of overnight stays, registration and authorisation schemes, zoning requirements and permits;

| 39. | emphasises that these measures have enjoyed limited success, as the sharing economy platforms have refused to cooperate and share the information requested by the public authorities; therefore feels that a regulation is a suitable legal instrument that would boost transparency and streamline data flows; |
| --- | --- |

39.

emphasises that these measures have enjoyed limited success, as the sharing economy platforms have refused to cooperate and share the information requested by the public authorities; therefore feels that a regulation is a suitable legal instrument that would boost transparency and streamline data flows;

| 40. | deplores the European Commission’s dismissal of local and regional registration schemes and rules as ‘burdensome’ and ‘inefficient and diverging’; |
| --- | --- |

40.

deplores the European Commission’s dismissal of local and regional registration schemes and rules as ‘burdensome’ and ‘inefficient and diverging’;

| 41. | points out that 22 Member States have established registration schemes; these schemes vary in scope, procedures, requirements and application, including the degree to which platforms are asked to cooperate; |
| --- | --- |

41.

points out that 22 Member States have established registration schemes; these schemes vary in scope, procedures, requirements and application, including the degree to which platforms are asked to cooperate;

| 42. | recalls that it is up to the Member States and the responsible authorities to decide on setting up a registration scheme in line with the proposal for a regulation; if they do so they get access to the data; |
| --- | --- |

42.

recalls that it is up to the Member States and the responsible authorities to decide on setting up a registration scheme in line with the proposal for a regulation; if they do so they get access to the data;

| 43. | supports the European Commission proposal to support the development of similar and interoperable registration schemes across the EU so as to ensure that hosts and platforms throughout the EU comply with consistent standards on registration; this may also lower the administrative costs for authorities; believes that compliance by design can be built into the registration process; |
| --- | --- |

43.

supports the European Commission proposal to support the development of similar and interoperable registration schemes across the EU so as to ensure that hosts and platforms throughout the EU comply with consistent standards on registration; this may also lower the administrative costs for authorities; believes that compliance by design can be built into the registration process;

| 44. | assumes that thanks to the regulation, public authorities will be able to devise better STR management policies, with more targeted, appropriate rules which can be enforced more effectively; |
| --- | --- |

44.

assumes that thanks to the regulation, public authorities will be able to devise better STR management policies, with more targeted, appropriate rules which can be enforced more effectively;

| 45. | is however concerned about the anticipated administrative costs to be borne by the public authorities when setting up registration schemes and Single Digital Gateways; |
| --- | --- |

45.

is however concerned about the anticipated administrative costs to be borne by the public authorities when setting up registration schemes and Single Digital Gateways;

| 46. | warns that the costs for the registration scheme and the links to the national Single Digital Gateway will be incurred by the competent local authorities in each region and stresses that the adaptation to the new system may require more time; |
| --- | --- |

46.

warns that the costs for the registration scheme and the links to the national Single Digital Gateway will be incurred by the competent local authorities in each region and stresses that the adaptation to the new system may require more time;

| 47. | emphasizes the fact that it remains up to the Member States (national, regional or local) to set the rules concerning the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation. Setting up authorization schemes concerning the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation is still possible; |
| --- | --- |

47.

emphasizes the fact that it remains up to the Member States (national, regional or local) to set the rules concerning the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation. Setting up authorization schemes concerning the access to and the provision of short-term accommodation is still possible;

Market shares and hosts

Market shares and hosts

| 48. | calls for further investigation into the definitions, and a series of criteria to distinguish between the various types of owners (professional or occasional hosts or owners whose properties are managed by property managers) so as to guarantee proper access to the market and remove unnecessary obstacles, particularly for small operators; |
| --- | --- |

48.

calls for further investigation into the definitions, and a series of criteria to distinguish between the various types of owners (professional or occasional hosts or owners whose properties are managed by property managers) so as to guarantee proper access to the market and remove unnecessary obstacles, particularly for small operators;

| 49. | stresses that the proposal of the European Commission is fully in line with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; it opens up different possibilities for the competent authorities, confers the decision to set up a registration scheme to them and does not interfere with other regulations in the public interest; |
| --- | --- |

49.

stresses that the proposal of the European Commission is fully in line with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; it opens up different possibilities for the competent authorities, confers the decision to set up a registration scheme to them and does not interfere with other regulations in the public interest;

| 50. | calls for a market evaluation to be carried out in order to estimate the degree of ‘professionalisation’ of the host community; |
| --- | --- |

50.

calls for a market evaluation to be carried out in order to estimate the degree of ‘professionalisation’ of the host community;

| 51. | hopes that the single registration number will suffice to evaluate the number of properties/units managed by each physical or legal person; |
| --- | --- |

51.

hopes that the single registration number will suffice to evaluate the number of properties/units managed by each physical or legal person;

| 52. | asks the European Commission to work with the Member States to publish a report describing the market and giving estimates of the market shares of the various operators; it should include specific sectors such as professional and occasional hosts, hosts in rural areas or small towns as opposed to tourist centres, and operators and intermediaries providing cross-border services as opposed to local ones and to update the information of the impact assessment; |
| --- | --- |

52.

asks the European Commission to work with the Member States to publish a report describing the market and giving estimates of the market shares of the various operators; it should include specific sectors such as professional and occasional hosts, hosts in rural areas or small towns as opposed to tourist centres, and operators and intermediaries providing cross-border services as opposed to local ones and to update the information of the impact assessment;

| 53. | agrees that more stringent rules should apply to professional managers of buildings available for short-term rentals (‘traders’) than to occasional ones; |
| --- | --- |

53.

agrees that more stringent rules should apply to professional managers of buildings available for short-term rentals (‘traders’) than to occasional ones;

Registration

Registration

| 54. | calls for clarification as to whether the decision to set up a registration scheme (along with the Single Digital Gateway) should be exclusively a national competence, or whether the local and regional governments of the Member State in question could decide should they so wish; |
| --- | --- |

54.

calls for clarification as to whether the decision to set up a registration scheme (along with the Single Digital Gateway) should be exclusively a national competence, or whether the local and regional governments of the Member State in question could decide should they so wish;

| 55. | is pleased that the proposal identifies a common approach for registration procedures, whereby each single unit is issued a single national registration number so as to ensure greater transparency and traceability; |
| --- | --- |

55.

is pleased that the proposal identifies a common approach for registration procedures, whereby each single unit is issued a single national registration number so as to ensure greater transparency and traceability;

| 56. | is concerned that the rules proposed stipulate that hosts are automatically and immediately issued a registration number and allowed to start operating; understands that registration does not imply verification but does expect more details on how the competent authorities can limit the issuing of registration numbers in areas or units covered by local rules and regulations forbidding STR activities; at least a proof of the right to dispose of the unit should be demanded already when registering; |
| --- | --- |

56.

is concerned that the rules proposed stipulate that hosts are automatically and immediately issued a registration number and allowed to start operating; understands that registration does not imply verification but does expect more details on how the competent authorities can limit the issuing of registration numbers in areas or units covered by local rules and regulations forbidding STR activities; at least a proof of the right to dispose of the unit should be demanded already when registering;

| 57. | expects greater clarity in Article 6 as regards penalties should the platforms fail to comply with the suspension or removal of illegal listings. Considers that the regulation should explicitly state that the competent authorities in each Member State have the power to penalise platforms who do not comply with the applicable rules; |
| --- | --- |

57.

expects greater clarity in Article 6 as regards penalties should the platforms fail to comply with the suspension or removal of illegal listings. Considers that the regulation should explicitly state that the competent authorities in each Member State have the power to penalise platforms who do not comply with the applicable rules;

Checking and evaluation

Checking and evaluation

| 58. | calls for further clarification regarding Article 7(1)(c), requiring platforms to ‘make reasonable efforts to randomly check the declaration of the hosts’; considers that terms such as ‘reasonable efforts’ and ‘randomly check’ could prove to be overly vague and open to interpretation; similarly, believes that such tasks relating to random verification and notifying results to the competent authorities should be carried out at least on a quarterly basis; |
| --- | --- |

58.

calls for further clarification regarding Article 7(1)(c), requiring platforms to ‘make reasonable efforts to randomly check the declaration of the hosts’; considers that terms such as ‘reasonable efforts’ and ‘randomly check’ could prove to be overly vague and open to interpretation; similarly, believes that such tasks relating to random verification and notifying results to the competent authorities should be carried out at least on a quarterly basis;

| 59. | emphasises that the registration procedure under this regulation is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics. |
| --- | --- |

59.

emphasises that the registration procedure under this regulation is without prejudice to possible other reporting obligations, for example in the fields of taxation, population registration and statistics.

| 60. | considers that the evaluation, to take place three years after the regulation comes into effect, should include an assessment of the impact on local and regional authorities and their ability to devise policies based on the data shared by the platforms with the competent authorities. Also the availability, quality and usability of data as well as the functioning of cross-border-enforcement and administrative cooperation should be included; |
| --- | --- |

60.

considers that the evaluation, to take place three years after the regulation comes into effect, should include an assessment of the impact on local and regional authorities and their ability to devise policies based on the data shared by the platforms with the competent authorities. Also the availability, quality and usability of data as well as the functioning of cross-border-enforcement and administrative cooperation should be included;

| 61. | considers that in Article 7 of the Regulation on compliance by design, the interface design should ensure that a mandatory box to indicate the unit’s registration number in short-term rental announcements on platforms is generated, and takes the view that this mandatory box should be generated automatically when a host attempts to publish a listing in a region with a registration procedure rather than this being done on the basis of voluntary self-declaration by the host. In turn, notes that, given that Article 13(1)(a) obliges the Member States to maintain up-to-date lists of regions where a registration procedure is applied, platforms will have the technical means to carry out this verification automatically without this entailing significant costs; |
| --- | --- |

61.

considers that in Article 7 of the Regulation on compliance by design, the interface design should ensure that a mandatory box to indicate the unit’s registration number in short-term rental announcements on platforms is generated, and takes the view that this mandatory box should be generated automatically when a host attempts to publish a listing in a region with a registration procedure rather than this being done on the basis of voluntary self-declaration by the host. In turn, notes that, given that Article 13(1)(a) obliges the Member States to maintain up-to-date lists of regions where a registration procedure is applied, platforms will have the technical means to carry out this verification automatically without this entailing significant costs;

| 62. | doubts that an indication by the hosts themselves whether the unit offered for short-term rental is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or is applied is sufficient. Instead suggests that the interface must be designed in such a way that the entry of the registration number is mandatory in such a case. |
| --- | --- |

62.

doubts that an indication by the hosts themselves whether the unit offered for short-term rental is located in an area where a registration procedure has been established or is applied is sufficient. Instead suggests that the interface must be designed in such a way that the entry of the registration number is mandatory in such a case.

Brussels, 15 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(31)  Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

31

(31)  Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

31

(37)  Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57).

37

(38)  Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (OJ L 265, 12.10.2022, p. 1).

38

(39)  Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (codification) (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1).

39

(40)  Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures, (OJ L 84, 31.3.2010, p. 1).

40

(41)  Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC (OJ L 64, 11.3.2011, p. 1).

41

(37)  Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57).

37

(38)  Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (OJ L 265, 12.10.2022, p. 1).

38

(39)  Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (codification) (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1).

39

(40)  Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures, (OJ L 84, 31.3.2010, p. 1).

40

(41)  Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC (OJ L 64, 11.3.2011, p. 1).

41

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164).

1

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities (OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164).

1

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 1).

1

(2)  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Short-stay_accommodation_offered_via_online_collaborative_economy_platforms

2

(3)  https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-themes/mobility-strategy_en

3

(4)  https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/reports/2018/comprehensive-analysis-of-the-existing-cross-border-rail-transport-connections-and-missing-links-on-the-internal-eu-borders

4

(5)  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119020300498

5

(6)  Case C-674/20: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 27 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle — Belgium) — Airbnb Ireland UC v Région de Bruxelles-Capitale (OJ C 237, 20.6.2022, p. 13), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62020CA0674

6

(7)  Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32000L0031

7

(8)  Case C-390/18: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the tribunal de grande instance de Paris — France) — Criminal proceedings against X (OJ C 61, 24.2.2020, p. 8).

8

(9)  Council Directive (EU) 2021/514 of 22 March 2021 amending Directive 2011/16/EU on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation (OJ L 104, 25.3.2021, p. 1).

9

---

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/43

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on sustainable use of pesticides

(2023/C 188/06)

| Rapporteur: | Heinz-Joachim HÖFER (DE/PES), Member of the Municipal Council of Altenkirchen (Westerwald) |
| --- | --- |
| Reference document: | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the sustainable use of plant protection products and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/2115
  COM(2022) 305 |

Rapporteur:

Heinz-Joachim HÖFER (DE/PES), Member of the Municipal Council of Altenkirchen (Westerwald)

Reference document:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the sustainable use of plant protection products and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/2115

COM(2022) 305

I.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Recital 5

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (5) | In order to ensure full attainment of the objectives of the Union legal framework on sustainable use of plant protection products, it needs to be adapted by laying down clearer and directly applicable rules for operators. In addition, a number of rules should be clarified, including the rules on the application of integrated pest management, restrictions of use of plant protection products and the inspections of equipment used to apply plant protection products. It is therefore appropriate to repeal Directive 2009/128/EC and replace it with a regulation. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(5)

In order to ensure full attainment of the objectives of the Union legal framework on sustainable use of plant protection products, it needs to be adapted by laying down clearer and directly applicable rules for operators. In addition, a number of rules should be clarified, including the rules on the application of integrated pest management, restrictions of use of plant protection products and the inspections of equipment used to apply plant protection products. It is therefore appropriate to repeal Directive 2009/128/EC and replace it with a regulation.

| (5) | In order to ensure full attainment of the objectives of the Union legal framework on sustainable use of plant protection products, it needs to be adapted by laying down clearer and directly applicable rules for operators
  , and border checks need to be strengthened to ensure that imports meet the same criteria as those required in the EU in order to prevent any food products, plants or flowers treated with plant protection products (e.g. pesticides, fungicides) that are banned in the EU from entering the EU
  . In addition, a number of rules should be clarified, including the rules on the application of integrated pest management, restrictions of use of plant protection products and the inspections of equipment used to apply plant protection products. It is therefore appropriate to repeal Directive 2009/128/EC and replace it with a regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

In order to ensure full attainment of the objectives of the Union legal framework on sustainable use of plant protection products, it needs to be adapted by laying down clearer and directly applicable rules for operators
  , and border checks need to be strengthened to ensure that imports meet the same criteria as those required in the EU in order to prevent any food products, plants or flowers treated with plant protection products (e.g. pesticides, fungicides) that are banned in the EU from entering the EU
  . In addition, a number of rules should be clarified, including the rules on the application of integrated pest management, restrictions of use of plant protection products and the inspections of equipment used to apply plant protection products. It is therefore appropriate to repeal Directive 2009/128/EC and replace it with a regulation.

Amendment 2

Recital 9

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (9) | In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, published on 9 May 2022, when it comes to the proposals on agriculture, food production, biodiversity and ecosystems, pollution, citizens ask the Union in particular to significantly reduce the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, in line with the existing targets, while still ensuring food security, and support for research to develop more sustainable and natural-based alternatives. Citizens ask for more research and innovations, including in technological solutions for sustainable production, plant resistance, and precision farming, and more communication, advisory systems, and training for and from farmers as well as asking the Union to protect insects, in particular indigenous and pollinating insects. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(9)

In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, published on 9 May 2022, when it comes to the proposals on agriculture, food production, biodiversity and ecosystems, pollution, citizens ask the Union in particular to significantly reduce the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, in line with the existing targets, while still ensuring food security, and support for research to develop more sustainable and natural-based alternatives. Citizens ask for more research and innovations, including in technological solutions for sustainable production, plant resistance, and precision farming, and more communication, advisory systems, and training for and from farmers as well as asking the Union to protect insects, in particular indigenous and pollinating insects.

| (9) | In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, published on 9 May 2022, when it comes to the proposals on agriculture, food production, biodiversity and ecosystems, pollution, citizens ask the Union in particular to significantly reduce the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, in line with the existing targets, while still ensuring food security, and support for research to develop more sustainable and natural-based alternatives. Citizens ask for more research and innovations, including in technological solutions for sustainable production, plant resistance, and precision farming, and more communication, advisory systems, and training for and from farmers as well as asking the Union to protect insects, in particular indigenous and pollinating insects.
  Citizens further recommend applying the polluter pays principle, which should also be embedded in taxation measures; |
| --- | --- |

(9)

In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, published on 9 May 2022, when it comes to the proposals on agriculture, food production, biodiversity and ecosystems, pollution, citizens ask the Union in particular to significantly reduce the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, in line with the existing targets, while still ensuring food security, and support for research to develop more sustainable and natural-based alternatives. Citizens ask for more research and innovations, including in technological solutions for sustainable production, plant resistance, and precision farming, and more communication, advisory systems, and training for and from farmers as well as asking the Union to protect insects, in particular indigenous and pollinating insects.
  Citizens further recommend applying the polluter pays principle, which should also be embedded in taxation measures;

Amendment 3

Recital 12

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (12) | The objective of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to make substantial progress in the reduction of the use of chemical plant protection products in an economically viable way. In order to achieve that aim, it is necessary to set quantified targets at Union and Member State levels for the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products and the use of more hazardous plant protection products to monitor progress. National targets should be established by national law in order to ensure adequate progress and accountability in relation to them. These binding national targets should also be achieved by Member States by 2030. The reduction in the use of chemical plant protection products is expected to significantly reduce occupational safety and health risks for professional users. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(12)

The objective of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to make substantial progress in the reduction of the use of chemical plant protection products in an economically viable way. In order to achieve that aim, it is necessary to set quantified targets at Union and Member State levels for the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products and the use of more hazardous plant protection products to monitor progress. National targets should be established by national law in order to ensure adequate progress and accountability in relation to them. These binding national targets should also be achieved by Member States by 2030. The reduction in the use of chemical plant protection products is expected to significantly reduce occupational safety and health risks for professional users.

| (12) | The objective of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to make substantial progress in the reduction of the use of chemical plant protection products in an economically viable way. In order to achieve that aim, it is necessary to set quantified targets at Union and Member State levels for the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products and the use of more hazardous plant protection products to monitor progress. National targets should be established by national law in order to ensure adequate progress and accountability in relation to them. These binding national targets should also be achieved by Member States by 2030. The reduction in the use of chemical plant protection products is expected to significantly reduce occupational safety and health risks for professional users
  , but also for citizens/consumers, particularly vulnerable groups
  . |
| --- | --- |

(12)

The objective of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to make substantial progress in the reduction of the use of chemical plant protection products in an economically viable way. In order to achieve that aim, it is necessary to set quantified targets at Union and Member State levels for the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products and the use of more hazardous plant protection products to monitor progress. National targets should be established by national law in order to ensure adequate progress and accountability in relation to them. These binding national targets should also be achieved by Member States by 2030. The reduction in the use of chemical plant protection products is expected to significantly reduce occupational safety and health risks for professional users
  , but also for citizens/consumers, particularly vulnerable groups
  .

Amendment 4

Recital 13a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (13a) | In its Staff Working Document on the Drivers of Food Security, the European Commission acknowledges that ‘Soil, water, biodiversity, and air are basic requirements for food production’, concludes that ‘the current high input intensive agricultural model, based on chemical pesticides, is likely to pose a food security threat in the medium term due to a loss of biodiversity, the likely increase in pests, decline in soil health and loss of pollinators which are essential to agricultural production’, and further highlights the need to implement pesticide reduction targets to safeguard food security in the EU in the long term. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(13a)

In its Staff Working Document on the Drivers of Food Security, the European Commission acknowledges that ‘Soil, water, biodiversity, and air are basic requirements for food production’, concludes that ‘the current high input intensive agricultural model, based on chemical pesticides, is likely to pose a food security threat in the medium term due to a loss of biodiversity, the likely increase in pests, decline in soil health and loss of pollinators which are essential to agricultural production’, and further highlights the need to implement pesticide reduction targets to safeguard food security in the EU in the long term.

Reason

Pesticide reduction is necessary in order to ensure food security.

Amendment 5

Recital 14

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (14) | Member States should draft and publish national action plans. In order for the Member State national action plans to be effective, they should contain quantitative objectives, references to binding national 2030 reduction targets as set out in national law, together with related indicative targets set out in the national action plans, measures, timetables and indicators to reduce risks and impacts of pesticide use on human health and the environment. This will allow for a structured approach to the setting of quantitative objectives and targets, with a clear link to the national 2030 reduction targets. In order to monitor compliance with the provisions of this Regulation, Member States should also be required to report annually on targets and precise quantitative data relating to compliance with provisions on use, training, application equipment and integrated pest management. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(14)

Member States should draft and publish national action plans. In order for the Member State national action plans to be effective, they should contain quantitative objectives, references to binding national 2030 reduction targets as set out in national law, together with related indicative targets set out in the national action plans, measures, timetables and indicators to reduce risks and impacts of pesticide use on human health and the environment. This will allow for a structured approach to the setting of quantitative objectives and targets, with a clear link to the national 2030 reduction targets. In order to monitor compliance with the provisions of this Regulation, Member States should also be required to report annually on targets and precise quantitative data relating to compliance with provisions on use, training, application equipment and integrated pest management.

| (14) | Member States should draft and publish national action plans. In order for the Member State national action plans to be effective, they should contain quantitative objectives, references to binding national 2030 reduction targets as set out in national law, together with related indicative targets set out in the national action plans, measures, timetables and indicators to reduce risks and impacts of pesticide use on human health and the environment. This will allow for a structured approach to the setting of quantitative objectives and targets, with a clear link to the national 2030 reduction targets. In order to monitor compliance with the provisions of this Regulation, Member States should also be required to report annually on targets and precise quantitative data relating to compliance with provisions on use, training, application equipment and integrated pest management.
  The European Commission will be able, with the help of an expert group of environmental scientists and civil society stakeholders, to carry out ex post monitoring of these national action plans in order to ensure the transparency of opinions. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

Member States should draft and publish national action plans. In order for the Member State national action plans to be effective, they should contain quantitative objectives, references to binding national 2030 reduction targets as set out in national law, together with related indicative targets set out in the national action plans, measures, timetables and indicators to reduce risks and impacts of pesticide use on human health and the environment. This will allow for a structured approach to the setting of quantitative objectives and targets, with a clear link to the national 2030 reduction targets. In order to monitor compliance with the provisions of this Regulation, Member States should also be required to report annually on targets and precise quantitative data relating to compliance with provisions on use, training, application equipment and integrated pest management.
  The European Commission will be able, with the help of an expert group of environmental scientists and civil society stakeholders, to carry out ex post monitoring of these national action plans in order to ensure the transparency of opinions.

Amendment 6

Recital 16

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (14) | The implementation of policies and measures in the areas of sustainable use of plant protection products has an impact on the environment, public health and working conditions. Member States should therefore ensure that the public and social partners are given sufficient opportunities to participate in and to be consulted on the preparation of Member State national action plans in accordance, where applicable, with Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (24). |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(14)

The implementation of policies and measures in the areas of sustainable use of plant protection products has an impact on the environment, public health and working conditions. Member States should therefore ensure that the public and social partners are given sufficient opportunities to participate in and to be consulted on the preparation of Member State national action plans in accordance, where applicable, with Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (24).

| (16) | The implementation of policies and measures in the areas of sustainable use of plant protection products has an impact on the environment, public health and working conditions. Member States should therefore ensure that
  local and regional authorities, within the scope of their competences, as well as
  the public and
  the
  social partners, are given sufficient opportunities to participate in and to be consulted on the preparation of Member State national action plans in accordance, where applicable, with Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (24). |
| --- | --- |

(16)

The implementation of policies and measures in the areas of sustainable use of plant protection products has an impact on the environment, public health and working conditions. Member States should therefore ensure that
  local and regional authorities, within the scope of their competences, as well as
  the public and
  the
  social partners, are given sufficient opportunities to participate in and to be consulted on the preparation of Member State national action plans in accordance, where applicable, with Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (24).

Amendment 7

Recital 24

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (22) | In order to ensure that plant protection products and related application equipment are used in a manner that protects human health and the environment, it is necessary to provide for general requirements on professional users in relation to the training required to use certain plant protection products or application equipment, the use of more hazardous plant protection products and the need to comply with inspection requirements for application equipment in professional use. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(22)

In order to ensure that plant protection products and related application equipment are used in a manner that protects human health and the environment, it is necessary to provide for general requirements on professional users in relation to the training required to use certain plant protection products or application equipment, the use of more hazardous plant protection products and the need to comply with inspection requirements for application equipment in professional use.

| (24) | In order to ensure that plant protection products and related application equipment are used in a manner that protects human health and the environment, it is necessary to provide for general requirements on professional users in relation to the training required to use certain plant protection products or application equipment, the use of more hazardous plant protection products and the need to comply with inspection requirements for application equipment in professional use.
  Concomitantly, the use of chemical plant protection products by non-professional users who are not trained should be prohibited, in order to avoid situations where human or environmental safety would be at risk. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

In order to ensure that plant protection products and related application equipment are used in a manner that protects human health and the environment, it is necessary to provide for general requirements on professional users in relation to the training required to use certain plant protection products or application equipment, the use of more hazardous plant protection products and the need to comply with inspection requirements for application equipment in professional use.
  Concomitantly, the use of chemical plant protection products by non-professional users who are not trained should be prohibited, in order to avoid situations where human or environmental safety would be at risk.

Amendment 8

Recital 24a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (24a) | Environmental monitoring is necessary in order to examine any effects on human health and the environment resulting from the use of plant protection products. EU monitoring requirements currently focus only on water. In order to accurately assess whether the targets of this Regulation in terms of reducing the risk of plant protection products are met, Member States shall put in place comprehensive programmes to monitor the occurrence of residues of active substances and their metabolites in the environment, water, animals and humans. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(24a)

Environmental monitoring is necessary in order to examine any effects on human health and the environment resulting from the use of plant protection products. EU monitoring requirements currently focus only on water. In order to accurately assess whether the targets of this Regulation in terms of reducing the risk of plant protection products are met, Member States shall put in place comprehensive programmes to monitor the occurrence of residues of active substances and their metabolites in the environment, water, animals and humans.

Amendment 9

Recital 24b (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (24b) | The European Commission’s implementation plan ‘Soil Deal for Europe’ notes that 83 % of agricultural soils in the EU are contaminated with residual pesticides, while agricultural intensification and overuse of pesticides are likely to further exacerbate the situation in the future. Pesticides’ high soil persistence and toxicity to non-target species are specifically referred to as posing a threat to soil health. The importance of soil protection should therefore be duly taken into account when implementing the provisions of this Regulation. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(24b)

The European Commission’s implementation plan ‘Soil Deal for Europe’ notes that 83 % of agricultural soils in the EU are contaminated with residual pesticides, while agricultural intensification and overuse of pesticides are likely to further exacerbate the situation in the future. Pesticides’ high soil persistence and toxicity to non-target species are specifically referred to as posing a threat to soil health. The importance of soil protection should therefore be duly taken into account when implementing the provisions of this Regulation.

Amendment 10

Recital 25

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (23) | Use of plant protection products may have particularly negative impacts in certain areas that are frequently used by the general public or by vulnerable groups, communities in which people live and work and ecologically sensitive areas, such as Natura 2000 sites protected in accordance with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (33) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC (34). If plant protection products are used in areas used by the general public, the possibility of exposure of humans to such plant protection products is high. In order to protect human health and the environment, the use of plant protection products in sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas, should therefore be prohibited. Derogations from the prohibition should only be allowed under certain conditions and on a case-by-case basis. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(23)

Use of plant protection products may have particularly negative impacts in certain areas that are frequently used by the general public or by vulnerable groups, communities in which people live and work and ecologically sensitive areas, such as Natura 2000 sites protected in accordance with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (33) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC (34). If plant protection products are used in areas used by the general public, the possibility of exposure of humans to such plant protection products is high. In order to protect human health and the environment, the use of plant protection products in sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas, should therefore be prohibited. Derogations from the prohibition should only be allowed under certain conditions and on a case-by-case basis.

| (25) | Use of plant protection products may have particularly negative impacts in certain areas that are frequently used by the general public or by vulnerable groups communities in which people live and work and ecologically sensitive areas, such as Natura 2000 sites protected in accordance with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (33) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC (34). If plant protection products are used in areas used by the general public, the possibility of exposure of humans to such plant protection products is high. In order to protect human health and the environment, the use of plant protection products in sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas, should therefore be prohibited. Derogations from the prohibition should only be allowed under certain conditions and on a case-by-case basis.
  The buffer zones should be expanded to 50 metres for areas primarily frequented by vulnerable populations and for the use of highly hazardous plant protection products. Derogations from the prohibition should only be allowed for plant protection products authorised in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848 for the continuation of existing agricultural activities or under certain strict conditions and on a case-by-case basis. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

Use of plant protection products may have particularly negative impacts in certain areas that are frequently used by the general public or by vulnerable groups communities in which people live and work and ecologically sensitive areas, such as Natura 2000 sites protected in accordance with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (33) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC (34). If plant protection products are used in areas used by the general public, the possibility of exposure of humans to such plant protection products is high. In order to protect human health and the environment, the use of plant protection products in sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas, should therefore be prohibited. Derogations from the prohibition should only be allowed under certain conditions and on a case-by-case basis.
  The buffer zones should be expanded to 50 metres for areas primarily frequented by vulnerable populations and for the use of highly hazardous plant protection products. Derogations from the prohibition should only be allowed for plant protection products authorised in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848 for the continuation of existing agricultural activities or under certain strict conditions and on a case-by-case basis.

Reason

Science suggests that effective buffer zones need to be several hundred metres wide to prevent pesticide inputs. A recent study investigating pesticide contamination of public playgrounds found nearly half of the playgrounds contaminated by at least one pesticide and a quarter by more than one (including EDCs), and shows that a distance of even 100 metres would be necessary to obtain zero pesticide contamination. A follow-up study shows that mitigation measures that are even stricter than the Commission’s proposed 3 metres were not enough to prevent exposure of children and the general public to dangerous pesticides.

Amendment 11

Recital 26

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (24) | The aquatic environment and drinking water supplies are especially sensitive to plant protection products. In order to protect the aquatic environment, the use of plant protection products in and around surface waters areas should therefore be prohibited. Member States should have in place appropriate measures to avoid deterioration of surface and groundwater as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products. In addition, it is important that professional users are trained in how to minimise or eliminate applications of certain plant protection products classified as ‘harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects’, ‘very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’ or ‘toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’. It is also important that professional users are trained on the importance of giving preference to low risk plant protection products or non-chemical alternatives, use of drift reducing technology and risk mitigation measures. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(24)

The aquatic environment and drinking water supplies are especially sensitive to plant protection products. In order to protect the aquatic environment, the use of plant protection products in and around surface waters areas should therefore be prohibited. Member States should have in place appropriate measures to avoid deterioration of surface and groundwater as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products. In addition, it is important that professional users are trained in how to minimise or eliminate applications of certain plant protection products classified as ‘harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects’, ‘very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’ or ‘toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’. It is also important that professional users are trained on the importance of giving preference to low risk plant protection products or non-chemical alternatives, use of drift reducing technology and risk mitigation measures.

| (26) | The aquatic environment and drinking water supplies are especially sensitive to plant protection products. In order to protect the aquatic environment, the use of plant protection products in and around surface waters areas should therefore be prohibited. Member States should have in place appropriate measures
  to prevent the regular occurrence of unacceptable environmental concentrations of pesticides in the future
  , to avoid
  further
  deterioration of surface and groundwater as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products.
  In this context, drinking water suppliers should regularly have full access to active-substance-specific data on the application of pesticides in the water protection areas within their area of responsibility, sufficiently broken down in terms of time and location.
  In addition, it is important that professional users are trained in how to minimise or eliminate applications of certain plant protection products classified as ‘harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects’, ‘very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’ or ‘toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’. It is also important that professional users are trained on the importance of giving preference to low risk plant protection products or non-chemical alternatives, use of drift reducing technology and risk mitigation measures. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

The aquatic environment and drinking water supplies are especially sensitive to plant protection products. In order to protect the aquatic environment, the use of plant protection products in and around surface waters areas should therefore be prohibited. Member States should have in place appropriate measures
  to prevent the regular occurrence of unacceptable environmental concentrations of pesticides in the future
  , to avoid
  further
  deterioration of surface and groundwater as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products.
  In this context, drinking water suppliers should regularly have full access to active-substance-specific data on the application of pesticides in the water protection areas within their area of responsibility, sufficiently broken down in terms of time and location.
  In addition, it is important that professional users are trained in how to minimise or eliminate applications of certain plant protection products classified as ‘harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects’, ‘very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’ or ‘toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects’. It is also important that professional users are trained on the importance of giving preference to low risk plant protection products or non-chemical alternatives, use of drift reducing technology and risk mitigation measures.

Reason

The regular and widespread presence of pesticides in waters at concentrations that, according to the EU authorisation procedure, absolutely should not occur at this level, and that thus have a significant negative impact on biodiversity and natural balance, highlights the need for measures to establish an acceptable status quo in the first place.

The drinking water supply is of major general interest and drinking water suppliers must be given all the necessary information to monitor and ensure the quality of drinking water.

Amendment 12

Recital 27

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (25) | Precision farming refers to agricultural management systems carefully tailoring crop management to fit localised conditions such as those found within land parcels. The application of existing technology, including the use of Union space data and services (Galileo and Copernicus), has the potential to significantly reduce pesticide usage. It is therefore necessary to provide for a legislative framework that incentivises the development of precision farming. Application of plant protection products from an aircraft, including application by planes, helicopters and drones, is usually less precise than other means of application and may therefore potentially cause adverse impacts on human health and the environment. Aerial application should therefore be prohibited, with limited derogations on a case-by-case basis where it has a less negative impact on human health and the environment than any alternative application method or there is no viable alternative application method. It is also necessary to record the numbers of aerial applications carried out on the basis of permits granted for aerial application in order to have clear data on how many aerial applications for which permits were granted actually took place. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(25)

Precision farming refers to agricultural management systems carefully tailoring crop management to fit localised conditions such as those found within land parcels. The application of existing technology, including the use of Union space data and services (Galileo and Copernicus), has the potential to significantly reduce pesticide usage. It is therefore necessary to provide for a legislative framework that incentivises the development of precision farming. Application of plant protection products from an aircraft, including application by planes, helicopters and drones, is usually less precise than other means of application and may therefore potentially cause adverse impacts on human health and the environment. Aerial application should therefore be prohibited, with limited derogations on a case-by-case basis where it has a less negative impact on human health and the environment than any alternative application method or there is no viable alternative application method. It is also necessary to record the numbers of aerial applications carried out on the basis of permits granted for aerial application in order to have clear data on how many aerial applications for which permits were granted actually took place.

| (27) | Precision farming refers to agricultural management systems carefully tailoring crop management to fit localised conditions such as those found within land parcels. The application of existing technology, including the use of Union space data and services (Galileo and Copernicus), has the potential to significantly reduce pesticide usage
  and risks
  . It is therefore necessary to provide for a legislative framework that incentivises the development of precision farming. Application of plant protection products from an aircraft, including application by planes, helicopters and drones, is usually less precise than other means of application and may therefore potentially cause adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
  However, technological developments unveiled in recent years show great precision and great potential for future innovations and applications.
  Aerial application should therefore be prohibited, with limited derogations on a case-by-case basis where it has a less negative impact on human health and the environment than any alternative application method or there is no viable alternative application method.
  This must always be subject to reviews and assessments based on technological innovations in precision farming
  . It is also necessary to record the numbers of aerial applications carried out on the basis of permits granted for aerial application in order to have clear data on how many aerial applications for which permits were granted actually took place. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

Precision farming refers to agricultural management systems carefully tailoring crop management to fit localised conditions such as those found within land parcels. The application of existing technology, including the use of Union space data and services (Galileo and Copernicus), has the potential to significantly reduce pesticide usage
  and risks
  . It is therefore necessary to provide for a legislative framework that incentivises the development of precision farming. Application of plant protection products from an aircraft, including application by planes, helicopters and drones, is usually less precise than other means of application and may therefore potentially cause adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
  However, technological developments unveiled in recent years show great precision and great potential for future innovations and applications.
  Aerial application should therefore be prohibited, with limited derogations on a case-by-case basis where it has a less negative impact on human health and the environment than any alternative application method or there is no viable alternative application method.
  This must always be subject to reviews and assessments based on technological innovations in precision farming
  . It is also necessary to record the numbers of aerial applications carried out on the basis of permits granted for aerial application in order to have clear data on how many aerial applications for which permits were granted actually took place.

Reason

Focusing solely on use is not appropriate here.

Amendment 13

Recital 30

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (28) | Given the importance of advice on the use of plant protection products as a means to support their use in a manner that protects human health and the environment in accordance with integrated pest management, it is important that advisors are adequately trained. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(28)

Given the importance of advice on the use of plant protection products as a means to support their use in a manner that protects human health and the environment in accordance with integrated pest management, it is important that advisors are adequately trained.

| (30) | Given the importance of advice on the use of plant protection products as a means to support their use in a manner that protects human health and the environment in accordance with integrated pest management, it is important that advisors are adequately trained
  and that they are independent from the companies producing (or marketing) these plant protection products
  . |
| --- | --- |

(30)

Given the importance of advice on the use of plant protection products as a means to support their use in a manner that protects human health and the environment in accordance with integrated pest management, it is important that advisors are adequately trained
  and that they are independent from the companies producing (or marketing) these plant protection products
  .

Reason

Pesticide producers and distributors.

Amendment 14

Recital 31

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (29) | Sale of a plant protection product is an important element in the distribution chain because it allows distributors to provide the necessary information to support its proper use. Specific advice on safety instructions for human health and the environment should be available to the purchaser or end user at the time of sale in order to allow questions to be answered that will facilitate the correct use of the relevant plant protection product. For non-professional users, general information should be available at point of sale on safe use, handling and storage of plant protection products and on disposal of the packaging of such products, since those users do not generally have the same practical knowledge as professional users. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(29)

Sale of a plant protection product is an important element in the distribution chain because it allows distributors to provide the necessary information to support its proper use. Specific advice on safety instructions for human health and the environment should be available to the purchaser or end user at the time of sale in order to allow questions to be answered that will facilitate the correct use of the relevant plant protection product. For non-professional users, general information should be available at point of sale on safe use, handling and storage of plant protection products and on disposal of the packaging of such products, since those users do not generally have the same practical knowledge as professional users.

| (31) | Sale of a plant protection product is an important element in the distribution chain because it allows distributors to provide the necessary information to support its proper use. Specific advice on safety instructions for human health and the environment should be available to the purchaser or end user at the time of sale in order to allow questions to be answered that will facilitate the correct use of the relevant plant protection product. For non-professional users, general information should be available at point of sale on safe use, handling and storage of plant protection products and on disposal of the packaging of such products, since those users do not generally have the same practical knowledge as professional users.
  In order to ensure consistency, the export of pesticides and pesticide active substances banned in the European Union from the European Union should be prohibited under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

Sale of a plant protection product is an important element in the distribution chain because it allows distributors to provide the necessary information to support its proper use. Specific advice on safety instructions for human health and the environment should be available to the purchaser or end user at the time of sale in order to allow questions to be answered that will facilitate the correct use of the relevant plant protection product. For non-professional users, general information should be available at point of sale on safe use, handling and storage of plant protection products and on disposal of the packaging of such products, since those users do not generally have the same practical knowledge as professional users.
  In order to ensure consistency, the export of pesticides and pesticide active substances banned in the European Union from the European Union should be prohibited under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

Reason

It goes without saying that chemicals that can no longer be used in the EU due to their adverse effects on the environment or human health should not be exported from the EU either. This applies to formulated pesticides as well as to their active substances.

Amendment 15

Recital 33a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (33a) | The efficacy of plant protection products should be regularly reviewed by the bodies responsible for evaluating and authorising plant protection products. In order to reduce pesticide use and where resistance has developed within the populations of harmful organisms that the product applies to, the permit for use should be severely restricted or withdrawn in order to prevent products that have become ineffective from remaining on the market. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(33a)

The efficacy of plant protection products should be regularly reviewed by the bodies responsible for evaluating and authorising plant protection products. In order to reduce pesticide use and where resistance has developed within the populations of harmful organisms that the product applies to, the permit for use should be severely restricted or withdrawn in order to prevent products that have become ineffective from remaining on the market.

Reason

In agriculture, all possible measures should be taken to limit resistance and its negative effects and care should be taken to ensure that resistance does not lead to one pesticide being substituted by a different one that is even more problematic for humans or the environment.

Amendment 16

Recital 34

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (32) | Considering the possible risks to human health and the environment from the use of plant protection products, the public should have access to better information on the overall impacts of the use of such products through awareness-raising programmes, information passed on through
  distributors
  and other appropriate measures. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(32)

Considering the possible risks to human health and the environment from the use of plant protection products, the public should have access to better information on the overall impacts of the use of such products through awareness-raising programmes, information passed on through
  distributors
  and other appropriate measures.

| (34) | Considering the possible risks to human health and the environment from the use of plant protection products, the public should have access to better information
  , for example on the European authorisation procedure, on the principle of approved plant protection products being non-hazardous to the environment and health when used correctly and
  on the overall impacts of the use of such products through awareness-raising programmes, information passed on through
  independent environmental/health authorities
  and other appropriate measures. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

Considering the possible risks to human health and the environment from the use of plant protection products, the public should have access to better information
  , for example on the European authorisation procedure, on the principle of approved plant protection products being non-hazardous to the environment and health when used correctly and
  on the overall impacts of the use of such products through awareness-raising programmes, information passed on through
  independent environmental/health authorities
  and other appropriate measures.

Reason

Only these bodies can ensure the dissemination of relevant, unbiased information.

Amendment 17

Recital 35

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (33) | In order to better understand the trends regarding acute poisoning incidents and chronic poisoning arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products, information on such trends should be compiled by each Member State. The Commission should also monitor the overall trends at Union level. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(33)

In order to better understand the trends regarding acute poisoning incidents and chronic poisoning arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products, information on such trends should be compiled by each Member State. The Commission should also monitor the overall trends at Union level.

| (35) | In order to better understand the trends regarding acute poisoning incidents and chronic poisoning arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products, information on such trends should be compiled by each Member State. The Commission should also monitor the overall trends at Union level.
  In particular, provision should be made to carry out longitudinal studies on particularly exposed populations (users) and vulnerable groups (e.g. pregnant women), which are already being carried out in some Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(35)

In order to better understand the trends regarding acute poisoning incidents and chronic poisoning arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products, information on such trends should be compiled by each Member State. The Commission should also monitor the overall trends at Union level.
  In particular, provision should be made to carry out longitudinal studies on particularly exposed populations (users) and vulnerable groups (e.g. pregnant women), which are already being carried out in some Member States.

Reason

More specific data are needed in order to adequately address the important issue of protecting human health.

Amendment 18

Recital 35a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (35a) | In order to reduce pesticide use, the combined effects of mixtures of pesticides on the environment and human health should be investigated and reflected more clearly in authorisation practice, in order to provide citizens with relevant and transparent information on the overall impact of using these products. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(35a)

In order to reduce pesticide use, the combined effects of mixtures of pesticides on the environment and human health should be investigated and reflected more clearly in authorisation practice, in order to provide citizens with relevant and transparent information on the overall impact of using these products.

Reason

The whole process of authorising pesticides targets individual active substances or their formulations. Many studies have demonstrated the potential risks that combined active substances may have in the field of the environment and human health, which, taken as a whole, cannot be derived from data on individual pesticides.

Amendment 19

Recital 43

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (41) | In order to enforce the obligations set out in this Regulation, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and ensure that those rules are enforced. The penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. It is also important to provide for Member States to recover costs related to carrying out obligations under this Regulation by means of fees or charges in order to ensure that adequate financial resources are available to competent authorities. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(41)

In order to enforce the obligations set out in this Regulation, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and ensure that those rules are enforced. The penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. It is also important to provide for Member States to recover costs related to carrying out obligations under this Regulation by means of fees or charges in order to ensure that adequate financial resources are available to competent authorities.

| (43) | In order to enforce the obligations set out in this Regulation, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and ensure that those rules are enforced. The penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. It is also important to provide for Member States to recover costs related to carrying out obligations under this Regulation by means of fees or charges
  , or by a risk-based taxation of plant protection products,
  in order to ensure that adequate financial resources are available to competent authorities. |
| --- | --- |

(43)

In order to enforce the obligations set out in this Regulation, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and ensure that those rules are enforced. The penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. It is also important to provide for Member States to recover costs related to carrying out obligations under this Regulation by means of fees or charges
  , or by a risk-based taxation of plant protection products,
  in order to ensure that adequate financial resources are available to competent authorities.

Amendment 20

Recital 43a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (43a) | Sufficient funding is needed for the implementation of integrated pest management. The establishment of a state fund can help to foster the implementation and uptake of integrated pest management and make related measures more attractive for farmers, e.g. by providing for compensation in case of proven loss of income. The financial resources for this fund could, inter alia, be provided by a risk-based taxation on plant protection products, by contributions of retailers, or by penalty payments. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(43a)

Sufficient funding is needed for the implementation of integrated pest management. The establishment of a state fund can help to foster the implementation and uptake of integrated pest management and make related measures more attractive for farmers, e.g. by providing for compensation in case of proven loss of income. The financial resources for this fund could, inter alia, be provided by a risk-based taxation on plant protection products, by contributions of retailers, or by penalty payments.

Amendment 21

Article 1

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| This Regulation lays down rules for the sustainable use of plant protection products by providing for the setting, and achievement by 2030, of reduction targets for the use and risk of chemical plant protection products, establishing requirements for use, storage, sale and disposal of plant protection products and for application equipment,
  providing for
  training and awareness raising
  , and providing for implementation of integrated pest management
  . | This Regulation
  aims at reducing the risks and impacts of pesticide use on human health and the environment and reducing pesticide dependency. It
  lays down rules for the sustainable use of plant protection products by providing for the setting, and achievement by 2030, of reduction targets for the use and risk of chemical plant protection products
  , by promoting and implementing integrated pest management, based on non-chemical preventive and alternative approaches and techniques, and encouraging the transition to low-input farming systems
  ,
  and by
  establishing requirements for use, storage, sale and disposal of plant protection products and for application equipment,
  worker protection and
  training
  , independent advice
  and awareness raising. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

This Regulation lays down rules for the sustainable use of plant protection products by providing for the setting, and achievement by 2030, of reduction targets for the use and risk of chemical plant protection products, establishing requirements for use, storage, sale and disposal of plant protection products and for application equipment,
  providing for
  training and awareness raising
  , and providing for implementation of integrated pest management
  .

This Regulation
  aims at reducing the risks and impacts of pesticide use on human health and the environment and reducing pesticide dependency. It
  lays down rules for the sustainable use of plant protection products by providing for the setting, and achievement by 2030, of reduction targets for the use and risk of chemical plant protection products
  , by promoting and implementing integrated pest management, based on non-chemical preventive and alternative approaches and techniques, and encouraging the transition to low-input farming systems
  ,
  and by
  establishing requirements for use, storage, sale and disposal of plant protection products and for application equipment,
  worker protection and
  training
  , independent advice
  and awareness raising.

Reason

This expresses the aims and objectives of this regulation more accurately, focusing on the reduction of risks and the implementation of alternative practices in agriculture with the ultimate aim of achieving a sustainable food system.

Amendment 22

Article 3(16), point (a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | an area used by the general public, such as a public park or garden, recreation or sports grounds, or a public path; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(a)

an area used by the general public, such as a public park or garden, recreation or sports grounds, or a public path;

| (a) | an area used by the general public, such as a public park or garden, recreation or sports grounds, or a public path
  , as well as all residential areas
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

an area used by the general public, such as a public park or garden, recreation or sports grounds, or a public path
  , as well as all residential areas
  ;

Amendment 23

Article 3(16), point (f)(i)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (i) | any protected area under Directive 2000/60/EC, including possible safeguard zones as well as modifications of those areas following the risk assessment results for drinking water abstraction points under Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council (47); |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(i)

any protected area under Directive 2000/60/EC, including possible safeguard zones as well as modifications of those areas following the risk assessment results for drinking water abstraction points under Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council (47);

| (i) | any protected area under Directive 2000/60/EC, including possible safeguard zones as well as modifications of those areas following the risk assessment results for drinking water abstraction points under Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council (47);
  , with the exception of areas vulnerable to nitrates, nutrients and urban waste water, which do not fall within the definition of sensitive areas and to which the planned restrictions will not apply
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(i)

any protected area under Directive 2000/60/EC, including possible safeguard zones as well as modifications of those areas following the risk assessment results for drinking water abstraction points under Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council (47);
  , with the exception of areas vulnerable to nitrates, nutrients and urban waste water, which do not fall within the definition of sensitive areas and to which the planned restrictions will not apply
  ;

Amendment 24

Article 3(16), point (f)(ii)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (ii) | sites of Community importance in the list referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive 92/43/EEC and the special areas of conservation designated in accordance with Article 4(4) of that Directive, and special protection areas classified pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC, and any other national, regional, or local protected area reported by the Member States to the Nationally designated protected areas inventory (CDDA); |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(ii)

sites of Community importance in the list referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive 92/43/EEC and the special areas of conservation designated in accordance with Article 4(4) of that Directive, and special protection areas classified pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC, and any other national, regional, or local protected area reported by the Member States to the Nationally designated protected areas inventory (CDDA);

| (ii) | sites of Community importance in the list referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive 92/43/EEC and the special areas of conservation designated in accordance with Article 4(4) of that Directive, and special protection areas classified pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC, and any other national, regional, or local protected area reported by the Member States to the Nationally designated protected areas inventory (CDDA)
  that these Member States would like to include in the group of areas with this level of protection
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

sites of Community importance in the list referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive 92/43/EEC and the special areas of conservation designated in accordance with Article 4(4) of that Directive, and special protection areas classified pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC, and any other national, regional, or local protected area reported by the Member States to the Nationally designated protected areas inventory (CDDA)
  that these Member States would like to include in the group of areas with this level of protection
  ;

Reason

In order to focus protection on the most relevant sensitive areas, the Member States may consider removing references to these areas from the definition of sensitive areas in the SUR.

Amendment 25

Article 8(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   By ... [OP: please insert the date — 18 months after the date of application of this Regulation] each Member State shall draft and publish on a website a national action plan containing the following information: | 1.   By ... [OP: please insert the date — 18 months after the date of application of this Regulation] each Member State shall draft and publish on a website a national action plan containing the following information: |
| (a) | the national 2030 reduction targets adopted in accordance with Chapter II; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   By ... [OP: please insert the date — 18 months after the date of application of this Regulation] each Member State shall draft and publish on a website a national action plan containing the following information:

1.   By ... [OP: please insert the date — 18 months after the date of application of this Regulation] each Member State shall draft and publish on a website a national action plan containing the following information:

(a)

the national 2030 reduction targets adopted in accordance with Chapter II;

| (a) | the plant protection situation with regard to organisms harmful to crops, with trends, indicating any new organisms present; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the plant protection situation with regard to organisms harmful to crops, with trends, indicating any new organisms present;

the plant protection situation with regard to organisms harmful to crops, with trends, indicating any new organisms present;

| (b) | information related to national 2030 reduction targets as set out in Article 9; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

information related to national 2030 reduction targets as set out in Article 9;

| (b) | the national 2030 reduction targets adopted in accordance with Chapter II; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

the national 2030 reduction targets adopted in accordance with Chapter II;

| (c) | details of planned progress in relation to the elements relevant for the implementation of this Regulation listed in Part 2 of Annex II; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

details of planned progress in relation to the elements relevant for the implementation of this Regulation listed in Part 2 of Annex II;

| (c) | information related to national 2030 reduction targets as set out in Article 9; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

(c)

information related to national 2030 reduction targets as set out in Article 9;

| (d) | a link to the relevant parts of CAP strategic plans, drawn-up in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, which set out plans for an increase in the utilised agricultural area engaged in organic farming and how the plans will contribute to achieving the target set out in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system (1) of having 25 % of the utilised agricultural area devoted to organic farming by 2030; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

a link to the relevant parts of CAP strategic plans, drawn-up in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, which set out plans for an increase in the utilised agricultural area engaged in organic farming and how the plans will contribute to achieving the target set out in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system (1) of having 25 % of the utilised agricultural area devoted to organic farming by 2030;

1

| (d) | details of planned progress in relation to the elements relevant for the implementation of this Regulation listed in Part 2 of Annex II; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

(d)

details of planned progress in relation to the elements relevant for the implementation of this Regulation listed in Part 2 of Annex II;

| (e) | a list of application equipment in professional use to which the Member State applies different inspection requirements in accordance with Article 32(1); |
| --- | --- |

(e)

a list of application equipment in professional use to which the Member State applies different inspection requirements in accordance with Article 32(1);

| (e) | a link to the relevant parts of CAP strategic plans, drawn-up in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, which set out plans for an increase in the utilised agricultural area engaged in organic farming and how the plans will contribute to achieving the target set out in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system (1) of having 25 % of the utilised agricultural area devoted to organic farming by 2030; |
| --- | --- |

(e)

(e)

a link to the relevant parts of CAP strategic plans, drawn-up in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, which set out plans for an increase in the utilised agricultural area engaged in organic farming and how the plans will contribute to achieving the target set out in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system (1) of having 25 % of the utilised agricultural area devoted to organic farming by 2030;

1

| (f) | information on the estimated annual amounts of plant protection products illegally used or seized via antifraud operations during the preceding 3 years and any planned related measures; |
| --- | --- |

(f)

information on the estimated annual amounts of plant protection products illegally used or seized via antifraud operations during the preceding 3 years and any planned related measures;

| (f) | a list of application equipment in professional use to which the Member State applies different inspection requirements in accordance with Article 32(1); |
| --- | --- |

(f)

(f)

a list of application equipment in professional use to which the Member State applies different inspection requirements in accordance with Article 32(1);

| (g) | national measures for encouraging the use of non-chemical methods by professional users through financial incentives, in accordance with Union legislation on State aid; |
| --- | --- |

(g)

national measures for encouraging the use of non-chemical methods by professional users through financial incentives, in accordance with Union legislation on State aid;

| (g) | information on the estimated annual amounts of plant protection products illegally used or seized via antifraud operations during the preceding 3 years and any planned related measures; |
| --- | --- |

(g)

(g)

information on the estimated annual amounts of plant protection products illegally used or seized via antifraud operations during the preceding 3 years and any planned related measures;

| (h) | planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, innovation and the development and use of non-chemical pest control methods; |
| --- | --- |

(h)

planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, innovation and the development and use of non-chemical pest control methods;

| (h) | national measures for encouraging the use of non-chemical methods by professional users through financial incentives, in accordance with Union legislation on State aid; |
| --- | --- |

(h)

(h)

national measures for encouraging the use of non-chemical methods by professional users through financial incentives, in accordance with Union legislation on State aid;

| (i) | other planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, the sustainable use of plant protection products in line with integrated pest management principles, including those contained in crop-specific rules as set out in Article 15(1). |
| --- | --- |

(i)

other planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, the sustainable use of plant protection products in line with integrated pest management principles, including those contained in crop-specific rules as set out in Article 15(1).

| (i) | planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, innovation and the development and use of non-chemical pest control methods; |
| --- | --- |

(i)

(i)

planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, innovation and the development and use of non-chemical pest control methods;

| (j) | other planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, the sustainable use of plant protection products in line with integrated pest management principles, including those contained in crop-specific rules as set out in Article 15(1). |
| --- | --- |

(j)

(j)

other planned and adopted measures to support, or ensure through binding requirements laid down in national law, the sustainable use of plant protection products in line with integrated pest management principles, including those contained in crop-specific rules as set out in Article 15(1).

Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the first publication of its national action plan.

Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the first publication of its national action plan
  in order to enable the European Commission to carry out ex post monitoring of these plans
  .

in order to enable the European Commission to carry out ex post monitoring of these plans

Amendment 26

Amendment 26

Amendment to Article 9(1), point (a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | a list of at least the 5 active substances that
  most strongly
  influence the trend in the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products, and of the use of the more hazardous plant protection products, as determined by applying the methodology set out in Annex I, during the 3 years preceding the adoption of the national action plan; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(a)

a list of at least the 5 active substances that
  most strongly
  influence the trend in the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products, and of the use of the more hazardous plant protection products, as determined by applying the methodology set out in Annex I, during the 3 years preceding the adoption of the national action plan;

most strongly

| (a) | a list of at least the 5 active substances that
  have the strongest negative
  influence
  on
  the trend in the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products, and of the use of the more hazardous plant protection products, as determined by applying the methodology set out in Annex I, during the 3 years preceding the adoption of the national action plan; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

a list of at least the 5 active substances that
  have the strongest negative
  influence
  on
  the trend in the reduction in the use and risk of chemical plant protection products, and of the use of the more hazardous plant protection products, as determined by applying the methodology set out in Annex I, during the 3 years preceding the adoption of the national action plan;

have the strongest negative

on

Reason

Reason

The wording here is unclear. Of particular interest here are those active substances that contribute most significantly to there not being a more noticeable reduction in risk.

Amendment 27

Amendment 27

Article 13(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Obligations of professional users and advisors related to integrated pest management | Obligations of professional users and advisors related to integrated pest management |
| 1.   Professional users shall first apply measures that do not require the use of chemical plant protection products for the
  prevention or
  suppression of harmful organisms
  before resorting to application of chemical
  plant protection products | 1.   Professional users shall
  always apply non-chemical preventative measures, such as appropriate agronomic practices. When interventions are needed, professional users shall
  first apply measures that do not require the use of chemical plant protection products for the suppression of harmful organisms
  , following the integrated pest management hierarchy. Chemical
  plant protection products
  can only be applied if no other non-chemical preventative measure or combination of such measures has proven successful. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Obligations of professional users and advisors related to integrated pest management

Obligations of professional users and advisors related to integrated pest management

1.   Professional users shall first apply measures that do not require the use of chemical plant protection products for the
  prevention or
  suppression of harmful organisms
  before resorting to application of chemical
  plant protection products

1.   Professional users shall
  always apply non-chemical preventative measures, such as appropriate agronomic practices. When interventions are needed, professional users shall
  first apply measures that do not require the use of chemical plant protection products for the suppression of harmful organisms
  , following the integrated pest management hierarchy. Chemical
  plant protection products
  can only be applied if no other non-chemical preventative measure or combination of such measures has proven successful.

Amendment 28

Amendment 28

Article 13(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   A professional user’s records referred to in Article 14(1) shall demonstrate that he or she has
  considered
  all of the
  following
  options: | 2.   A professional user’s records referred to in Article 14(1) shall demonstrate that he or she has
  applied
  all of the
  applicable
  options
  from the list below, before resorting to chemical pesticides
  : |
| — | crop rotation, |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   A professional user’s records referred to in Article 14(1) shall demonstrate that he or she has
  considered
  all of the
  following
  options:

2.   A professional user’s records referred to in Article 14(1) shall demonstrate that he or she has
  applied
  all of the
  applicable
  options
  from the list below, before resorting to chemical pesticides
  :

—

crop rotation,

| — | a wide
  crop rotation
  of at least four years, |
| --- | --- |

—

a wide
  crop rotation
  of at least four years,

a wide

of at least four years,

| — | use of modern cultivation techniques, including stale seedbed technique, sowing dates and densities, under-sowing, intercropping, conservation tillage, pruning and direct sowing, |
| --- | --- |

—

use of modern cultivation techniques, including stale seedbed technique, sowing dates and densities, under-sowing, intercropping, conservation tillage, pruning and direct sowing,

| — | enhanced crop diversity, including the mixing of different varieties, intercropping or polyculture
  , |
| --- | --- |

—

enhanced crop diversity, including the mixing of different varieties, intercropping or polyculture
  ,

enhanced crop diversity, including the mixing of different varieties, intercropping or polyculture

| — | use of resistant or tolerant cultivars and high quality or certified seed and planting material, |
| --- | --- |

—

use of resistant or tolerant cultivars and high quality or certified seed and planting material,

| — | use of modern cultivation techniques, including stale seedbed technique, sowing dates and densities, under-sowing, intercropping,
  non-chemical
  conservation tillage, pruning and direct sowing, |
| --- | --- |

—

use of modern cultivation techniques, including stale seedbed technique, sowing dates and densities, under-sowing, intercropping,
  non-chemical
  conservation tillage, pruning and direct sowing,

non-chemical

| — | use of
  balanced
  fertilisation, liming and irrigation or drainage practices, |
| --- | --- |

—

use of
  balanced
  fertilisation, liming and irrigation or drainage practices,

balanced

| — | use of resistant or tolerant cultivars and high quality or certified seed and planting material, |
| --- | --- |

—

use of resistant or tolerant cultivars and high quality or certified seed and planting material,

| — | preventing the spreading of harmful organisms by hygiene measures, including regular cleansing of machinery and equipment, |
| --- | --- |

—

preventing the spreading of harmful organisms by hygiene measures, including regular cleansing of machinery and equipment,

| — | regenerative soil management, including the
  use of
  green manure, fertilising with organic material or mulching, |
| --- | --- |

—

regenerative soil management, including the
  use of
  green manure, fertilising with organic material or mulching,

regenerative soil management, including the

green manure, fertilising with organic material or mulching,

| — | protection and enhancement of important beneficial organisms, including beneficial plant protection measures or the utilisation of ecological infrastructures inside and outside production sites, |
| --- | --- |

—

protection and enhancement of important beneficial organisms, including beneficial plant protection measures or the utilisation of ecological infrastructures inside and outside production sites,

| — | avoiding excessive
  fertilisation, liming and
  limiting
  irrigation or drainage practices, |
| --- | --- |

—

avoiding excessive
  fertilisation, liming and
  limiting
  irrigation or drainage practices,

avoiding excessive

limiting

| — | pest exclusion by use of protected structures, nets and other physical barriers. |
| --- | --- |

—

pest exclusion by use of protected structures, nets and other physical barriers.

| — | preventing the spreading of harmful organisms by hygiene measures, including regular cleansing of machinery and equipment, |
| --- | --- |

—

preventing the spreading of harmful organisms by hygiene measures, including regular cleansing of machinery and equipment,

| — | protection and enhancement of important beneficial organisms, including beneficial plant protection measures or the utilisation of ecological infrastructures inside and outside production sites, |
| --- | --- |

—

protection and enhancement of important beneficial organisms, including beneficial plant protection measures or the utilisation of ecological infrastructures inside and outside production sites,

| — | pest exclusion by use of protected structures, nets and other physical barriers. |
| --- | --- |

—

pest exclusion by use of protected structures, nets and other physical barriers.

Amendment 29

Amendment 29

Article 13(3), point (c)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (c) | the use of advice from professionally qualified advisors. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(c)

the use of advice from professionally qualified advisors.

| (c) | the use of advice from professionally qualified
  , independent
  advisors. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the use of advice from professionally qualified
  , independent
  advisors.

, independent

Reason

Reason

The neutrality of the advice must be preserved.

Amendment 30

Amendment 30

Article 14

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Records of preventative measures and interventions for crop protection by professional users, and of advice on use of plant protection products | Records of preventative measures and interventions for crop protection by professional users, and of advice on use of plant protection products |
| 1.   Where a professional
  user takes a preventative measure or
  performs an intervention, the professional user shall enter the following information in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register referred to in Article 16, which covers the area where the professional user operates: | 1.   Where a professional performs an intervention
  (preventive or curative),
  the professional user shall enter the following information in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register referred to in Article 16, which covers the area where the professional user operates: |
| (a) | any preventative measure
  or intervention and the reason for that preventative measure or intervention, including the identification and assessment of pest level,
  where no crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Records of preventative measures and interventions for crop protection by professional users, and of advice on use of plant protection products

Records of preventative measures and interventions for crop protection by professional users, and of advice on use of plant protection products

1.   Where a professional
  user takes a preventative measure or
  performs an intervention, the professional user shall enter the following information in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register referred to in Article 16, which covers the area where the professional user operates:

1.   Where a professional performs an intervention
  (preventive or curative),
  the professional user shall enter the following information in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register referred to in Article 16, which covers the area where the professional user operates:

(a)

any preventative measure
  or intervention and the reason for that preventative measure or intervention, including the identification and assessment of pest level,
  where no crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates;

or intervention and the reason for that preventative measure or intervention, including the identification and assessment of pest level,

| (a) | any preventative measure
  or combination of different preventive measures (preventive or curative)
  , where no crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

any preventative measure
  or combination of different preventive measures (preventive or curative)
  , where no crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates;

or combination of different preventive measures (preventive or curative)

| (b) | any preventative measure or
  intervention and the reason for that preventative measure or intervention, including the identification and assessment of pest level
  , performed with a reference to measurable criteria set out in the applicable crop-specific rules where crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

any preventative measure or
  intervention and the reason for that preventative measure or intervention, including the identification and assessment of pest level
  , performed with a reference to measurable criteria set out in the applicable crop-specific rules where crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates.

intervention and the reason for that preventative measure or intervention, including the identification and assessment of pest level

| (b) | any preventative measure
  or combination of different preventive measures (preventive or curative)
  , performed with a reference to measurable criteria set out in the applicable crop-specific rules where crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

any preventative measure
  or combination of different preventive measures (preventive or curative)
  , performed with a reference to measurable criteria set out in the applicable crop-specific rules where crop-specific rules have been adopted for the relevant crop and area by the Member State in which the professional user operates.

or combination of different preventive measures (preventive or curative)

2.   A professional user shall enter an electronic record in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register, referred to in Article 16 of the name of its advisor and the dates and the content of the advice received from it in accordance with Article 26(3). The professional user shall make those records available to the competent authority referred to in Article 15(2) upon request.

2.   A professional user shall enter an electronic record in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register, referred to in Article 16 of the name of its advisor and the dates and the content of the advice received from it in accordance with Article 26(3). The professional user shall make those records available to the competent authority referred to in Article 15(2) upon request.

3.   A professional user shall enter an electronic record of each application of a plant protection product under Article 67 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register referred to in Article 16. A professional user shall also enter an electronic record specifying whether the application was done by aerial or land-based equipment. In the case of aerial application, a professional user shall specify the type of equipment used

3.   A professional user shall enter an electronic record of each application of a plant protection product under Article 67 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register referred to in Article 16. A professional user shall also enter an electronic record specifying whether the application was done by aerial or land-based equipment. In the case of aerial application, a professional user shall specify the type of equipment used.

4.   
  In order to monitor progress achieved in the reduction of risks and adverse impacts to human health and the environment from the use of plant protection products it is necessary to revise the system of harmonised risk indicators established under Directive (EU) 2009/128/EC so that it is actually able to address the two objectives pursued, namely reducing the quantity of plant protection products used and the associated risks
  .
  The revision of the system of harmonised risk indicators shall be carried out within the framework of Article 35 of this Regulation.

4.   In order to ensure a uniform structure of the entries to be made by professional users in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, adopt a standard template for such entries. Any such template shall include fields for inputting records that need to be kept in accordance with Article 67 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and shall require the use of a recognisable ID. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(2).

5.   In order to ensure a uniform structure of the entries to be made by professional users in the electronic integrated pest management and plant protection product use register in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, adopt a standard template for such entries. Any such template shall include fields for inputting records that need to be kept in accordance with Article 67 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and shall require the use of a recognisable ID. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(2).

Reason

Reason

In the short term, the current proposal on the HRI poses the following serious problems:

| — | All approved active substances receive the same factor (in this case, 8) and their immense differences in toxicity are subsequently completely ignored. |
| --- | --- |

—

All approved active substances receive the same factor (in this case, 8) and their immense differences in toxicity are subsequently completely ignored.

| — | Therefore, within a group of substances with the same weighting factor, the quantity applied suddenly once again has an extremely decisive impact on how substances from this group are ultimately included in the HRI. |
| --- | --- |

—

Therefore, within a group of substances with the same weighting factor, the quantity applied suddenly once again has an extremely decisive impact on how substances from this group are ultimately included in the HRI.

| — | The natural chronology of the groups to which a pesticide belongs is: currently authorised -> candidate for substitution -> no longer allowed, which also includes ever decreasing use in agriculture. Determining the weighting factors in this order, as set out above, inevitably means that the HRI ultimately calculated using these same weighting factors can only decrease, and that this decrease is even ‘accelerated’ by the higher weighting factors. |
| --- | --- |

—

The natural chronology of the groups to which a pesticide belongs is: currently authorised -> candidate for substitution -> no longer allowed, which also includes ever decreasing use in agriculture. Determining the weighting factors in this order, as set out above, inevitably means that the HRI ultimately calculated using these same weighting factors can only decrease, and that this decrease is even ‘accelerated’ by the higher weighting factors.

In this respect, the HRI often shows decreasing risks, but these are purely a product of how it is designed. They suggest a decreasing risk, which in fact does not exist at all, or at least is not necessarily there. This is also not in line with the objectives of a transparent EU chemicals policy and the European Green Deal.

Amendment 31

Amendment 31

Article 15(7)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 7.   Each Member State shall review its crop-specific rules annually and update them where necessary, including when it is needed to reflect changes in the availability of harmful organism control tools. | 7.   Each Member State shall review its crop-specific rules annually and update them where necessary, including when it is needed to reflect changes in the availability of harmful organism control tools
  and shall review the development of resistance to treatment within the pest populations concerned every five years
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

7.   Each Member State shall review its crop-specific rules annually and update them where necessary, including when it is needed to reflect changes in the availability of harmful organism control tools.

7.   Each Member State shall review its crop-specific rules annually and update them where necessary, including when it is needed to reflect changes in the availability of harmful organism control tools
  and shall review the development of resistance to treatment within the pest populations concerned every five years
  .

Amendment 32

Amendment 32

Article 16(8) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | 8.
     
  Record keeping should be extended to non-agricultural areas, for example where pesticides are used in forests and public spaces, roads and railways. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

8.
     
  Record keeping should be extended to non-agricultural areas, for example where pesticides are used in forests and public spaces, roads and railways.

Amendment 33

Amendment 33

Article 16(9) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | 9.
     
  The registers must be made available to the public with due consideration for the protection of personal data. The public interest prevails over data confidentiality in light of the emissions into the environment. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

9.
     
  The registers must be made available to the public with due consideration for the protection of personal data. The public interest prevails over data confidentiality in light of the emissions into the environment.

Amendment 34

Amendment 34

Article 18(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Use of plant protection products in sensitive areas | Use of plant protection products in sensitive areas |
| 1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited in all sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas. This 3 metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques. | 1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited in all sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas. This 3-metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques
  . For sensitive areas used by vulnerable groups, this buffer zone shall be 50 metres. A 50-metre buffer zone shall also be respected for the use of the more hazardous pesticides
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Use of plant protection products in sensitive areas

Use of plant protection products in sensitive areas

1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited in all sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas. This 3 metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques.

1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited in all sensitive areas and within 3 metres of such areas. This 3-metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques
  . For sensitive areas used by vulnerable groups, this buffer zone shall be 50 metres. A 50-metre buffer zone shall also be respected for the use of the more hazardous pesticides
  .

Reason

Reason

Science suggests that effective buffer zones need to be several hundred metres wide to prevent pesticide inputs. A recent study investigating pesticide contamination of public playgrounds found nearly half of the playgrounds contaminated by at least one pesticide and a quarter by more than one (including EDCs), and shows that a distance of even 100 metres would be necessary to obtain zero pesticide contamination. A follow-up study shows that measures that are even stricter than the Commission’s proposed 3 metres were not enough to prevent exposure of children and the general public to dangerous pesticides.

Amendment 35

Amendment 35

Article 18(2a) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | 2a.
     
  Member States shall define a clear procedure and methods for solving the problem of pest occurrence in sensitive areas, with available alternative nonchemical solutions, starting with prevention, monitoring, physical and mechanical methods and biocontrol. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2a.
     
  Member States shall define a clear procedure and methods for solving the problem of pest occurrence in sensitive areas, with available alternative nonchemical solutions, starting with prevention, monitoring, physical and mechanical methods and biocontrol.

Amendment 36

Amendment 36

Article 18(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 3.   By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a competent authority designated by a Member State may permit a professional user to use a plant protection product in a sensitive area for a limited period with a precisely defined start and end date that is the shortest possible but does not exceed
  60
  days, provided that all of the following conditions are met: | 3.   By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a competent authority designated by a Member State may permit a professional user to use a plant protection product in a sensitive area for a limited period with a precisely defined start and end date that is the shortest possible but does not exceed
  90
  days, provided that all of the following conditions are met: |
| (a) | a proven serious and exceptional risk of the spread of
  quarantine
  pests or invasive alien species exists; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

3.   By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a competent authority designated by a Member State may permit a professional user to use a plant protection product in a sensitive area for a limited period with a precisely defined start and end date that is the shortest possible but does not exceed
  60
  days, provided that all of the following conditions are met:

3.   By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a competent authority designated by a Member State may permit a professional user to use a plant protection product in a sensitive area for a limited period with a precisely defined start and end date that is the shortest possible but does not exceed
  90
  days, provided that all of the following conditions are met:

(a)

a proven serious and exceptional risk of the spread of
  quarantine
  pests or invasive alien species exists;

quarantine

| (a) | a proven serious and exceptional risk of the spread of pests or invasive alien species exists; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

a proven serious and exceptional risk of the spread of pests or invasive alien species exists;

| (b) | there is no technically feasible lower risk alternative control technique to contain the spread of
  quarantine
  pests or invasive alien species. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

there is no technically feasible lower risk alternative control technique to contain the spread of
  quarantine
  pests or invasive alien species.

quarantine

| (b) | there is no technically feasible lower risk alternative control technique to contain the spread of pests or invasive alien species. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

there is no technically feasible lower risk alternative control technique to contain the spread of pests or invasive alien species.

Amendment 37

Amendment 37

Article 19

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water | Measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water |
| 1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited on all surface waters and within
  3
  metres of such waters. This
  3
  metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques. | 1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited on all surface waters and within 3 metres of such waters. This 3-metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques. |
| 2.   Member States may establish larger mandatory buffer zones adjacent to surface waters. | 2.   Member States may establish larger mandatory buffer zones adjacent to surface waters. |
| 3.   By ... [OP: please insert the date of application of this Regulation], Member States shall have in place appropriate measures to avoid deterioration of surface and groundwater status as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products to achieve, at least, the objectives set out in Directives 2000/60/EC, 2006/118/EC, 2008/105/EC, 2008/56/EC and (EU) 2020/2184. | 3.   By ... [OP: please insert the date of application of this Regulation], Member States shall have in place appropriate measures
  to immediately eliminate the already existing entries of pesticides that lead to unacceptable environmental concentrations,
  to avoid
  further
  deterioration of surface and groundwater status as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products to achieve, at least, the objectives set out in Directives 2000/60/EC, 2006/118/EC, 2008/105/EC, 2008/56/EC and (EU) 2020/2184. |
| | 4.
     
  In this context, drinking water suppliers should regularly have full access to active-substance-specific data on the application of pesticides in the water protection areas within their area of responsibility, sufficiently broken down in terms of time and location. Such data should also be made available in an appropriate form to the general public.






  5.
     
  The application of chemical plant protection products should be forbidden on very permeable surfaces or other infrastructure close to surface or groundwater or sealed surfaces with a high risk of run-off into water or sewage systems.






  6.
     
  The Member States shall designate protected zones for the capturing of surface water and groundwater for drinking water where the use or storage of pesticides shall be prohibited. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water

Measures to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water

1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited on all surface waters and within
  3
  metres of such waters. This
  3
  metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques.

1.   The use of all plant protection products is prohibited on all surface waters and within 3 metres of such waters. This 3-metre buffer zone shall not be reduced by using alternative risk-mitigation techniques.

2.   Member States may establish larger mandatory buffer zones adjacent to surface waters.

2.   Member States may establish larger mandatory buffer zones adjacent to surface waters.

3.   By ... [OP: please insert the date of application of this Regulation], Member States shall have in place appropriate measures to avoid deterioration of surface and groundwater status as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products to achieve, at least, the objectives set out in Directives 2000/60/EC, 2006/118/EC, 2008/105/EC, 2008/56/EC and (EU) 2020/2184.

3.   By ... [OP: please insert the date of application of this Regulation], Member States shall have in place appropriate measures
  to immediately eliminate the already existing entries of pesticides that lead to unacceptable environmental concentrations,
  to avoid
  further
  deterioration of surface and groundwater status as well as coastal and marine waters and allow achievement of good surface and groundwater status, to protect the aquatic environment and drinking water supplies from the impact of plant protection products to achieve, at least, the objectives set out in Directives 2000/60/EC, 2006/118/EC, 2008/105/EC, 2008/56/EC and (EU) 2020/2184.

4.
     
  In this context, drinking water suppliers should regularly have full access to active-substance-specific data on the application of pesticides in the water protection areas within their area of responsibility, sufficiently broken down in terms of time and location. Such data should also be made available in an appropriate form to the general public.

5.
     
  The application of chemical plant protection products should be forbidden on very permeable surfaces or other infrastructure close to surface or groundwater or sealed surfaces with a high risk of run-off into water or sewage systems.

6.
     
  The Member States shall designate protected zones for the capturing of surface water and groundwater for drinking water where the use or storage of pesticides shall be prohibited.

Reason

Reason

The regular and widespread presence of pesticides in waters at concentrations that, according to the EU authorisation procedure, absolutely should not occur at this level, and that thus have a significant negative impact on biodiversity and natural balance, highlights the need for measures to establish an acceptable status quo in the first place.

The drinking water supply is of major general interest and drinking water suppliers must be given all the necessary information to monitor and ensure the quality of drinking water.

Amendment 38

Amendment 38

Article 19a (new article)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | Extended Producer Responsibility |
| | 1.
     
  Member States shall take measures to ensure that producers who place any plant protection product on the market have extended producer responsibility. |
| | 2.
     
  Member States shall ensure that extended producer responsibility schemes are established for all plant protection products including their metabolites, in accordance with Articles 8 and 8a of Directive 2008/98/EC. |
| | 3.
     
  Member States shall ensure that the producers of plant protection products cover the costs pursuant to the extended producer responsibility provisions in Directive 2008/98/EC and, insofar as not already included, cover the following costs: |
| | (a) | the investment and operational costs incurred by drinking water suppliers to ensure compliance with the parametric values for pesticides and their metabolites defined in Annex 1, Part B of Directive (EU) 2020/2184; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Extended Producer Responsibility

Extended Producer Responsibility

1.
     
  Member States shall take measures to ensure that producers who place any plant protection product on the market have extended producer responsibility.

2.
     
  Member States shall ensure that extended producer responsibility schemes are established for all plant protection products including their metabolites, in accordance with Articles 8 and 8a of Directive 2008/98/EC.

3.
     
  Member States shall ensure that the producers of plant protection products cover the costs pursuant to the extended producer responsibility provisions in Directive 2008/98/EC and, insofar as not already included, cover the following costs:

(a)

(a)

the investment and operational costs incurred by drinking water suppliers to ensure compliance with the parametric values for pesticides and their metabolites defined in Annex 1, Part B of Directive (EU) 2020/2184;

the investment and operational costs incurred by drinking water suppliers to ensure compliance with the parametric values for pesticides and their metabolites defined in Annex 1, Part B of Directive (EU) 2020/2184;

| (b) | the costs for gathering and verifying data on products placed on the market. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

the costs for gathering and verifying data on products placed on the market.

the costs for gathering and verifying data on products placed on the market.

4.
     
  The costs to be covered referred to in paragraph 3 shall not exceed the costs that are necessary to provide the services referred to therein in a cost-efficient way and shall be established in a transparent way between the actors concerned.

5.
     
  Member States shall ensure that each producer’s contribution, as referred to in paragraph 3, is determined based on the environmental and health risk of the plant protection products that are placed on the market.

6.
     
  Member States shall define in a clear way the roles and responsibilities of all relevant actors involved.

7.
     
  Each Member State shall allow the producers established in another Member State and placing products on its market to appoint a legal or natural person established on its territory as an authorised representative for the purposes of fulfilling the obligations of a producer related to extended producer responsibility schemes on its territory.

Amendment 39

Amendment 39

Article 27(3), point (a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | the potential risks to human health and the environment through acute or chronic effects relating to the use of plant protection products; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(a)

the potential risks to human health and the environment through acute or chronic effects relating to the use of plant protection products;

| (a) | the potential risks to human health and the environment through acute or chronic effects relating to the use of plant protection products; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the potential risks to human health and the environment through acute or chronic effects relating to the use of plant protection products;

| (aa) | the potential risks to human health and the environment from the combined use of plant protection products and the lack of data on the effects of combining plant protection products, which are not assessed in connection with the use of plant protection products; |
| --- | --- |

(aa)

(aa)

the potential risks to human health and the environment from the combined use of plant protection products and the lack of data on the effects of combining plant protection products, which are not assessed in connection with the use of plant protection products;

the potential risks to human health and the environment from the combined use of plant protection products and the lack of data on the effects of combining plant protection products, which are not assessed in connection with the use of plant protection products;

Amendment 40

Amendment 40

Article 28(2) to (4) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   By 31 August every year, each Member State shall submit to the Commission a report containing the following information: | 2.   By 31 August every year, each Member State shall submit to the Commission a report containing the following information: |
| (a) | the number of acute and chronic poisoning incidents arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products during the preceding calendar year; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   By 31 August every year, each Member State shall submit to the Commission a report containing the following information:

2.   By 31 August every year, each Member State shall submit to the Commission a report containing the following information:

(a)

the number of acute and chronic poisoning incidents arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products during the preceding calendar year;

| (a) | the number of acute and chronic poisoning incidents arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products during the preceding calendar year; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the number of acute and chronic poisoning incidents arising from exposure of persons to plant protection products during the preceding calendar year;

| (b) | the information referred to in paragraph 1 as regards each poisoning incident. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the information referred to in paragraph 1 as regards each poisoning incident.

| (b) | the information referred to in paragraph 1 as regards each poisoning incident; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the information referred to in paragraph 1 as regards each poisoning incident;

| (c) | the number of occupational diseases resulting from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products in the previous year. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

(c)

the number of occupational diseases resulting from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products in the previous year.

the number of occupational diseases resulting from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products in the previous year.

3.   The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to establish the format for the submission of the information and data referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(2).

3.   The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to establish the format for the submission of the information and data referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 41(2).

4.
     
  Occupational diseases resulting from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products in the previous year:

| (a) | Each Member State shall designate a competent authority responsible for setting up a system for notifying, recognising and fairly compensating occupational diseases arising from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

(a)

Each Member State shall designate a competent authority responsible for setting up a system for notifying, recognising and fairly compensating occupational diseases arising from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products.

Each Member State shall designate a competent authority responsible for setting up a system for notifying, recognising and fairly compensating occupational diseases arising from the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products.

| (b) | The Member States shall ensure that the designated authorities have sufficient staff and resources to carry out their duties properly, including effective inspections. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

The Member States shall ensure that the designated authorities have sufficient staff and resources to carry out their duties properly, including effective inspections.

The Member States shall ensure that the designated authorities have sufficient staff and resources to carry out their duties properly, including effective inspections.

| (c) | The Member States shall ensure that the binding national occupational exposure limit values (LEP[ES1]) for the use of and/or exposure to active substances contained in plant protection products are monitored, complied with and applied. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

(c)

The Member States shall ensure that the binding national occupational exposure limit values (LEP[ES1]) for the use of and/or exposure to active substances contained in plant protection products are monitored, complied with and applied.

The Member States shall ensure that the binding national occupational exposure limit values (LEP[ES1]) for the use of and/or exposure to active substances contained in plant protection products are monitored, complied with and applied.

| (d) | The Member States shall ensure that all professional users, including workers, have access to official documentation indicating the nature of the plant protection product used in the course of their professional activity and the exposure period. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

(d)

The Member States shall ensure that all professional users, including workers, have access to official documentation indicating the nature of the plant protection product used in the course of their professional activity and the exposure period.

The Member States shall ensure that all professional users, including workers, have access to official documentation indicating the nature of the plant protection product used in the course of their professional activity and the exposure period.

| (e) | Employers shall provide all workers employed in their business with the official documents referred to in paragraph 4. |
| --- | --- |

(e)

(e)

Employers shall provide all workers employed in their business with the official documents referred to in paragraph 4.

Employers shall provide all workers employed in their business with the official documents referred to in paragraph 4.

| (f) | The Member States shall ensure compliance with the obligation referred to in paragraph 5 and shall apply effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties for breaches of that requirement. |
| --- | --- |

(f)

(f)

The Member States shall ensure compliance with the obligation referred to in paragraph 5 and shall apply effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties for breaches of that requirement.

The Member States shall ensure compliance with the obligation referred to in paragraph 5 and shall apply effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties for breaches of that requirement.

| (g) | The Member States shall facilitate the reporting of occupational diseases relating to the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products by establishing accessible and effective reporting mechanisms. |
| --- | --- |

(g)

(g)

The Member States shall facilitate the reporting of occupational diseases relating to the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products by establishing accessible and effective reporting mechanisms.

The Member States shall facilitate the reporting of occupational diseases relating to the use of and/or exposure to plant protection products by establishing accessible and effective reporting mechanisms.

| (h) | The Member States shall be obliged to ensure the recognition of these diseases and provide adequate compensation. |
| --- | --- |

(h)

(h)

The Member States shall be obliged to ensure the recognition of these diseases and provide adequate compensation.

The Member States shall be obliged to ensure the recognition of these diseases and provide adequate compensation.

Amendment 41

Amendment 41

Article 33a (new article)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | Monitoring of pesticide residues





  1.
     
  Member States shall put in place routine measures for carrying out specific, representative monitoring programmes of residues of active substances and their metabolites in water resources, groundwater, soil, air/dust/precipitation, biota and humans.






  2.
     
  Existing monitoring programmes and indicators shall be evaluated and adapted if necessary, and new programmes shall be tailored as appropriate to assure that suitable monitoring data is generated. If necessary, Member States shall implement additional measures to ensure that the use of plant protection products complies with the provisions of Articles 4 and 29 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.






  3.
     
  The results of the monitoring programmes shall be submitted to the Commission and published on the website referred to in Article 8. The Commission shall examine the results and consider whether regulatory changes are necessary. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Monitoring of pesticide residues

Monitoring of pesticide residues

1.
     
  Member States shall put in place routine measures for carrying out specific, representative monitoring programmes of residues of active substances and their metabolites in water resources, groundwater, soil, air/dust/precipitation, biota and humans.

2.
     
  Existing monitoring programmes and indicators shall be evaluated and adapted if necessary, and new programmes shall be tailored as appropriate to assure that suitable monitoring data is generated. If necessary, Member States shall implement additional measures to ensure that the use of plant protection products complies with the provisions of Articles 4 and 29 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

3.
     
  The results of the monitoring programmes shall be submitted to the Commission and published on the website referred to in Article 8. The Commission shall examine the results and consider whether regulatory changes are necessary.

Amendment 42

Amendment 42

Amendment to Article 36(2), point (a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | identify five active substances
  influencing
  the result
  most significantly
  ; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(a)

identify five active substances
  influencing
  the result
  most significantly
  ;

influencing

most significantly

| (a) | identify five active substances
  having the strongest negative influence on
  the result; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

identify five active substances
  having the strongest negative influence on
  the result;

having the strongest negative influence on

Reason

Reason

To make the wording clearer.

II.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

| 1. | strongly supports measures to reduce the use of chemical plant protection products and their risks as well as to ensure sustainable food systems; however, care should be taken to ensure that the obligations laid down in the legislation do not result in an excessive administrative burden; |
| --- | --- |

1.

strongly supports measures to reduce the use of chemical plant protection products and their risks as well as to ensure sustainable food systems; however, care should be taken to ensure that the obligations laid down in the legislation do not result in an excessive administrative burden;

| 2. | points out that, in its opinion on the CAP reform, the European Committee of the Regions called for quantified, measurable and achievable common EU targets for the national strategic plans to be included in the CAP Regulation (1) by 2027, with pesticide use in the Member States to decrease by at least 30 % compared to 2017; |
| --- | --- |

2.

points out that, in its opinion on the CAP reform, the European Committee of the Regions called for quantified, measurable and achievable common EU targets for the national strategic plans to be included in the CAP Regulation (1

| 3. | considers that the European Commission should work, by means of delegated acts and in accordance with Article 35 of this Regulation, towards carrying out an ongoing and orderly review of the indicators in order to enable toxicity to be considered in a way that is sufficiently separate from the quantity of pesticides; also considers that, in doing so, the wide range of different toxicities, which e.g. previously were to be taken into account in one HRI group with the same weighting factor, must be taken into account in a differentiated manner with respect to their toxicity; |
| --- | --- |

3.

considers that the European Commission should work, by means of delegated acts and in accordance with Article 35 of this Regulation, towards carrying out an ongoing and orderly review of the indicators in order to enable toxicity to be considered in a way that is sufficiently separate from the quantity of pesticides; also considers that, in doing so, the wide range of different toxicities, which e.g. previously were to be taken into account in one HRI group with the same weighting factor, must be taken into account in a differentiated manner with respect to their toxicity;

| 4. | calls for the national action plans (NAPs) to be submitted to the European Commission to carry out ex post monitoring of these plans, supported by an independent expert group including representatives of civil society to ensure the transparency of the processes; |
| --- | --- |

4.

calls for the national action plans (NAPs) to be submitted to the European Commission to carry out ex post

| 5. | calls on the European Food Safety Authority to review the efficacy of authorised pesticides on a very regular basis and to review authorisations as soon as resistance has emerged in the pest populations affected by the product, in order to avoid ineffective and thus unnecessary product replication; |
| --- | --- |

5.

calls on the European Food Safety Authority to review the efficacy of authorised pesticides on a very regular basis and to review authorisations as soon as resistance has emerged in the pest populations affected by the product, in order to avoid ineffective and thus unnecessary product replication;

| 6. | calls on the EU to fund research projects on the cocktail effects of pesticides on human health and biodiversity, which are currently unknown; |
| --- | --- |

6.

calls on the EU to fund research projects on the cocktail effects of pesticides on human health and biodiversity, which are currently unknown;

| 7. | notes that the private and public research efforts on biological and integrated pest management have made significant progress over the last decade and now offer alternatives to 40 % of synthetic pesticide uses; would like the EU research programme to place more emphasis on support for these programmes in order to achieve, at least, the objective of halving the use of pesticides by 2030; |
| --- | --- |

7.

notes that the private and public research efforts on biological and integrated pest management have made significant progress over the last decade and now offer alternatives to 40 % of synthetic pesticide uses; would like the EU research programme to place more emphasis on support for these programmes in order to achieve, at least, the objective of halving the use of pesticides by 2030;

| 8. | calls on the EU to significantly revise the HRI approach so that, as well as quantity, toxicity in particular is taken into account in a decisive way; calls on the EU to validate the predictive effect of the HRI or alternative approach and to ensure that a reduction in the calculated risk value actually leads to a reduction in the negative effects of pesticides in the environment or on human health; calls on the European Commission to carry out an orderly revision so that reliable results can be ensured from the existing indicators; |
| --- | --- |

8.

calls on the EU to significantly revise the HRI approach so that, as well as quantity, toxicity in particular is taken into account in a decisive way; calls on the EU to validate the predictive effect of the HRI or alternative approach and to ensure that a reduction in the calculated risk value actually leads to a reduction in the negative effects of pesticides in the environment or on human health; calls on the European Commission to carry out an orderly revision so that reliable results can be ensured from the existing indicators;

| 9. | calls for the EU to fund experimental studies on the long-term toxicity of pesticides in their full formulation prior to their authorisation on the European market, in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 1 October 2019; |
| --- | --- |

9.

calls for the EU to fund experimental studies on the long-term toxicity of pesticides in their full formulation prior to their authorisation on the European market, in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 1 October 2019;

| 10. | points out that food security must not be jeopardised by an overly rapid adjustment process, given the current crisis context; |
| --- | --- |

10.

points out that food security must not be jeopardised by an overly rapid adjustment process, given the current crisis context;

| 11. | points out, on the contrary, that reducing the use of pesticides and reducing toxicity improves the resilience of farms to economic, energy and environmental crises; |
| --- | --- |

11.

points out, on the contrary, that reducing the use of pesticides and reducing toxicity improves the resilience of farms to economic, energy and environmental crises;

| 12. | points out, moreover, that lowering standards for sustainable food production in the context of the current crisis could not only lead to environmental costs, but also increase price volatility; |
| --- | --- |

12.

points out, moreover, that lowering standards for sustainable food production in the context of the current crisis could not only lead to environmental costs, but also increase price volatility;

| 13. | calls on the Member States to strengthen their measures to help farmers reduce their use of pesticides and their risks as part of their CAP strategic plans; |
| --- | --- |

13.

calls on the Member States to strengthen their measures to help farmers reduce their use of pesticides and their risks as part of their CAP strategic plans;

| 14. | regrets that the European Commission proposes that the necessary funding will come from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for a period of five years but without any new money being added to the fund; |
| --- | --- |

14.

regrets that the European Commission proposes that the necessary funding will come from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for a period of five years but without any new money being added to the fund;

| 15. | regrets the fact that the national strategic plans, which have been validated by the Commission, lack ambition when it comes to reducing the quantities of pesticides and, above all, their risks, and will therefore not achieve the objectives that Europe has set itself; |
| --- | --- |

15.

regrets the fact that the national strategic plans, which have been validated by the Commission, lack ambition when it comes to reducing the quantities of pesticides and, above all, their risks, and will therefore not achieve the objectives that Europe has set itself;

| 16. | calls on the EU to ban the import of foodstuffs treated with pesticides that have not been authorised in Europe and that pose a risk to public health or the environment, in order to create fair competition for our producers; |
| --- | --- |

16.

calls on the EU to ban the import of foodstuffs treated with pesticides that have not been authorised in Europe and that pose a risk to public health or the environment, in order to create fair competition for our producers;

| 17. | calls on the Commission, to ensure consistency with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 (2), to ban the export of unauthorised pesticides or active substances in pesticides from Europe to third countries; |
| --- | --- |

17.

calls on the Commission, to ensure consistency with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 (2

| 18. | reminds the EU institutions that, in the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU institutions to take decisive action to promote and ensure greener, more climate-friendly agriculture; |
| --- | --- |

18.

reminds the EU institutions that, in the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU institutions to take decisive action to promote and ensure greener, more climate-friendly agriculture;

| 19. | points to the role of European regions and local authorities in implementing the European Green Deal, in particular through their role in the implementation and monitoring of the CAP; |
| --- | --- |

19.

points to the role of European regions and local authorities in implementing the European Green Deal, in particular through their role in the implementation and monitoring of the CAP;

| 20. | calls on local and regional authorities to inform their fellow citizens of the dangers of using pesticides; |
| --- | --- |

20.

calls on local and regional authorities to inform their fellow citizens of the dangers of using pesticides;

| 21. | calls for a ban on the sale of the most dangerous chemical plant protection products to non-commercial customers; |
| --- | --- |

21.

calls for a ban on the sale of the most dangerous chemical plant protection products to non-commercial customers;

| 22. | calls for a ban on the use of chemical plant protection products by non-commercial customers; |
| --- | --- |

22.

calls for a ban on the use of chemical plant protection products by non-commercial customers;

| 23. | highlights the right of regional and local authorities in Europe to replan their territories, respecting subsidiarity and proportionality. |
| --- | --- |

23.

highlights the right of regional and local authorities in Europe to replan their territories, respecting subsidiarity and proportionality.

Brussels, 15 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(24)  Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30).

24

(24)  Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30).

24

(33)  Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

33

(34)  Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

34

(33)  Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

33

(34)  Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

34

(47)  Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ L 435, 23.12.2020, p. 1).

47

(47)  Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ L 435, 23.12.2020, p. 1).

47

(1)  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system [(2020)381 final].

1

(1)  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system [(2020)381 final].

1

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (OJ L 435, 6.12.2021, p. 187).

1

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1).

2

---

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/70 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/70

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the proposal for a directive on asbestos

(2023/C 188/07)

| Rapporteur: | Hanna ZDANOWSKA (PL/EPP), Mayor of Łódź |
| --- | --- |
| Reference document: | Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/148/EC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work
  COM(2022) 489 final |

Rapporteur:

Hanna ZDANOWSKA (PL/EPP), Mayor of Łódź

Reference document:

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/148/EC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work

COM(2022) 489 final

I.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Recital 3

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (3) | Asbestos is a highly dangerous carcinogenic agent, still affecting different economic sectors, such as building and renovation, mining and quarrying, waste management and firefighting, where workers are at high risk of being exposed. Asbestos fibres are classified as carcinogens 1A according to Regulation (EC) 1272/200865 of the European Parliament and of the Council. When inhaled, airborne asbestos fibres can lead to serious diseases such as mesothelioma and lung cancer, and the first signs of disease may take an average of 30 years to manifest from the moment of exposure, ultimately leading to work-related deaths. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(3)

Asbestos is a highly dangerous carcinogenic agent, still affecting different economic sectors, such as building and renovation, mining and quarrying, waste management and firefighting, where workers are at high risk of being exposed. Asbestos fibres are classified as carcinogens 1A according to Regulation (EC) 1272/200865 of the European Parliament and of the Council. When inhaled, airborne asbestos fibres can lead to serious diseases such as mesothelioma and lung cancer, and the first signs of disease may take an average of 30 years to manifest from the moment of exposure, ultimately leading to work-related deaths.

| (3) | Asbestos is a highly dangerous carcinogenic agent, still affecting different economic sectors, such as building and renovation, mining and quarrying,
  the energy industry, chemical industry, transport,
  waste management and firefighting, where workers are at high risk of being exposed. Asbestos fibres are classified as carcinogens 1A according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/200865 of the European Parliament and of the Council. When inhaled, airborne asbestos fibres can lead to serious diseases such as mesothelioma and lung cancer, and the first signs of disease may take an average of 30 years to manifest from the moment of exposure, ultimately leading to work-related deaths. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Asbestos is a highly dangerous carcinogenic agent, still affecting different economic sectors, such as building and renovation, mining and quarrying,
  the energy industry, chemical industry, transport,
  waste management and firefighting, where workers are at high risk of being exposed. Asbestos fibres are classified as carcinogens 1A according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/200865 of the European Parliament and of the Council. When inhaled, airborne asbestos fibres can lead to serious diseases such as mesothelioma and lung cancer, and the first signs of disease may take an average of 30 years to manifest from the moment of exposure, ultimately leading to work-related deaths.

Reason

Adding to the list sectors where asbestos was frequently used and may currently pose a risk to the health of workers and residents.

Amendment 2

Recital 5

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (5) | The Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan supports the need for action in the field of protection of workers against carcinogenic substances (1). Improved protection of workers exposed to asbestos will also be important in the context of the green transition and the implementation of the European Green Deal, including in particular the renovation wave for Europe (2). Citizens’ recommendations in the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe (3) also highlighted the importance of fair working conditions, in particular the revision of Directive 2009/148/EC. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(5)

The Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan supports the need for action in the field of protection of workers against carcinogenic substances (1). Improved protection of workers exposed to asbestos will also be important in the context of the green transition and the implementation of the European Green Deal, including in particular the renovation wave for Europe (2). Citizens’ recommendations in the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe (3) also highlighted the importance of fair working conditions, in particular the revision of Directive 2009/148/EC.

| (5) | The Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan supports the need for action in the field of protection of workers against carcinogenic substances (1). Improved protection of workers exposed to asbestos
  and people directly and indirectly exposed as a result of the occupational activities of third parties particularly at refurbishment, renovation, dismantling and demolition sites or asbestos landfills
  will also be important in the context of the green transition and the implementation of the European Green Deal, including in particular the renovation wave for Europe (2). Citizens’ recommendations in the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe (3) also highlighted the importance of fair working conditions, in particular the revision of Directive 2009/148/EC. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan supports the need for action in the field of protection of workers against carcinogenic substances (1). Improved protection of workers exposed to asbestos
  and people directly and indirectly exposed as a result of the occupational activities of third parties particularly at refurbishment, renovation, dismantling and demolition sites or asbestos landfills
  will also be important in the context of the green transition and the implementation of the European Green Deal, including in particular the renovation wave for Europe (2). Citizens’ recommendations in the framework of the Conference on the Future of Europe (3) also highlighted the importance of fair working conditions, in particular the revision of Directive 2009/148/EC.

Reason

The green transition sought by all and the EU’s ambition to increase the renovation rate of buildings as part of the Renovation Wave could at the same time lead to increased exposure to asbestos — not only for construction workers but also people who are not involved (inhabitants of neighbouring buildings, bystanders).

Amendment 3

Recital 8

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (8) | A revised limit value should be set out in this Directive in light of available information, including up-to-date scientific evidence and technical data, based on a thorough assessment of the socioeconomic impact and availability of exposure measurement protocols and techniques at the place of work. That information should be based on opinions of the Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), established by Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and opinions of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH) established by a Council Decision of 22 July 2003 (1). |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(8)

A revised limit value should be set out in this Directive in light of available information, including up-to-date scientific evidence and technical data, based on a thorough assessment of the socioeconomic impact and availability of exposure measurement protocols and techniques at the place of work. That information should be based on opinions of the Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), established by Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and opinions of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH) established by a Council Decision of 22 July 2003 (1).

| (8) | A revised limit value should be set out in this Directive in light of available information, including up-to-date scientific evidence and technical data, based on a thorough assessment of the socioeconomic impact and availability of exposure measurement protocols and techniques at the place of work. That information should be based on
  different options presented in
  opinions of the Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), established by Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and opinions of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH) established by a Council Decision of 22 July 2003 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(8)

A revised limit value should be set out in this Directive in light of available information, including up-to-date scientific evidence and technical data, based on a thorough assessment of the socioeconomic impact and availability of exposure measurement protocols and techniques at the place of work. That information should be based on
  different options presented in
  opinions of the Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), established by Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and opinions of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH) established by a Council Decision of 22 July 2003 (1).

Reason

The opinions of the aforementioned bodies present different options related to the occupational exposure limits for asbestos and the exposure-risk relationship.

Amendment 4

Recital 9

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (9) | Taking into account the relevant scientific expertise and a balanced approach ensuring at the same time adequate protection of workers at Union level and
  avoiding disproportionate economic disadvantages and burdens for
  the
  affected economic operators (including SMEs)
  , a revised OEL equal to 0,01 fibres/cm 3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) should be established. This balanced approach is underpinned by a public health objective aiming at the
  necessary
  safe removal of asbestos. Consideration has also been given to proposing
  an
  OEL that takes into account economic and technical considerations to allow an effective removal. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(9)

Taking into account the relevant scientific expertise and a balanced approach ensuring at the same time adequate protection of workers at Union level and
  avoiding disproportionate economic disadvantages and burdens for
  the
  affected economic operators (including SMEs)
  , a revised OEL equal to 0,01 fibres/cm 3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) should be established. This balanced approach is underpinned by a public health objective aiming at the
  necessary
  safe removal of asbestos. Consideration has also been given to proposing
  an
  OEL that takes into account economic and technical considerations to allow an effective removal.

| (9) | Taking into account the relevant scientific expertise and a balanced approach ensuring at the same time adequate protection of workers at Union level and
  taking into consideration what is already being implemented in some EU Member States, which confirms
  the
  feasibility of implementation of the new OEL
  , a revised OEL equal to 0,01 fibres/cm 3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) should be established
  , with an OEL of equal to 0,002 fibres/cm3, to be implemented within 3 years of the entry into force of this directive
  . This balanced approach is underpinned by a public health objective aiming at the safe removal of asbestos. Consideration has also been given to proposing
  a gradual
  OEL
  reduction
  that takes into account economic and technical considerations to allow an effective removal. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

Taking into account the relevant scientific expertise and a balanced approach ensuring at the same time adequate protection of workers at Union level and
  taking into consideration what is already being implemented in some EU Member States, which confirms
  the
  feasibility of implementation of the new OEL
  , a revised OEL equal to 0,01 fibres/cm 3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) should be established
  , with an OEL of equal to 0,002 fibres/cm3, to be implemented within 3 years of the entry into force of this directive
  . This balanced approach is underpinned by a public health objective aiming at the safe removal of asbestos. Consideration has also been given to proposing
  a gradual
  OEL
  reduction
  that takes into account economic and technical considerations to allow an effective removal.

Reason

In the Netherlands, the national OEL for asbestos in place since 2016 has been 0,002 fibres/cm3 (measured with Scanning Electron Microscopy-SEM/EDXA). This binding limit value is based on the 2010 report of the Health Council of the Netherlands, which is a key source used by ECHA to derive its ERR.

Amendment 5

Recital 11

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (11) | Optical microscopy
  , although it
  does not allow a counting of the smallest fibres detrimental to health
  , is currently the most used method for the regular measuring of asbestos. As
  it is possible to measure an OEL
  equal to
  0,01 f/cm3 with phase-contrast microscope (PCM)
  , no transition period is needed for the implementation of the revised OEL
  . In line with the opinion of the ACSH, a more modern and sensitive methodology based on electron microscopy should be
  used
  , while taking into account the need for
  an adequate period of
  adaptation and for more EU level harmonisation of different electron microscopy methodologies. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(11)

Optical microscopy
  , although it
  does not allow a counting of the smallest fibres detrimental to health
  , is currently the most used method for the regular measuring of asbestos. As
  it is possible to measure an OEL
  equal to
  0,01 f/cm3 with phase-contrast microscope (PCM)
  , no transition period is needed for the implementation of the revised OEL
  . In line with the opinion of the ACSH, a more modern and sensitive methodology based on electron microscopy should be
  used
  , while taking into account the need for
  an adequate period of
  adaptation and for more EU level harmonisation of different electron microscopy methodologies.

| (11) | Optical microscopy does not allow a counting of the smallest fibres detrimental to health
  and
  it is
  not
  possible to measure an OEL
  lower than
  0,01 f/cm3 with phase-contrast microscope (PCM). In line with the opinion of the ACSH, a more modern and sensitive methodology based on electron microscopy should be
  gradually introduced,
  while taking into account the need for adaptation and for more EU level harmonisation of different electron microscopy methodologies. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

Optical microscopy does not allow a counting of the smallest fibres detrimental to health
  and
  it is
  not
  possible to measure an OEL
  lower than
  0,01 f/cm3 with phase-contrast microscope (PCM). In line with the opinion of the ACSH, a more modern and sensitive methodology based on electron microscopy should be
  gradually introduced,
  while taking into account the need for adaptation and for more EU level harmonisation of different electron microscopy methodologies.

Reason

According to the RAC Opinion on scientific evaluation of occupational exposure limits for asbestos, published on 21 June 2021, ‘at present, PCM is not considered a state-of-the-art measurement method for asbestos in the work environment anymore’.

Amendment 6

Recital 14a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (14a) | Member States are invited to harmonise national standards and procedures for recognising asbestos-related diseases and introduce a register of asbestos-related diseases. It is essential to include a special scheme for the care and treatment of asbestos-related diseases for all workers (currently or previously) employed in sectors with risk of asbestos exposure as well as members of their families and other people exposed to their environment. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(14a)

Member States are invited to harmonise national standards and procedures for recognising asbestos-related diseases and introduce a register of asbestos-related diseases. It is essential to include a special scheme for the care and treatment of asbestos-related diseases for all workers (currently or previously) employed in sectors with risk of asbestos exposure as well as members of their families and other people exposed to their environment.

Reason

At present only occupational asbestos-related diseases have been identified — the lack of comprehensive and comparable information from Member States does not allow for reliable prediction of mortality caused by things such as pleural mesothelioma or for proper assessment of asbestos-related risks. This also exacerbates disparities in national compensation systems. It is therefore also important to complement asbestos policy in the field of health with a register of asbestos-related diseases (the most common source of information on the number of asbestos-related diseases is based on asbestos-related occupational diseases).

Amendment 7

Recital 16a (new recital)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (16a) | Because asbestos-related diseases have a long latency period and there is little awareness of the risks relating to exposure to asbestos, immediately after the directive comes into force the European Commission, together with the Member States, will carry out periodic, intensive and targeted information and education campaigns on the risks of exposure to asbestos and appropriate forms of protection. These actions should be aimed at:







  — | workers and their families; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(16a)

—

workers and their families;

| — | employers; |
| --- | --- |

—

employers;

| — | building owners and administrators; |
| --- | --- |

—

building owners and administrators;

| — | local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

—

local and regional authorities;

| — | inhabitants of areas where old buildings are predominant; |
| --- | --- |

—

inhabitants of areas where old buildings are predominant;

| — | health services, to increase the awareness and skills of radiologists and general practitioners in recognising and treating asbestos-related diseases. |
| --- | --- |

—

health services, to increase the awareness and skills of radiologists and general practitioners in recognising and treating asbestos-related diseases.

Reason

Despite asbestos having been banned in the EU in 2005 and, it would seem, the general awareness of asbestos-related risks, both employees and employers (especially in the construction sector) and the residents themselves and employees of local and regional governments or housing cooperatives/associations have little practical knowledge.

Amendment 8

Article 1, point (4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (4) | in Article 7(6) the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
  ‘Fibre counting shall be carried out by phase-contrast microscope (PCM) in accordance with the method recommended in 1997 by the World Health Organization (WHO) (*1)

  or, wherever possible, any other method giving equivalent or better results, such as a method based on
  electron microscopy (EM). |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(4)

in Article 7(6) the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

‘Fibre counting shall be carried out by phase-contrast microscope (PCM) in accordance with the method recommended in 1997 by the World Health Organization (WHO) (*1)

  or, wherever possible, any other method giving equivalent or better results, such as a method based on
  electron microscopy (EM).

| (4) | in Article 7(6) the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
  ‘Fibre counting shall be carried out
  during the transition period
  by phase-contrast microscope (PCM) in accordance with the method recommended in 1997 by the World Health Organization (WHO) (*2),
  while the implementation of the OEL of equal to 0,002 fibres/cm3 will require
  electron microscopy (EM). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

in Article 7(6) the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

‘Fibre counting shall be carried out
  during the transition period
  by phase-contrast microscope (PCM) in accordance with the method recommended in 1997 by the World Health Organization (WHO) (*2),
  while the implementation of the OEL of equal to 0,002 fibres/cm3 will require
  electron microscopy (EM).

Reason

Since optical microscopy cannot measure an OEL lower than 0,01 f/cm3 with phase-contrast microscope, a more modern and sensitive methodology based on electron microscopy should be used, in line with the opinion of the ACSH.

Amendment 9

Article 1, point (4a) (new point)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (4a) | Article 7(7) is added as follows:




  ‘7.
     
  Given the cost of high-quality laboratory equipment used for asbestos fibre research, it is recommended that certification centres be set up in larger urban centres, working on behalf of stakeholders and for monitoring purposes. Laboratories carrying out asbestos analysis must be accredited in accordance with the applicable quality management system standard for testing laboratories.’ |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(4a)

‘7.
     
  Given the cost of high-quality laboratory equipment used for asbestos fibre research, it is recommended that certification centres be set up in larger urban centres, working on behalf of stakeholders and for monitoring purposes. Laboratories carrying out asbestos analysis must be accredited in accordance with the applicable quality management system standard for testing laboratories.’

Reason

Reason

It is necessary to ensure the functioning (and co-financing) of certified laboratories equipped with appropriate sample testing equipment. This will reduce the financial burden on employers in addition to ensuring that research is reliable. Accreditation of laboratories according to the quality management system standard will guarantee their competence to carry out reliable analyses. It will also ensure uniform control of laboratories in all EU countries.

Amendment 10

Amendment 10

Article 1, point (5)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (5) | Article 8 is replaced by the following:

  ‘Article 8
  Employers shall ensure that no worker is exposed to an airborne concentration of asbestos in excess of 0,01 fibres per cm3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA).’ |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(5)

Article 8 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 8

Employers shall ensure that no worker is exposed to an airborne concentration of asbestos in excess of 0,01 fibres per cm3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA).’

| (5) | Article 8 is replaced by the following:

  ‘Article 8
  Employers shall ensure that no worker is exposed to an airborne concentration of asbestos in excess of 0,01 fibres per cm3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA)
  with an OEL of equal to 0,002 fibres/cm3, to be implemented within 3 years of the entry into force of this directive
  .’ |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Article 8 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 8

Employers shall ensure that no worker is exposed to an airborne concentration of asbestos in excess of 0,01 fibres per cm3 as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA)
  with an OEL of equal to 0,002 fibres/cm3, to be implemented within 3 years of the entry into force of this directive
  .’

Reason

Reason

The proposed two-step approach to the changes to the binding limit value takes into consideration the need for a transitory period of adaptation. Besides, the more ambitious OEL proposed has been implemented in the Netherlands since 2016 and is based on the 2010 report of the Health Council of the Netherlands, which is a key source used by ECHA to derive its ERR.

Amendment 11

Amendment 11

Article 1, point (6a) (new point)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (6a) | Article 15 is replaced by the following:




  ‘Article 15




  Before carrying out demolition or asbestos removal work, firms must provide evidence of their and their workers’ formally verified competence in this field (connected also with periodic training), which shall be established in accordance with national laws and/or practice, and in line with EU guidelines, to be developed by the European Commission in cooperation with the tripartite Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH).’ |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(6a)

(6a)

Article 15 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 15

Before carrying out demolition or asbestos removal work, firms must provide evidence of their and their workers’ formally verified competence in this field (connected also with periodic training), which shall be established in accordance with national laws and/or practice, and in line with EU guidelines, to be developed by the European Commission in cooperation with the tripartite Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (ACSH).’

Reason

Reason

Self-explanatory.

II.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

| 1. | welcomes the European Commission’s work on the revision of the Directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work, which seeks, among other things to prevent a new wave of asbestos victims while implementing the ambitious goals of the Renovation Wave. At the same time, it calls for further action to be taken to effectively and comprehensively prevent work-related cancers; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the European Commission’s work on the revision of the Directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work, which seeks, among other things to prevent a new wave of asbestos victims while implementing the ambitious goals of the Renovation Wave. At the same time, it calls for further action to be taken to effectively and comprehensively prevent work-related cancers;

| 2. | notes that the directive treats asbestos in a very fragmented manner, limiting the problem to only protecting workers from risks to their health and safety arising from exposure to asbestos at work; |
| --- | --- |

2.

notes that the directive treats asbestos in a very fragmented manner, limiting the problem to only protecting workers from risks to their health and safety arising from exposure to asbestos at work;

| 3. | points out that:






  — | 80 % of asbestos was used in the manufacture of building materials, |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

points out that:

—

80 % of asbestos was used in the manufacture of building materials,

| — | more than 220 million buildings or structures were built long before the ban on asbestos (a significant amount may still contain asbestos), |
| --- | --- |

—

more than 220 million buildings or structures were built long before the ban on asbestos (a significant amount may still contain asbestos),

| — | 78 % of occupational cancers recognised in the EU are related to asbestos, |
| --- | --- |

—

78 % of occupational cancers recognised in the EU are related to asbestos,

| — | the average time from exposure to the first symptoms appearing is 30 years, |
| --- | --- |

—

the average time from exposure to the first symptoms appearing is 30 years,

| — | it is estimated that between 4,1 and 7,3 million workers are currently exposed to the harmful effects of asbestos fibres; |
| --- | --- |

—

it is estimated that between 4,1 and 7,3 million workers are currently exposed to the harmful effects of asbestos fibres;

| 4. | recommends a two-step approach, whereby three years after the introduction of the binding limit value of 0,01 f/cm3, a more ambitious OEL of 0,002 f/cm3 is introduced. The Committee urges by the same token that optical microscopy is gradually replaced by the more accurate electron microscopy, suitable for the detection of asbestos when OELs lower than 0,01 f/cm3 apply; |
| --- | --- |

4.

recommends a two-step approach, whereby three years after the introduction of the binding limit value of 0,01 f/cm3

3

3

| 5. | notes with concern that the current rate of asbestos removal in the EU is far from satisfactory and varies from one Member State to another, as do the application of action strategies, inventory and monitoring methods and methods used to remove asbestos; |
| --- | --- |

5.

notes with concern that the current rate of asbestos removal in the EU is far from satisfactory and varies from one Member State to another, as do the application of action strategies, inventory and monitoring methods and methods used to remove asbestos;

| 6. | urges the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) or, where appropriate, another European competent body to develop a uniform approach to the detection of asbestos-containing products. A register of potential asbestos-containing products would be desirable in order to facilitate early detection by Member States. Welcomes by the same token the European Commission’s proposal for a legislative initiative entitled Asbestos screening, registering and monitoring, aimed to bridge the gap among national actions in this field. The introduction of mandatory screening and registration of asbestos in buildings and the development of national strategies for asbestos removal should lead to the implementation of a coordinated, and comparable approach throughout the EU, thus creating a safer environment and achieving a higher level of protection for EU citizens. The Directive should also address the need to protect emergency services (including fire-fighters, police, doctors and rescue workers) from the risks associated with exposure to asbestos by creating an up-to-date and accessible database containing reliable data on infrastructure with confirmed or likely presence of asbestos; |
| --- | --- |

6.

urges the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) or, where appropriate, another European competent body to develop a uniform approach to the detection of asbestos-containing products. A register of potential asbestos-containing products would be desirable in order to facilitate early detection by Member States. Welcomes by the same token the European Commission’s proposal for a legislative initiative entitled Asbestos screening, registering and monitoring, aimed to bridge the gap among national actions in this field. The introduction of mandatory screening and registration of asbestos in buildings and the development of national strategies for asbestos removal should lead to the implementation of a coordinated, and comparable approach throughout the EU, thus creating a safer environment and achieving a higher level of protection for EU citizens. The Directive should also address the need to protect emergency services (including fire-fighters, police, doctors and rescue workers) from the risks associated with exposure to asbestos by creating an up-to-date and accessible database containing reliable data on infrastructure with confirmed or likely presence of asbestos;

| 7. | notes that in order for the directive to be successful, Member States and EU institutions should actively involve local and regional authorities at all stages of coordination and implementation of the revised directive; |
| --- | --- |

7.

notes that in order for the directive to be successful, Member States and EU institutions should actively involve local and regional authorities at all stages of coordination and implementation of the revised directive;

| 8. | supports the adoption of a common EU framework to make it easier to detect and then safely remove asbestos in the EU’s building stock. The Committee calls on the European Commission and Member States to develop and encourage the implementation of a common, systemic and systematic approach to tackling the problem of asbestos (from inventory method, through information and education campaigns, programmes to support residents, contractors and local and regional authorities in removing asbestos, to solutions for health protection and asbestos storage); |
| --- | --- |

8.

supports the adoption of a common EU framework to make it easier to detect and then safely remove asbestos in the EU’s building stock. The Committee calls on the European Commission and Member States to develop and encourage the implementation of a common, systemic and systematic approach to tackling the problem of asbestos (from inventory method, through information and education campaigns, programmes to support residents, contractors and local and regional authorities in removing asbestos, to solutions for health protection and asbestos storage);

| 9. | notes with concern that in some EU Member States it is permissible to dismantle asbestos products themselves. Points out that, as training of workers is essential to prevent risks from occupational exposure to asbestos, European guidelines on the certification of required skills are needed to ensure that the same standards are applied across the EU. Therefore, urges for the development of European guidelines on the certification of skills required from workers for the safe removal of asbestos-containing components; |
| --- | --- |

9.

notes with concern that in some EU Member States it is permissible to dismantle asbestos products themselves. Points out that, as training of workers is essential to prevent risks from occupational exposure to asbestos, European guidelines on the certification of required skills are needed to ensure that the same standards are applied across the EU. Therefore, urges for the development of European guidelines on the certification of skills required from workers for the safe removal of asbestos-containing components;

| 10. | calls on the Commission to create mechanisms to safely speed up the eradication of asbestos by raising awareness, more effective education and protection for workers and inhabitants through effective, attractive and targeted education and information programmes (including among local and regional authority and health service staff); |
| --- | --- |

10.

calls on the Commission to create mechanisms to safely speed up the eradication of asbestos by raising awareness, more effective education and protection for workers and inhabitants through effective, attractive and targeted education and information programmes (including among local and regional authority and health service staff);

| 11. | notes that the green transition sought by all and the EU’s ambition to increase the renovation rate of buildings as part of the Renovation Wave could at the same time lead to increased exposure to asbestos, particularly for construction workers. This is why it is essential to put in place solutions to monitor asbestos removal more effectively, with a special system of healthcare and treatment for asbestos-related diseases (for workers currently and previously employed in sectors exposed to asbestos); |
| --- | --- |

11.

notes that the green transition sought by all and the EU’s ambition to increase the renovation rate of buildings as part of the Renovation Wave could at the same time lead to increased exposure to asbestos, particularly for construction workers. This is why it is essential to put in place solutions to monitor asbestos removal more effectively, with a special system of healthcare and treatment for asbestos-related diseases (for workers currently and previously employed in sectors exposed to asbestos);

| 12. | draws attention to the need to initiate and financially support the innovative activities of R & D centres for the safe disposal, preservation and storage of asbestos (e.g. under Horizon). In most countries, storage of hazardous waste is still used in landfills or in dedicated storage facilities for asbestos waste. An increase in the rate of asbestos removal is equivalent to a significant increase in the storage area for this dangerous mineral. At the same time, recommends creating a network of cities and regions facing the problem and impact of asbestos in their territory; The aim is to develop cooperation involving the exchange of practices and the creation of partnerships for the implementation of joint transnational research projects co-financed by the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

12.

draws attention to the need to initiate and financially support the innovative activities of R & D centres for the safe disposal, preservation and storage of asbestos (e.g. under Horizon). In most countries, storage of hazardous waste is still used in landfills or in dedicated storage facilities for asbestos waste. An increase in the rate of asbestos removal is equivalent to a significant increase in the storage area for this dangerous mineral. At the same time, recommends creating a network of cities and regions facing the problem and impact of asbestos in their territory; The aim is to develop cooperation involving the exchange of practices and the creation of partnerships for the implementation of joint transnational research projects co-financed by the European Union;

| 13. | notes that the main reason for the slow rate of asbestos removal is that only dismantling and disposal of asbestos products (particularly Eternit roofs) are funded. Residents often do not have enough money to pay for the building materials and services to replace roofs and therefore forego investment. There is a need to introduce new subsidy mechanisms and incentives (e.g. tax relief, subsidies); |
| --- | --- |

13.

notes that the main reason for the slow rate of asbestos removal is that only dismantling and disposal of asbestos products (particularly Eternit roofs) are funded. Residents often do not have enough money to pay for the building materials and services to replace roofs and therefore forego investment. There is a need to introduce new subsidy mechanisms and incentives (e.g. tax relief, subsidies);

| 14. | in order to protect workers exposed to asbestos and minimise the impact of asbestos on the environment, joins the call for a European strategy for asbestos removal, which would ensure an integrated approach of different policies and implement systemic and effective solutions in all Member States on inventory, monitoring, safe disposal, storage and education (training) methods; |
| --- | --- |

14.

in order to protect workers exposed to asbestos and minimise the impact of asbestos on the environment, joins the call for a European strategy for asbestos removal, which would ensure an integrated approach of different policies and implement systemic and effective solutions in all Member States on inventory, monitoring, safe disposal, storage and education (training) methods;

| 15. | emphasises that local and regional authorities should be granted direct access to European Structural and Investment Funds to carry out plans for the safe removal of asbestos — the impact will not be effective unless municipalities and regions receive direct funding; |
| --- | --- |

15.

emphasises that local and regional authorities should be granted direct access to European Structural and Investment Funds to carry out plans for the safe removal of asbestos — the impact will not be effective unless municipalities and regions receive direct funding;

| 16. | calls for the establishment of a financial framework using (ESIF) funds to support building owners and thus link the safe removal of asbestos with other public policies and programmes (such as energy efficiency, better living conditions, social housing and disease prevention). |
| --- | --- |

16.

calls for the establishment of a financial framework using (ESIF) funds to support building owners and thus link the safe removal of asbestos with other public policies and programmes (such as energy efficiency, better living conditions, social housing and disease prevention).

Brussels, 16 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(1)  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/XT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0044

1

(2)  Renovation Wave: doubling the renovation rate to cut emissions, boost recovery and reduce energy poverty, COM(2020) 662 final Conference on the Future of Europe.

2

(3)  Conference on the Future of Europe: Report on the final outcome (May 2022) https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/new-push-european-democracy/conference-future-europe_en

3

(1)  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/XT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0044

1

(2)  Renovation Wave: doubling the renovation rate to cut emissions, boost recovery and reduce energy poverty, COM(2020) 662 final Conference on the Future of Europe.

2

(3)  Conference on the Future of Europe: Report on the final outcome (May 2022) https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/new-push-european-democracy/conference-future-europe_en

3

(1)  Council Decision of 22 July 2003 setting up an Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (OJ C 218, 13.9.2003, p. 1).

1

(1)  Council Decision of 22 July 2003 setting up an Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work (OJ C 218, 13.9.2003, p. 1).

1

(*1)  Determination of airborne fibre concentrations. A recommended method, by phase-contrast optical microscopy (membrane filter method), WHO, Geneva 1997 (ISBN 92 4 154496 1).’;

*1

(*2)  Determination of airborne fibre concentrations. A recommended method, by phase-contrast optical microscopy (membrane filter method), WHO, Geneva 1997 (ISBN 92 4 154496 1).’;

*2

---

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 188/79 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 188/79

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the ‘European Media Freedom Act’

(2023/C 188/08)

| Rapporteur: | Mark SPEICH (DE/EPP), Secretary of State for Federal, European and International Affairs and Media (North Rhine-Westphalia) |
| --- | --- |
| Reference documents: | Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU
  COM(2022) 457 final
  Commission Recommendation on internal safeguards for editorial independence and ownership transparency in the media sector
  C(2022) 6536 final |

Rapporteur:

Mark SPEICH (DE/EPP), Secretary of State for Federal, European and International Affairs and Media (North Rhine-Westphalia)

Reference documents:

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU

COM(2022) 457 final

Commission Recommendation on internal safeguards for editorial independence and ownership transparency in the media sector

C(2022) 6536 final

I.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU

COM(2022) 457 final

Amendment 1

Recital 2

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (2) | Given their unique role, the protection of media freedom and pluralism is an essential feature of a well-functioning internal market for media services (or ‘internal media market’). This market has substantially changed since the beginning of the new century, becoming increasingly digital and international.
  It offers many economic opportunities but also faces a number of challenges.
  The Union should help the media sector seize those opportunities within the internal market, while at the same time protecting the values, such as the protection of the fundamental rights, that are common to the Union and to its Member States. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(2)

Given their unique role, the protection of media freedom and pluralism is an essential feature of a well-functioning internal market for media services (or ‘internal media market’). This market has substantially changed since the beginning of the new century, becoming increasingly digital and international.
  It offers many economic opportunities but also faces a number of challenges.
  The Union should help the media sector seize those opportunities within the internal market, while at the same time protecting the values, such as the protection of the fundamental rights, that are common to the Union and to its Member States.

| (2) | In view of their unique role, special attention must be paid to protecting media freedom and media pluralism in the internal market concerning media services. The internal market for media services has changed fundamentally in recent decades and has become increasingly digital and international.
  It offers many economic opportunities but also faces a number of challenges.
  The Union should support the media sector in taking advantage of these opportunities in the internal market, while working to ensure that the common values of the Union and the Member States, such as fundamental rights, are protected. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In view of their unique role, special attention must be paid to protecting media freedom and media pluralism in the internal market concerning media services. The internal market for media services has changed fundamentally in recent decades and has become increasingly digital and international.
  It offers many economic opportunities but also faces a number of challenges.
  The Union should support the media sector in taking advantage of these opportunities in the internal market, while working to ensure that the common values of the Union and the Member States, such as fundamental rights, are protected.

Reason

The special role of the media as an economic and cultural good, as well as the respective competences of the European Union and its Member States stemming from this role, must be taken into account.

Amendment 2

Recital 3

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (3) | In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross-border setting. Global online platforms act as gateways to media content, with business models that tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms are also essential providers of online advertising, which has diverted financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of content on offer. As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, they require scale to remain competitive and to thrive in the internal market. To that effect, the possibility to offer services across borders and obtain investment including from or in other Member States
  is particularly important
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(3)

In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross-border setting. Global online platforms act as gateways to media content, with business models that tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms are also essential providers of online advertising, which has diverted financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of content on offer. As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, they require scale to remain competitive and to thrive in the internal market. To that effect, the possibility to offer services across borders and obtain investment including from or in other Member States
  is particularly important
  .

| (3) | In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross-border setting. Global online platforms
  and search engines
  act as gateways to media content, with business models that tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms are also essential providers of online advertising, which has diverted financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of content on offer.
  These market participants must therefore be appropriately involved in order to ensure the independence and diversity of the media.
  As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, they require scale to remain competitive and to thrive in the internal market. To that effect, the possibility to offer services across borders and obtain investment including from or in other Member States
  can be of particular importance
  .


  At the same time, however, corporate growth can have the effect of limiting the diversity of content and offerings in the domestic market and further increase the pressure on local or regionally active market players. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross-border setting. Global online platforms
  and search engines
  act as gateways to media content, with business models that tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms are also essential providers of online advertising, which has diverted financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of content on offer.
  These market participants must therefore be appropriately involved in order to ensure the independence and diversity of the media.
  As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, they require scale to remain competitive and to thrive in the internal market. To that effect, the possibility to offer services across borders and obtain investment including from or in other Member States
  can be of particular importance
  .

At the same time, however, corporate growth can have the effect of limiting the diversity of content and offerings in the domestic market and further increase the pressure on local or regionally active market players.

Reason

All relevant developments of the market are to be taken into consideration.

Amendment 3

Recital 4

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (4) | However, the internal market for media services is insufficiently integrated. A number of national restrictions hamper free movement within the internal market. In particular, different
  national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence
  , insufficient
  cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies
  as well as opaque
  and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources
  make it difficult for media market players to operate and expand across borders and
  lead to an uneven level playing field
  across the Union
  . The integrity of the internal market for media services may also be challenged by providers that systematically engage in disinformation, including information manipulation and interference, and abuse the internal market freedoms, including by state-controlled media service providers financed by certain third countries. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(4)

However, the internal market for media services is insufficiently integrated. A number of national restrictions hamper free movement within the internal market. In particular, different
  national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence
  , insufficient
  cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies
  as well as opaque
  and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources
  make it difficult for media market players to operate and expand across borders and
  lead to an uneven level playing field
  across the Union
  . The integrity of the internal market for media services may also be challenged by providers that systematically engage in disinformation, including information manipulation and interference, and abuse the internal market freedoms, including by state-controlled media service providers financed by certain third countries.

| (4) | Functioning
  national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence
  take into account the needs at national, regional and local level, in accordance with the Member States’ fundamental duty to take adequate measures to ensure media pluralism. Common minimum standards for the development of these measures, set while respecting the cultural sovereignty of the Member States, are likely to promote the internal market and prevent inappropriate national restrictions on free movement within the internal market. For this purpose,
  cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies
  should also be improved. Opaque
  and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources lead to an uneven level playing field
  which can also impair competition in the publishing sector
  . The integrity of the internal market for media services may also be challenged by providers that systematically engage in disinformation, including information manipulation and interference, and abuse the internal market freedoms, including by state-controlled media service providers financed by certain third countries. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Functioning
  national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence
  take into account the needs at national, regional and local level, in accordance with the Member States’ fundamental duty to take adequate measures to ensure media pluralism. Common minimum standards for the development of these measures, set while respecting the cultural sovereignty of the Member States, are likely to promote the internal market and prevent inappropriate national restrictions on free movement within the internal market. For this purpose,
  cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies
  should also be improved. Opaque
  and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources lead to an uneven level playing field
  which can also impair competition in the publishing sector
  . The integrity of the internal market for media services may also be challenged by providers that systematically engage in disinformation, including information manipulation and interference, and abuse the internal market freedoms, including by state-controlled media service providers financed by certain third countries.

Reason

The respective competences of the European Union and its Member States have to be reflected.

Amendment 4

Recital 5

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (5) | Moreover, in response to challenges to media pluralism and media freedom online, some Member States have taken regulatory measures and other Member States are likely to do so, with a risk of furthering the divergence in national approaches and restrictions to free movement in the internal market. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(5)

Moreover, in response to challenges to media pluralism and media freedom online, some Member States have taken regulatory measures and other Member States are likely to do so, with a risk of furthering the divergence in national approaches and restrictions to free movement in the internal market.

Reason

It seems inappropriate to consider measures taken in line with national responsibility and competence to protect media plurality as an obstacle to the internal market.

Amendment 5

Recital 6

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (6) | Recipients of media services in the Union (natural persons who are nationals of Member States or benefit from rights conferred upon them by Union law and legal persons established in the Union) should be able to effectively enjoy the freedom to receive free and pluralistic media services in the internal market. In fostering the cross-border flow of media services, a minimum level of protection of service recipients should be ensured in the internal market. That would be in compliance with the right to receive and impart information pursuant to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). It is thus necessary to harmonise certain aspects of national rules related to media services. In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU to further promote media independence and pluralism, in particular by introducing legislation addressing threats to media independence through EU-wide minimum standards. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(6)

Recipients of media services in the Union (natural persons who are nationals of Member States or benefit from rights conferred upon them by Union law and legal persons established in the Union) should be able to effectively enjoy the freedom to receive free and pluralistic media services in the internal market. In fostering the cross-border flow of media services, a minimum level of protection of service recipients should be ensured in the internal market. That would be in compliance with the right to receive and impart information pursuant to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). It is thus necessary to harmonise certain aspects of national rules related to media services. In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU to further promote media independence and pluralism, in particular by introducing legislation addressing threats to media independence through EU-wide minimum standards.

Reason

The regulation should be focused on the competence of the European Union.

Amendment 6

Recital 7

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (7) | For the purposes of this Regulation, the definition of a media service should be limited to services as defined by the Treaty and therefore should cover any form of economic activity. This definition should exclude user-generated content uploaded to an online platform unless it constitutes a professional activity normally provided for consideration (be it of financial or of other nature). It should also exclude purely private correspondence, such as e-mails, as well as all services that do not have the provision of audiovisual or audio programmes or press publications as their principal purpose, meaning where the content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose, such as advertisements or information related to a product or a service provided by websites that do not offer media services. The definition of a media service should cover in particular television or radio broadcasts, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts or press publications. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(7)

For the purposes of this Regulation, the definition of a media service should be limited to services as defined by the Treaty and therefore should cover any form of economic activity. This definition should exclude user-generated content uploaded to an online platform unless it constitutes a professional activity normally provided for consideration (be it of financial or of other nature). It should also exclude purely private correspondence, such as e-mails, as well as all services that do not have the provision of audiovisual or audio programmes or press publications as their principal purpose, meaning where the content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose, such as advertisements or information related to a product or a service provided by websites that do not offer media services. The definition of a media service should cover in particular television or radio broadcasts, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts or press publications. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.

| (7) | For the purposes of this Regulation, the definition of a media service should be limited to services as defined by the Treaty and therefore should cover any form of
  cross-border
  economic activity. This definition should exclude user-generated content uploaded to an online platform unless it constitutes a professional activity normally provided for consideration (be it of financial or of other nature). It should also exclude purely private correspondence, such as e-mails, as well as all services that do not have the provision of audiovisual or audio programmes or press publications as their principal purpose, meaning where the content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose, such as advertisements or information related to a product or a service provided by websites that do not offer media services. The definition of a media service should cover in particular television or radio broadcasts, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts or press publications. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

For the purposes of this Regulation, the definition of a media service should be limited to services as defined by the Treaty and therefore should cover any form of
  cross-border
  economic activity. This definition should exclude user-generated content uploaded to an online platform unless it constitutes a professional activity normally provided for consideration (be it of financial or of other nature). It should also exclude purely private correspondence, such as e-mails, as well as all services that do not have the provision of audiovisual or audio programmes or press publications as their principal purpose, meaning where the content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose, such as advertisements or information related to a product or a service provided by websites that do not offer media services. The definition of a media service should cover in particular television or radio broadcasts, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts or press publications. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.

Reason

The regulation should be focused on the competence of the European Union.

Amendment 7

Recital 10

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (10) | State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  1 million
  inhabitants. However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individuals. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(10)

State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  1 million
  inhabitants. However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individuals.

| (10) | State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at
  Union,
  national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  100 000
  inhabitants
  , with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold
  . However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individuals
  , provided that this does not involve more than reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the media service provider
  . |
| --- | --- |

(10)

State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at
  Union,
  national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  100 000
  inhabitants
  , with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold
  . However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individuals
  , provided that this does not involve more than reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the media service provider
  .

Reason

The European Union itself should also be bound to transparency requirements. At the same time, the 1 million threshold is unrealistic for smaller Member States. Lowering the population threshold and considering it together with a minimum threshold for annual spending reduces the risk of transparency loopholes, while avoiding the creation of disproportionate administrative burden related to reporting requirements.

Amendment 8

Recital 11

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (11) | In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of
  the internal media market, it is essential
  not only
  to guarantee the fundamental freedoms
  under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipients of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipients should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists and editors in an independent manner and in line with journalistic standards and hence provide trustworthy information, including news and current affairs content. Such right does not entail any correspondent obligation on any given media service provider to adhere to standards not set out explicitly by law. Such quality media services are also an antidote against disinformation, including foreign information manipulation and interference. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(11)

In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of
  the internal media market, it is essential
  not only
  to guarantee the fundamental freedoms
  under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipients of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipients should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists and editors in an independent manner and in line with journalistic standards and hence provide trustworthy information, including news and current affairs content. Such right does not entail any correspondent obligation on any given media service provider to adhere to standards not set out explicitly by law. Such quality media services are also an antidote against disinformation, including foreign information manipulation and interference.

| (11) | In order to take adequate account of media services in their role as cultural goods in
  the internal market, it is essential to guarantee the fundamental freedoms
  enshrined in the Treaty while preserving the cultural diversity of the Union in the light of the obligation under fundamental law to ensure diversity of the media and to protect users’ freedom of information. To this end, the Member States’ responsibility for shaping their respective national media systems must be emphasised and guided by common values, while respecting the cultural sovereignty and different constitutional traditions of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

In order to take adequate account of media services in their role as cultural goods in
  the internal market, it is essential to guarantee the fundamental freedoms
  enshrined in the Treaty while preserving the cultural diversity of the Union in the light of the obligation under fundamental law to ensure diversity of the media and to protect users’ freedom of information. To this end, the Member States’ responsibility for shaping their respective national media systems must be emphasised and guided by common values, while respecting the cultural sovereignty and different constitutional traditions of the Member States.

Reason

The respective competences of the European Union and its Member States have to be reflected.

Amendment 9

Recital 13

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (13) | The free flow of trustworthy information
  is essential in a well-functioning internal market for media services. Therefore,
  the provision of media services should not be subject to
  any
  restrictions
  contrary to this Regulation or other rules of Union law, such as Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council providing for measures necessary to protect users from illegal and harmful content.
  Restrictions could also
  derive
  from measures applied by national
  public
  authorities in
  compliance
  with Union law. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(13)

The free flow of trustworthy information
  is essential in a well-functioning internal market for media services. Therefore,
  the provision of media services should not be subject to
  any
  restrictions
  contrary to this Regulation or other rules of Union law, such as Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council providing for measures necessary to protect users from illegal and harmful content.
  Restrictions could also
  derive
  from measures applied by national
  public
  authorities in
  compliance
  with Union law.

| (13) | The free flow of trustworthy information
  should be guaranteed as far as possible. It must therefore be the duty of the Member States, along the lines of their national constitutions, in accordance with Article 11 and other fundamental rights, particularly of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, namely freedom of expression and entrepreneurial freedoms, and respecting the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, to ensure an appropriate legal and administrative framework in which pluralism and the independence of the media are guaranteed in an effective and adequate manner.
  The provision of media services should not be subject to restrictions
  that violate these fundamental principles and are not in compliance with Union law.
  Restrictions could also
  result
  from measures applied by national authorities in
  accordance
  with Union law. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The free flow of trustworthy information
  should be guaranteed as far as possible. It must therefore be the duty of the Member States, along the lines of their national constitutions, in accordance with Article 11 and other fundamental rights, particularly of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, namely freedom of expression and entrepreneurial freedoms, and respecting the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, to ensure an appropriate legal and administrative framework in which pluralism and the independence of the media are guaranteed in an effective and adequate manner.
  The provision of media services should not be subject to restrictions
  that violate these fundamental principles and are not in compliance with Union law.
  Restrictions could also
  result
  from measures applied by national authorities in
  accordance
  with Union law.

Reason

The respective competences of the European Union and its Member States have to be reflected.

Amendment 10

Recital 14

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (14) | The protection of editorial independence is a precondition for exercising the activity of media service providers and their professional integrity. Editorial independence is especially important for media service providers providing news and current affairs content given its societal role as a public good.
  Media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities freely in the internal market and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(14)

The protection of editorial independence is a precondition for exercising the activity of media service providers and their professional integrity. Editorial independence is especially important for media service providers providing news and current affairs content given its societal role as a public good.
  Media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities freely in the internal market and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders.

| (14) | Media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities
  as
  freely
  as possible
  in the internal market
  , maintaining to this effect their editorial independence,
  and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

Media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities
  as
  freely
  as possible
  in the internal market
  , maintaining to this effect their editorial independence,
  and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders.

Reason

The respective competences of the European Union and its Member States have to be reflected. Moreover, editorial freedom should be taken into account as an element in ensuring media diversity.

Amendment 11

Recital 18

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (18) | Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in
  the internal media market
  , by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. However, public service media
  can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. This situation may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their mission that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service mission of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations.
  The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(18)

Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in
  the internal media market
  , by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. However, public service media
  can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. This situation may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their mission that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service mission of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations.
  The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

| (18) | Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in
  securing media pluralism
  , by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. However, public service media
  may have an impact on the provision of private media services in the internal market due to their institutional proximity to the state and the public funding they receive. It is therefore necessary, taking into account the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to support the establishment of public service media by the Member States, but at the same time to define common minimum standards for this purpose which take into account the principles of the internal market, while respecting Protocol 29 annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
  The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in
  securing media pluralism
  , by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. However, public service media
  may have an impact on the provision of private media services in the internal market due to their institutional proximity to the state and the public funding they receive. It is therefore necessary, taking into account the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to support the establishment of public service media by the Member States, but at the same time to define common minimum standards for this purpose which take into account the principles of the internal market, while respecting Protocol 29 annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
  The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Reason

The special role of public media in the light of the Amsterdam Protocol has to be respected.

Amendment 12

Recital 19

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (19) | It is crucial for the recipients of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information.
  In this context, the measures taken by Member States under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 should not be affected.
  The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(19)

It is crucial for the recipients of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information.
  In this context, the measures taken by Member States under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 should not be affected.
  The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible.

| (19) | It is crucial for the recipients of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information.
  This should be in line with the requirements applicable in principle to audiovisual media services under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/849, but without prejudice to the measures taken by Member States in other respects.
  The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

It is crucial for the recipients of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information.
  This should be in line with the requirements applicable in principle to audiovisual media services under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/849, but without prejudice to the measures taken by Member States in other respects.
  The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible.

Reason

Contradictions with applicable law should be avoided.

Amendment 13

Recital 20

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (20) | Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards.
  Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, once the overall editorial line has been agreed between their owners and editors, the freedom of the editors to take individual decisions in the course of their professional activity. The objective to shield editors from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of content as part of their everyday work contributes to ensuring a level playing field in the internal market for media services and the quality of such services. That objective is also in conformity with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter. In view of these considerations, media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipients. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(20)

Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards.
  Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, once the overall editorial line has been agreed between their owners and editors, the freedom of the editors to take individual decisions in the course of their professional activity. The objective to shield editors from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of content as part of their everyday work contributes to ensuring a level playing field in the internal market for media services and the quality of such services. That objective is also in conformity with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter. In view of these considerations, media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipients.

| (20) | Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards.
  Media service providers should consider measures that allow editorial staff to operate freely in an appropriate manner. These measures can help to improve competitive conditions in the internal market and improve the quality of services. This objective is also consistent with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards.
  Media service providers should consider measures that allow editorial staff to operate freely in an appropriate manner. These measures can help to improve competitive conditions in the internal market and improve the quality of services. This objective is also consistent with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter.

Reason

A differentiated view of editorial freedom must be taken into account.

Amendment 14

Recital 21

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (21) | To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (50) should be exempted from the requirements related to information and
  internal safeguards
  with a view to
  guaranteeing
  the independence of individual editorial decisions.
  Moreover, media service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs, in particular if they are small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of that Article.
  The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(21)

To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (50) should be exempted from the requirements related to information and
  internal safeguards
  with a view to
  guaranteeing
  the independence of individual editorial decisions.
  Moreover, media service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs, in particular if they are small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of that Article.
  The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners.

| (21) | To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (50) should be exempted from the requirements related to information and
  measures
  with a view to
  fostering
  the independence of individual editorial decisions. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (50) should be exempted from the requirements related to information and
  measures
  with a view to
  fostering
  the independence of individual editorial decisions. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners.

Reason

A differentiated view of editorial freedom must be taken into account.

Amendment 15

Recital 22

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (22) | Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(22)

Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.

| (22) | Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU
  or other regulatory authorities designated by the Member States in accordance with the requirements set out in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU
  are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU
  or other regulatory authorities designated by the Member States in accordance with the requirements set out in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU
  are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.

Reason

The different structures of media supervision must be taken into account.

Amendment 16

Recital 23

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (23) | The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level
  a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board
  . The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings
  , in agreement with the Commission,
  experts and observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(23)

The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level
  a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board
  . The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings
  , in agreement with the Commission,
  experts and observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.

| (23) | The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level
  and systems of self- or co-regulation
  ,
  a common representative should be selected by means of appropriate procedures, and, if necessary, supplementary procedures for the involvement of regulatory bodies, especially those of self-regulation or co-regulation, should be established. The voting rights of the designated representative should be limited to one representative per Member State
  . The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings experts and observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level
  and systems of self- or co-regulation
  ,
  a common representative should be selected by means of appropriate procedures, and, if necessary, supplementary procedures for the involvement of regulatory bodies, especially those of self-regulation or co-regulation, should be established. The voting rights of the designated representative should be limited to one representative per Member State
  . The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings experts and observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.

Reason

The different structures of media supervision must be taken into account.

Amendment 17

Recital 24

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (24) | Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions in agreement with the Commission or upon its request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(24)

Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions in agreement with the Commission or upon its request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.

| (24) | The Board’s work should be independent and remote from political influence. The Commission should therefore not have any determining influence on the work of the Board, outside its power to consult the Board or to perform its role as ‘guardian of the Treaties’. The Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the uniform application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU. To that end, the Board should advise and assist the Commission, in particular on technical or practical aspects relevant to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices, and prepare opinions in the cases provided for in this Regulation. In order to carry out its tasks effectively, the Board should be able to draw on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The secretariat provided by the Commission should support the Board both administratively and organisationally and in the performance of its tasks. To ensure the independence and non-governmental nature of the Board’s work, the secretariat should have sufficient financial and human resources. In its substantive work, the secretariat should be independent of the Commission and subject only to the leadership of the Board, namely its Chair or vice-Chair. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

The Board’s work should be independent and remote from political influence. The Commission should therefore not have any determining influence on the work of the Board, outside its power to consult the Board or to perform its role as ‘guardian of the Treaties’. The Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the uniform application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU. To that end, the Board should advise and assist the Commission, in particular on technical or practical aspects relevant to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices, and prepare opinions in the cases provided for in this Regulation. In order to carry out its tasks effectively, the Board should be able to draw on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The secretariat provided by the Commission should support the Board both administratively and organisationally and in the performance of its tasks. To ensure the independence and non-governmental nature of the Board’s work, the secretariat should have sufficient financial and human resources. In its substantive work, the secretariat should be independent of the Commission and subject only to the leadership of the Board, namely its Chair or vice-Chair.

Reason

The independence of the Board’s work must be ensured.

Amendment 18

Recital 26

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (26) | To ensure the effective enforcement of Union media law, to prevent the possible circumvention of the applicable media rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid the raising of additional barriers in the internal market for media services, it is essential to provide for a clear, legally binding framework for national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(26)

To ensure the effective enforcement of Union media law, to prevent the possible circumvention of the applicable media rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid the raising of additional barriers in the internal market for media services, it is essential to provide for a clear, legally binding framework for national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently.

| (26) | In order to ensure the effective enforcement of Union measures concerning the media, to prevent possible circumvention of the applicable rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid additional barriers to the provision of media services in the internal market, effective and efficient cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies is essential. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

In order to ensure the effective enforcement of Union measures concerning the media, to prevent possible circumvention of the applicable rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid additional barriers to the provision of media services in the internal market, effective and efficient cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies is essential.

Reason

The applicable order of competences must be preserved.

Amendment 19

Recital 30

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (30) | Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened
  and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation
  . In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law.
  Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(30)

Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened
  and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation
  . In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law.
  Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

| (30) | Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law.

Reason

The Board’s competences should be focused on cross-border issues.

Amendment 20

Recital 31

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (31) | Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self-regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States.
  Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of Reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(31)

Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self-regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States.
  Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of Reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act].

| (31) | Very large online platforms
  and very large search engines
  act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self-regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States.
  Therefore, providers of very large online platforms and very large search engines also have to take due account of users’ freedom of information, freedom and media pluralism in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [the Digital Services Regulation]. This Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform or a very large search engine from taking immediate action, in accordance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [the Digital Services Regulation], to address illegal content distributed through its service or to mitigate systemic risks posed by the distribution of certain content through its service. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

Very large online platforms
  and very large search engines
  act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self-regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States.
  Therefore, providers of very large online platforms and very large search engines also have to take due account of users’ freedom of information, freedom and media pluralism in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [the Digital Services Regulation]. This Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform or a very large search engine from taking immediate action, in accordance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [the Digital Services Regulation], to address illegal content distributed through its service or to mitigate systemic risks posed by the distribution of certain content through its service.

Reason

The important role of major intermediary services in terms of media content availability should be taken into account.

Amendment 21

Recital 32

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (32) | It is furthermore justified, in view of an expected positive impact on freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, that where media service providers adhere to certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their complaints against decisions of providers of very large online platforms are treated with priority and without undue delay. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(32)

It is furthermore justified, in view of an expected positive impact on freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, that where media service providers adhere to certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their complaints against decisions of providers of very large online platforms are treated with priority and without undue delay.

| (32) | Given the expected positive impact on the freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, it is also justified that in cases where media service providers comply with certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their content or offerings are not readily blocked, deleted or otherwise excluded from distribution or publication by the platform provider or search engine. |
| --- | --- |

(32)

Given the expected positive impact on the freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, it is also justified that in cases where media service providers comply with certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their content or offerings are not readily blocked, deleted or otherwise excluded from distribution or publication by the platform provider or search engine.

Reason

The important role of major intermediary services in terms of media content availability should be taken into account.

Amendment 22

Recital 33

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (33) | To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility
  not to accept such self-declaration
  where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(33)

To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility
  not to accept such self-declaration
  where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.

| (33) | To this end, providers of very large online platforms
  or very large


  search engines
  should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements
  and which supervision they are subject to
  , while at the same time retaining the possibility
  to have such a self-declaration verified
  where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

To this end, providers of very large online platforms
  or very large


  search engines
  should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements
  and which supervision they are subject to
  , while at the same time retaining the possibility
  to have such a self-declaration verified
  where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.

Reason

The important role of major intermediary services in terms of media content availability should be taken into account, while any means of facilitating the verification of compliance with specific requirements should be welcomed.

Amendment 23

Recital 35

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (35) | Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that
  restrictions on
  their content
  are
  frequently
  imposed
  by providers of very large online platforms without sufficient grounds, in order to find an amicable solution for
  terminating any unjustified restrictions and
  avoiding
  them
  in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(35)

Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that
  restrictions on
  their content
  are
  frequently
  imposed
  by providers of very large online platforms without sufficient grounds, in order to find an amicable solution for
  terminating any unjustified restrictions and
  avoiding
  them
  in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.

| (35) | Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that their content
  is
  frequently
  objected to
  by providers of very large online platforms
  or very large search engines
  without sufficient grounds, in order to find an amicable solution for avoiding
  claims
  in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information. |
| --- | --- |

(35)

Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that their content
  is
  frequently
  objected to
  by providers of very large online platforms
  or very large search engines
  without sufficient grounds, in order to find an amicable solution for avoiding
  claims
  in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.

Reason

The important role of major intermediary services in terms of media content availability should be taken into account.

Amendment 24

Recital 37

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (37) | Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(37)

Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations.

| (37) | Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest, in particular but not only
  implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations. |
| --- | --- |

(37)

Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest, in particular but not only
  implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations.

Reason

The competence of Member States to ensure media plurality should not be restricted.

Amendment 25

Recital 39

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (39) | It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion
  , on the Commission’s request,
  where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market
  for media services
  . This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State
  , or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(39)

It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion
  , on the Commission’s request,
  where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market
  for media services
  . This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State
  , or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State
  .

| (39) | It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion where national measures
  regarding media services
  are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State. |
| --- | --- |

(39)

It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion where national measures
  regarding media services
  are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State.

Reason

The focus should be on internal market issues.

Amendment 26

Recital 40

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (40) | Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism
  or
  editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub-sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(40)

Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism
  or
  editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub-sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration.

| (40) | Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism
  , including
  editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub-sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration. |
| --- | --- |

(40)

Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism
  , including
  editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub-sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration.

Reason

The focus should be on internal market issues.

Amendment 27

Recital 41

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (41) | National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should
  be involved in the
  assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence
  where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to
  foster legal certainty and ensure that the rules and procedures are genuinely geared at protecting media pluralism and editorial independence,
  it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence
  are set out in advance. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(41)

National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should
  be involved in the
  assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence
  where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to
  foster legal certainty and ensure that the rules and procedures are genuinely geared at protecting media pluralism and editorial independence,
  it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence
  are set out in advance.

| (41) | National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should
  assess
  the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to
  genuinely protect media pluralism,
  it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism are set out in advance. |
| --- | --- |

(41)

National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should
  assess
  the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to
  genuinely protect media pluralism,
  it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism are set out in advance.

Reason

National regulatory authorities or bodies are responsible for assessing media concentrations within their borders.

Amendment 28

Recital 42

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (42) | When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (55), the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence
  should therefore be aimed at legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(42)

When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (55), the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence
  should therefore be aimed at legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law.

| (42) | When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (55), the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism should therefore be aimed at
  protecting freedom and pluralism of the media, taking into account the importance of editorial independence, as
  legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law. |
| --- | --- |

(42)

When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (55), the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism should therefore be aimed at
  protecting freedom and pluralism of the media, taking into account the importance of editorial independence, as
  legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law.

Reason

The relevance of media pluralism should be made clear.

Amendment 29

Recital 43

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (43) | The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiable concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or operating in more than one Member State
  or result in media service providers having a significant influence on formation of public opinion in a given media market. Moreover, where the concentration has not been assessed for its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the relevant national authorities or bodies, or where the national regulatory authorities or bodies have not consulted the Board regarding a given media market concentration, but that media market concentration is considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, the Board should be able to provide an opinion, upon request of the Commission. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(43)

The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiable concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or operating in more than one Member State
  or result in media service providers having a significant influence on formation of public opinion in a given media market. Moreover, where the concentration has not been assessed for its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the relevant national authorities or bodies, or where the national regulatory authorities or bodies have not consulted the Board regarding a given media market concentration, but that media market concentration is considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, the Board should be able to provide an opinion, upon request of the Commission. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board.

| (43) | The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiable concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or operating in more than one Member State
  . The Commission should be able to issue its own opinions following the opinions of the Board. |
| --- | --- |

(43)

The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiable concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or operating in more than one Member State
  . The Commission should be able to issue its own opinions following the opinions of the Board.

Reason

The focus should be on internal market issues.

Amendment 30

Recital 44

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (44) | With a view to ensuring pluralistic media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account of a set of criteria.
  In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment.
  Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the media market concentration in question. Assessment of safeguards for editorial independence should include the examination of potential risks of undue interference by the prospective owner, management or governance structure in the individual editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the individual editorial decisions within the media undertakings involved should also be taken into account. In assessing the potential impacts, the effects of the concentration in question on the economic sustainability of the entity or entities subject to the concentration should also be considered and whether, in the absence of the concentration, they would be economically sustainable, in the sense that they would be able in the medium term to continue to provide and further develop financially viable, adequately resourced and technologically adapted quality media services in the market. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(44)

With a view to ensuring pluralistic media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account of a set of criteria.
  In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment.
  Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the media market concentration in question. Assessment of safeguards for editorial independence should include the examination of potential risks of undue interference by the prospective owner, management or governance structure in the individual editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the individual editorial decisions within the media undertakings involved should also be taken into account. In assessing the potential impacts, the effects of the concentration in question on the economic sustainability of the entity or entities subject to the concentration should also be considered and whether, in the absence of the concentration, they would be economically sustainable, in the sense that they would be able in the medium term to continue to provide and further develop financially viable, adequately resourced and technologically adapted quality media services in the market.

| (44) | In order to ensure pluralistic media markets, Member States should define a number of relevant criteria to be taken into account.
  In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment.
  In deciding whether a merger is permissible, consideration should be given to whether the acquiring and acquired entities would remain economically viable without the merger, whether there are alternatives to ensure their economic viability, and whether measures are possible and effective to continue to ensure media plurality despite a merger. |
| --- | --- |

(44)

In order to ensure pluralistic media markets, Member States should define a number of relevant criteria to be taken into account.
  In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment.
  In deciding whether a merger is permissible, consideration should be given to whether the acquiring and acquired entities would remain economically viable without the merger, whether there are alternatives to ensure their economic viability, and whether measures are possible and effective to continue to ensure media plurality despite a merger.

Reason

It should be clear that Member States have the right and duty to decide on criteria that are in line with the set principles.

Amendment 31

Recital 50

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (50) | Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market
  for
  media services
  , including as regards the degree of concentration of the market at national and regional level and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference
  . It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market
  , to alert about vulnerabilities around media pluralism and editorial independence,
  and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment
  , regulatory cooperation and convergence in media regulation, obstacles to the provision of media services, including in a digital environment,
  as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market
  and national media markets as well as national legislation affecting media service providers. In addition, the monitoring should provide an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, including those proposed in the accompanying Recommendation
  . In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(50)

Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market
  for
  media services
  , including as regards the degree of concentration of the market at national and regional level and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference
  . It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market
  , to alert about vulnerabilities around media pluralism and editorial independence,
  and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment
  , regulatory cooperation and convergence in media regulation, obstacles to the provision of media services, including in a digital environment,
  as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market
  and national media markets as well as national legislation affecting media service providers. In addition, the monitoring should provide an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, including those proposed in the accompanying Recommendation
  . In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved.

| (50) | Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market
  regarding
  media services.
  Developments at the level of the Member States should also be included, in particular to take account of the interaction between the internal market and national markets and the impact on the freedom and plurality of the media at the various levels
  . It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market
  and national media markets
  . In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved. |
| --- | --- |

(50)

Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market
  regarding
  media services.
  Developments at the level of the Member States should also be included, in particular to take account of the interaction between the internal market and national markets and the impact on the freedom and plurality of the media at the various levels
  . It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market
  and national media markets
  . In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved.

Reason

The tasks of the Commission should be focused on aspects relating to the internal market. This should necessarily include a consideration of the developments of media markets in the Member States, in particular as these may interact with the single market. An overview of and alerting about possible vulnerabilities can also help to develop adequate measures to safeguard media freedom and pluralism.

Amendment 32

Recital 51

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (51) | To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions
  concerning independent media authorities, the Board and the required amendments to Directive 2010/13/EU (Articles 7 to 12 and 27 of this Regulation)
  should apply
  3
  months after the entry into force of the Act
  , while all other provisions of this Regulation will apply 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. In particular, this is needed to ensure that the Board will be established in time to ensure a successful implementation of the Regulation
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(51)

To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions
  concerning independent media authorities, the Board and the required amendments to Directive 2010/13/EU (Articles 7 to 12 and 27 of this Regulation)
  should apply
  3
  months after the entry into force of the Act
  , while all other provisions of this Regulation will apply 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. In particular, this is needed to ensure that the Board will be established in time to ensure a successful implementation of the Regulation
  .

| (51) | To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions should
  essentially
  apply
  20
  months after the entry into force of the Act. |
| --- | --- |

(51)

To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions should
  essentially
  apply
  20
  months after the entry into force of the Act.

Reason

As Member States might have to readjust their national regulatory system, the Regulation should lay down an appropriate timeline.

Amendment 33

Article 1(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   This Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market
  for
  media services, including the establishment of the European Board for Media Services, while
  preserving
  the quality of media services. | 1.   This Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market
  regarding
  media services, including the establishment of the European Board for Media Services, while
  seeking to preserve
  the quality of media services.




  2.
     
  The Regulation


  lays down, to the extent necessary for the achievement of the objective set out in paragraph 1, common basic principles as minimum standards for the safe and unhindered operation of media services and activity of journalists while ensuring the independence and plurality of the media. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   This Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market
  for
  media services, including the establishment of the European Board for Media Services, while
  preserving
  the quality of media services.

1.   This Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market
  regarding
  media services, including the establishment of the European Board for Media Services, while
  seeking to preserve
  the quality of media services.

2.
     
  The Regulation


  lays down, to the extent necessary for the achievement of the objective set out in paragraph 1, common basic principles as minimum standards for the safe and unhindered operation of media services and activity of journalists while ensuring the independence and plurality of the media.

Reason

Reason

The objective and scope of the regulation should reflect the European Union’s area of competence and therefore clearly refer to harmonisation of the internal market. Media services are part of the internal market; however, a uniform ‘internal market for media services’ should not be assumed, especially since, despite a constant convergence of the media, the media in all their forms of appearance cannot be assigned to one single market from the user’s perspective. In addition, in order to meaningfully outline the scope of the regulation and clarify its objectives, it should be made clear that the aim of the legal act is to draft common minimum standards concerning the activities of media service providers and journalists and to promote cross-border activities in the light of the independence and pluralism of the media.

Amendment 34

Amendment 34

Article 1(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2
  .   This Regulation shall not affect rules laid down by: | 3.
     This Regulation shall not affect rules laid down by: |
| (a) | Directive 2000/31/EC; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2
  .   This Regulation shall not affect rules laid down by:

3.
     This Regulation shall not affect rules laid down by:

(a)

Directive 2000/31/EC;

| (
  b
  ) | Directive 2019/790/EU; |
| --- | --- |

(
  b
  )

b

Directive 2019/790/EU;

[...]

| (a) | Directive 2000/31/EC; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Directive 2000/31/EC;

| (b) | Directive 2010/13/EU, with the exception of the amendments made by Article 27 of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

Directive 2010/13/EU, with the exception of the amendments made by Article 27 of this Regulation;

Directive 2010/13/EU, with the exception of the amendments made by Article 27 of this Regulation;

| (
  c
  ) | Directive 2019/790/EU; |
| --- | --- |

(
  c
  )

c

Directive 2019/790/EU;

[...]

Reason

Reason

The standard laid down by the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU) should be preserved. It is thereby clarified that its requirements also remain unaffected by the supplementary provisions of this legal act.

Amendment 35

Amendment 35

Article 1(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 3.
     
  This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and Section 5 of Chapter III, provided that those rules comply with Union law. | 4.
     
  Member States shall remain free to require media services under their jurisdiction to comply with more detailed or stricter rules in the fields covered by this Regulation, provided that such rules are in compliance with Union law. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

3.
     
  This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and Section 5 of Chapter III, provided that those rules comply with Union law.

4.
     
  Member States shall remain free to require media services under their jurisdiction to comply with more detailed or stricter rules in the fields covered by this Regulation, provided that such rules are in compliance with Union law.

Reason

Reason

According to the European treaties, cultural sovereignty and thus competence for media regulation lies with the Member States. The European Union must respect the diversity of cultures and has only supplementary and supporting competence in this area, which is protected by Article 167 in conjunction with Article 6(c) TFEU. Accordingly, as in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, there should be no harmonisation that goes beyond minimum standards.

Amendment 36

Amendment 36

Article 2, point (3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (3) | ‘public service media provider’ means a media service provider which is entrusted with a public service mission
  under national law or
  receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a mission; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(3)

‘public service media provider’ means a media service provider which is entrusted with a public service mission
  under national law or
  receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a mission;

under national law or

| (3) | ‘public service media provider’ means a media service provider which is entrusted with a public service mission
  and
  receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a mission; |
| --- | --- |

(3)

‘public service media provider’ means a media service provider which is entrusted with a public service mission
  and
  receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a mission;

and

Reason

Reason

Financing is an essential factor for the internal market relevance of a public service offering and an essential element of public service media. Moreover, the openness of the term ‘mission’ is not suitable for sensibly limiting the scope of application. For example, it could unjustifiably also cover private media service providers subject to plurality requirements by law.

Amendment 37

Amendment 37

Article 2, point (10)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (10) | ‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article
  25
  (4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/
  XXX
  [Digital Services Act]; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(10)

(10)

‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article
  25
  (4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/
  XXX
  [Digital Services Act];

25

XXX

| (10) | ‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article
  33
  (4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act]; |
| --- | --- |

(10)

(10)

‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article
  33
  (4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act];

33

| (11) | ‘provider of very large search engine’ means a provider of a search engine that has been designated as a very large search engine pursuant to Article 33(4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act]; |
| --- | --- |

(11)

(11)

‘provider of very large search engine’ means a provider of a search engine that has been designated as a very large search engine pursuant to Article 33(4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act];

Reason

Reason

The definition under the Digital Services Act (1) is added for the purposes of inclusion in Article 17.

1

Amendment 38

Amendment 38

Article 2, point (15)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (15) | ‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any
  national or regional
  public authority, such as national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than
  1 million
  inhabitants; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(15)

(15)

‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any
  national or regional
  public authority, such as national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than
  1 million
  inhabitants;

national or regional

1 million

| (15) | ‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any public authority, such as
  EU, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than
  100 000
  inhabitants,
  with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(15)

(15)

‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any public authority, such as
  EU, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than
  100 000
  inhabitants,
  with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold
  ;

EU

100 000

with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold

Reason

Reason

As far as state advertising is addressed, the EU itself should also be included. At the same time, the 1 million threshold is unrealistic for smaller Member States. Lowering the population threshold and considering it together with a minimum threshold for annual spending reduces the risk of transparency loopholes while avoiding the creation of disproportionate administrative burden related to reporting requirements.

Amendment 39

Amendment 39

Article 3

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Rights of recipients of media services




  Recipients of media services in the Union shall have the right to receive a plurality of news and current affairs content, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers, to the benefit of the public discourse. | Securing media freedom and pluralism




  Member States shall ensure, without prejudice to their national constitutional laws and in accordance with Article 11 and other fundamental rights of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and with respect for the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, an appropriate legislative and administrative framework to guarantee effective pluralism and independence of the media, also taking into account the perspective of the users. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Rights of recipients of media services

Rights of recipients of media services

Recipients of media services in the Union shall have the right to receive a plurality of news and current affairs content, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers, to the benefit of the public discourse.

Recipients of media services in the Union shall have the right to receive a plurality of news and current affairs content, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers, to the benefit of the public discourse.

Securing media freedom and pluralism

Securing media freedom and pluralism

Member States shall ensure, without prejudice to their national constitutional laws and in accordance with Article 11 and other fundamental rights of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and with respect for the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, an appropriate legislative and administrative framework to guarantee effective pluralism and independence of the media, also taking into account the perspective of the users.

Member States shall ensure, without prejudice to their national constitutional laws and in accordance with Article 11 and other fundamental rights of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and with respect for the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, an appropriate legislative and administrative framework to guarantee effective pluralism and independence of the media, also taking into account the perspective of the users.

Reason

Reason

Freedom of information is a legally recognised fundamental right. However, it needs to be further defined and weighed against other legal interests. The scope of the statutory right is unclear in this respect and should be left to further legal definition. With regard to local and regional offerings, the relevance of the standard to the internal market is questionable.

In contrast, the Member States have the right and the duty to ensure diversity of opinion and media and thus to shape their media regulations. In structuring their media regulations, they are obliged to respect the fundamental freedoms of the internal market insofar as these relate to the cross-border provision of media services. Accordingly, as the European Commission has stated in its reports on the rule of law, the vast majority of Member States already have effective regulations for a diverse media landscape with independent media that are in line with European values, standards and objectives. This should not diminish the efforts of the Member States to continue to fulfil their obligations with the greatest possible commitment, especially where deficits are apparent, in view of the deficits that have also been identified and the negative trend for the independence and diversity of the media.

The legal act should therefore emphasise this obligation and enshrine it in law, so that the Union and its Member States can jointly counteract systemic deficits without impairing functioning media systems.

Amendment 40

Amendment 40

Article 4(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Rights of media service providers



  1.   
  Media service providers shall have the right to exercise
  their economic activities in the internal market without restrictions other than those allowed under Union law. | Media independence



  1.   
  Member States shall provide for appropriate measures to ensure that media service providers can carry out
  their economic activities in the internal market without restrictions other than those allowed under Union law. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Rights of media service providers

Rights of media service providers

1.   
  Media service providers shall have the right to exercise
  their economic activities in the internal market without restrictions other than those allowed under Union law.

Media independence

Media independence

1.   
  Member States shall provide for appropriate measures to ensure that media service providers can carry out
  their economic activities in the internal market without restrictions other than those allowed under Union law.

Reason

Reason

The right as provided for in the proposed regulation remains vague and therefore hardly seems to be enforceable. If nevertheless on its basis claims by media service providers could be asserted directly in court, this would be suitable for challenging any measure taken by a Member State concerning a media service provider, including any justified measure taken by regulatory authorities. As the rights of media service providers, and of journalists, guaranteed by fundamental rights and freedoms need to be defined further and are as such part of the legal system of a Member State, the Member States should be required to respect these rights in an appropriate way.

Amendment 41

Amendment 41

Article 4(2), point (a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | interfere in or try to influence in any way, directly or indirectly, editorial policies and decisions by media service providers; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(a)

interfere in or try to influence in any way, directly or indirectly, editorial policies and decisions by media service providers;

| (a) | interfere in or try to influence in any way, directly or indirectly, editorial policies and decisions by media service providers; this shall be without prejudice to legal requirements and their enforcement pursuing general interest objectives, in particular with regard to diversity, illegal content or the protection of minors in the media, or the definition of the public service mission of public service media
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

interfere in or try to influence in any way, directly or indirectly, editorial policies and decisions by media service providers; this shall be without prejudice to legal requirements and their enforcement pursuing general interest objectives, in particular with regard to diversity, illegal content or the protection of minors in the media, or the definition of the public service mission of public service media
  ;

; this shall be without prejudice to legal requirements and their enforcement pursuing general interest objectives, in particular with regard to diversity, illegal content or the protection of minors in the media, or the definition of the public service mission of public service media

Reason

Reason

It should be clarified that the prohibition of any influence on editorial strategies or decisions of media service providers does not include measures of national regulatory bodies aimed at compliance with or enforcement of legally determined requirements, in particular regarding the offer of media service providers.

Amendment 42

Amendment 42

Article 5

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Safeguards for the independent functioning of public
  service media
  providers | Public
  service media |
| 1.
     
  Public service media providers shall provide in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission. | 1.
     
  Member States may provide for public service media that serve their democratic, social and cultural needs. |
| 2.
     
  The head of management and the members of the governing board of public service media providers shall be appointed through a transparent, open and non-discriminatory procedure and on the basis of transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria laid down in advance by national law. | 2.
     
  The financing of public media services shall serve the public service mission and shall take into account the needs of the fulfilment of that mission. For this purpose, Member States shall provide for mechanisms to ensure adequate financing on a predictable basis and compliance with the mission determined by law or on the basis of procedures established by law. |
| The duration of their term of office shall be established by national law, and be adequate and sufficient to ensure effective independence of the public media service provider. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office only exceptionally where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties laid down in advance by national law or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law. | |
| Dismissal decisions shall be duly justified, subject to prior notification to the person concerned, and include the possibility for judicial review. The grounds for dismissal shall be made available to the public. | |
| 3.
     
  Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resources shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded. | 3.
     
  Without prejudice to the competence of the Member States to confer, define and organise the public service mission, Member States shall take steps to ensure that services of public service media take account of the need to safeguard pluralism. To this end, public service providers should be required, in particular, to present as broad a range of topics and opinions as possible in a balanced manner and uphold the principles of objectivity and impartiality in reporting. |
| 4.
     
  Member States shall designate one or more independent authorities or bodies in order to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 to 3. | 4.
     
  In defining and organising their public service media, Member States shall provide for appropriate measures to ensure their editorial independence and for the independence of their supervision authorities or bodies. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Safeguards for the independent functioning of public
  service media
  providers

Safeguards for the independent functioning of public

providers

Public
  service media

Public

1.
     
  Public service media providers shall provide in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission.

1.
     
  Member States may provide for public service media that serve their democratic, social and cultural needs.

2.
     
  The head of management and the members of the governing board of public service media providers shall be appointed through a transparent, open and non-discriminatory procedure and on the basis of transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria laid down in advance by national law.

2.
     
  The financing of public media services shall serve the public service mission and shall take into account the needs of the fulfilment of that mission. For this purpose, Member States shall provide for mechanisms to ensure adequate financing on a predictable basis and compliance with the mission determined by law or on the basis of procedures established by law.

The duration of their term of office shall be established by national law, and be adequate and sufficient to ensure effective independence of the public media service provider. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office only exceptionally where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties laid down in advance by national law or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law.

The duration of their term of office shall be established by national law, and be adequate and sufficient to ensure effective independence of the public media service provider. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office only exceptionally where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties laid down in advance by national law or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law.

Dismissal decisions shall be duly justified, subject to prior notification to the person concerned, and include the possibility for judicial review. The grounds for dismissal shall be made available to the public.

Dismissal decisions shall be duly justified, subject to prior notification to the person concerned, and include the possibility for judicial review. The grounds for dismissal shall be made available to the public.

3.
     
  Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resources shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.

3.
     
  Without prejudice to the competence of the Member States to confer, define and organise the public service mission, Member States shall take steps to ensure that services of public service media take account of the need to safeguard pluralism. To this end, public service providers should be required, in particular, to present as broad a range of topics and opinions as possible in a balanced manner and uphold the principles of objectivity and impartiality in reporting.

4.
     
  Member States shall designate one or more independent authorities or bodies in order to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 to 3.

4.
     
  In defining and organising their public service media, Member States shall provide for appropriate measures to ensure their editorial independence and for the independence of their supervision authorities or bodies.

Reason

Reason

The activities of the public service media, which by their nature operate at the national level and are partly decentralised in the Member States, have only a limited impact on the internal market. Their internal organisation bears no discernible relationship to this.

It is up to the Member States to shape and define the public service media sector. Provisions are therefore neither compatible with the competence of the European Union nor sufficiently flexible to meet the possibly changing demands on media service providers with a public service mission.

Taking into account the right of the Member States to decide for themselves on the structure, organisation and financing of their public service media, the essential requirements for the integration of public service media into the internal market, which already apply to public service broadcasting under the Amsterdam Protocol, should be anchored. In this respect, it should be clarified that Member States are free to establish and finance public service media in the light of their democratic, social and cultural needs.

Amendment 43

Amendment 43

Article 6(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Duties
  of media service providers providing news and current affairs content | Transparency obligations
  of media service providers providing news and current affairs content |
| 1.   
  Media
  service providers providing news and current affairs content
  shall
  make easily
  and
  directly accessible to the recipients of their services the following information: | 1.   
  The Member States shall ensure that media
  service providers providing news and current affairs content make easily, directly
  and permanently
  accessible to the recipients of their services
  at least
  the following information: |
| (a) | their legal name and contact details; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Duties
  of media service providers providing news and current affairs content

Duties

Transparency obligations
  of media service providers providing news and current affairs content

Transparency obligations

1.   
  Media
  service providers providing news and current affairs content
  shall
  make easily
  and
  directly accessible to the recipients of their services the following information:

1.   
  The Member States shall ensure that media
  service providers providing news and current affairs content make easily, directly
  and permanently
  accessible to the recipients of their services
  at least
  the following information:

(a)

their legal name and contact details;

| (a) | their legal name, the geographical address at which they are established
  and contact details, at least their email address or website, which allow them to be contacted rapidly in a direct and effective manner
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

their legal name, the geographical address at which they are established
  and contact details, at least their email address or website, which allow them to be contacted rapidly in a direct and effective manner
  ;

, the geographical address at which they are established

, at least their email address or website, which allow them to be contacted rapidly in a direct and effective manner

| (b) | the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making;

| (b) | the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making;

| (c) | the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

| (c) | the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849.

This provision is without prejudice to additional measures pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 2010/13/EU.

This provision is without prejudice to additional measures pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Reason

Reason

The role of Member States must be duly acknowledged.

Amendment 44

Amendment 44

Article 6(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing the independence of
  individual
  editorial decisions.
  In particular, such measures shall aim to:










  (a) | guarantee that editors are free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activity; and |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing the independence of
  individual
  editorial decisions.
  In particular, such measures shall aim to:

(a)

guarantee that editors are free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activity; and

| (b) | ensure disclosure of any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

ensure disclosure of any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content.

2.   Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take
  into account
  measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing the independence of editorial decisions.

Reason

Reason

The guaranteeing of internal media freedom in the sense of editorial freedom is not an absolute requirement resulting from fundamental rights, even in view of differing national constitutional traditions. As an instrument for ensuring diversity, the independence of editorial staff must be viewed in a differentiated manner and is in tension with entrepreneurial freedoms and media freedoms themselves. The focus should therefore be on transparency obligations that enable the user to recognise and classify the potential background of certain tendencies. Any further measures concerning editorial freedoms should be left to self-regulatory mechanisms.

Amendment 45

Amendment 45

Article 7(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation. | 1.   The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation
  as far as the provision of the service or content of an audiovisual media service within the meaning of Article 1(1), point (a) of Directive 2010/13/EU is concerned
  .
  The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in sentence 1 shall also be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation in other respects, unless and to the extent that a Member State has designated other national regulatory authorities or bodies or imposed a system of self-regulation or co-regulation. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation.

1.   The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation
  as far as the provision of the service or content of an audiovisual media service within the meaning of Article 1(1), point (a) of Directive 2010/13/EU is concerned
  .
  The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in sentence 1 shall also be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation in other respects, unless and to the extent that a Member State has designated other national regulatory authorities or bodies or imposed a system of self-regulation or co-regulation.

Reason

Reason

The competence of the competent authorities under the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU) (2) should extend beyond content or offerings of audiovisual media services and user-generated video as defined in the Directive 2010/13/EU only if and to the extent that other authorities or bodies, including self-regulatory system bodies such as those commonly used for the press, are not established at national level for other media sectors. For all state supervisory bodies, Article 7 paragraph 2 stipulates that the requirements of the Directive 2010/13/EU on independent media supervision apply, as well as the principle of sufficient funding.

2

Amendment 46

Amendment 46

Article 10(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Structure of the Board

  1.   The Board shall be composed of representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in
  Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU
  . | Structure of the Board

  1.   The Board shall be composed of representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in
  Article 7(1) of this Regulation
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Structure of the Board

1.   The Board shall be composed of representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in
  Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU
  .

Structure of the Board

1.   The Board shall be composed of representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in
  Article 7(1) of this Regulation
  .

Reason

Reason

The body shall be composed of representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies responsible under national law for the supervision of media service providers. This ensures that not only the authorities or bodies responsible for audiovisual media are included, and in this way takes account of the differentiated responsibilities at national level, which are in some cases split both functionally and geographically. In any case, public authorities or bodies are only taken into account if they meet the requirements of Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Amendment 47

Amendment 47

Article 10(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 3.   Where a Member State has more than one national regulatory authority or body, those regulatory authorities or bodies shall coordinate with each other as necessary and appoint a joint representative which shall exercise the right to vote. | 3.   Where a Member State has more than one national regulatory authority or body, those regulatory authorities or bodies, including self-regulatory and co-regulatory systems, shall coordinate with each other as necessary and appoint a joint representative which shall exercise the right to vote. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

3.   Where a Member State has more than one national regulatory authority or body, those regulatory authorities or bodies shall coordinate with each other as necessary and appoint a joint representative which shall exercise the right to vote.

3.   Where a Member State has more than one national regulatory authority or body, those regulatory authorities or bodies, including self-regulatory and co-regulatory systems, shall coordinate with each other as necessary and appoint a joint representative which shall exercise the right to vote.

Reason

Reason

Self- and co-governance bodies should be involved within the scope of their respective responsibilities.

Amendment 48

Amendment 48

Article 10(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be
  two years
  . | 4.   The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair
  and a Vice-Chair
  from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair
  and the Vice-Chair
  shall be
  one year
  .
  The Chair and Vice-Chair can be re-elected once for a maximum period of one year.




  In the event that it is not possible for the Chair to perform their duties, the Vice-Chair shall exercise the full powers of the Chair. The Board shall regulate details in its rules of procedure. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

4.   The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be
  two years
  .

4.   The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair
  and a Vice-Chair
  from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair
  and the Vice-Chair
  shall be
  one year
  .
  The Chair and Vice-Chair can be re-elected once for a maximum period of one year.

In the event that it is not possible for the Chair to perform their duties, the Vice-Chair shall exercise the full powers of the Chair. The Board shall regulate details in its rules of procedure.

Reason

Reason

As with the ERGA, the term of office of the chair should be one year with the option of re-election once. This will also enable smaller national regulatory bodies to become involved via a chair.

To ensure the Board’s ability to act, the appointment of a vice-chair should be determined.

Amendment 49

Amendment 49

Article 10(5)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 5.   
  The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights.
  The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall
  consult the Commission in preparation
  of its work programme and main deliverables. | 5.   The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall
  give the Commission an opportunity to provide input in the development
  of its work programme and main deliverables.
  It shall annually report to the Member States. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

5.   
  The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights.
  The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall
  consult the Commission in preparation
  of its work programme and main deliverables.

5.   The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall
  give the Commission an opportunity to provide input in the development
  of its work programme and main deliverables.
  It shall annually report to the Member States.

Reason

Reason

To ensure the independence of the Board, the Commission should not necessarily attend all Board meetings. However, it should be granted a basic right to information. In addition, the Commission should have the opportunity to make comments and suggestions on the Board’s work program. Information on the work of the Board should also be made available to the Member States, as the work and findings of the Board may be of interest to the Member States for the further development of their national legal framework.

Amendment 50

Amendment 50

Article 10(6)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 6.   The Board,
  in agreement with the Commission
  , may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings. | 6.   The Board may invite experts, Commission representatives
  and observers to attend its meetings. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

6.   The Board,
  in agreement with the Commission
  , may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.

6.   The Board may invite experts, Commission representatives
  and observers to attend its meetings.

Reason

Reason

The Board should be enabled to hold discussions with third parties, in particular experts, without the Commission’s consent. The Board should also consider inviting the Commission to attend its meetings.

Amendment 51

Amendment 51

Article 10(8)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 8.   The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights,
  in agreement with the Commission
  . | 8.   The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights.


  Prior to its decision, the Board shall give the Commission an opportunity to comment. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

8.   The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights,
  in agreement with the Commission
  .

8.   The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights.

Prior to its decision, the Board shall give the Commission an opportunity to comment.

Reason

Reason

To ensure the Board’s independence, the Board shall adopt its own rules of procedure, as in the case of the ERGA. These should not require the approval of the Commission. However, it seems reasonable to give the Commission the opportunity to provide remarks on the procedural rules in advance.

Amendment 52

Amendment 52

Article 11(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Secretariat of the Board

  1.   The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commission. | Secretariat of the Board

  1.   The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commission
  with adequate staff and material resources. The personnel of the Secretariat shall be subject only to the instructions of the Chair; it may be subject to service instructions from the Commission only to the extent that their independence in the performance of their duties is not thereby impaired. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Secretariat of the Board

1.   The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commission.

Secretariat of the Board

1.   The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commission
  with adequate staff and material resources. The personnel of the Secretariat shall be subject only to the instructions of the Chair; it may be subject to service instructions from the Commission only to the extent that their independence in the performance of their duties is not thereby impaired.

Reason

Reason

It is to be welcomed that the new Board is to be supported by a secretariat to perform its tasks.

Its ability to function can only be ensured if the secretariat is provided by the Commission with adequate personnel and material resources. In order to maintain independent and non-governmental supervision, it must be ensured that the staff of the Secretariat is only subject to the instructions of the Board’s Chair, or, in their absence, the Vice-Chair. With regard to matters of service, they may only be subject to instructions from the Commission to the extent that their independence in the performance of their duties is not thereby impaired.

Amendment 53

Amendment 53

Article 11(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   
  The main task of the secretariat shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU. | |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   
  The main task of the secretariat shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.

Reason

Reason

The extension is redundant to paragraph 3 and should not be understood as an extension of an independent task.

Amendment 54

Amendment 54

Article 11(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 3.
     The secretariat shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks. | 2.
     The secretariat shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall
  , on the instruction of the Chair,
  also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

3.
     The secretariat shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.

2.
     The secretariat shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall
  , on the instruction of the Chair,
  also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.

Reason

Reason

It should be clarified that function and role of the Secretariat is exclusively to support and assist the Board.

Amendment 55

Amendment 55

Article 12, first paragraph

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Tasks of the Board
  Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of
  national rules implementing
  Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall: | Tasks of the Board
  Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of
  the consistent implementation of
  Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Tasks of the Board

Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of
  national rules implementing
  Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall:

national rules implementing

Tasks of the Board

Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of
  the consistent implementation of
  Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall:

the consistent implementation of

Reason

Reason

Direct supervision of national measures by the Board, which would require application and interpretation of national law by the Board, should not be envisaged, in order to preserve Member State competences and to maintain a fundamentally decentralised supervision determined by the Member States. With regard to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU), the Board should rather limit itself to its implementation; this corresponds to Article 30b(3) of Directive 2010/13/EU, which provides for a ‘consistent implementation of this Directive’ as a task of the ERGA. This approach should be continued and clarified accordingly.

Amendment 56

Amendment 56

Article 12, point (b)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (b) | promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the national regulatory authorities or bodies on the application of the Union
  and national
  rules applicable to media services, including this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU, in particular as regards Articles 3, 4 and 7 of that Directive; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(b)

promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the national regulatory authorities or bodies on the application of the Union
  and national
  rules applicable to media services, including this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU, in particular as regards Articles 3, 4 and 7 of that Directive;

and national

| (b) | promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the national regulatory authorities or bodies on the application of the Union rules applicable to media services, including this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU, in particular as regards Articles 3, 4 and 7 of that Directive; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the national regulatory authorities or bodies on the application of the Union rules applicable to media services, including this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU, in particular as regards Articles 3, 4 and 7 of that Directive;

Reason

Reason

The tasks of the Board should be limited to EU regulations and their implementation in national law, but should not include a review of the application of national law. This should be the sole task of the national regulators.

Amendment 57

Amendment 57

Article 12, point (c)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (c) | advise the Commission
  , where requested by it,
  on
  regulatory,
  technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(c)

advise the Commission
  , where requested by it,
  on
  regulatory,
  technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;

, where requested by it,

regulatory,

| (c) | advise the Commission on technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a
  reasonable
  time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter.
  Where they are of general interest, Board findings should be made available by the Board to the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

advise the Commission on technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a
  reasonable
  time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter.
  Where they are of general interest, Board findings should be made available by the Board to the Member States;

reasonable

Where they are of general interest, Board findings should be made available by the Board to the Member States;

Reason

Reason

Regulatory issues are the responsibility of the legislature, not the supervisor, and therefore should not be included in the Board’s tasks here. Further, findings of the board that are of general interest should also be made available to the Member States, as they may also be of importance to them.

Amendment 58

Amendment 58

Article 12, point (e)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (e) | in agreement with the Commission,
  draw up opinions with respect to: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(e)

in agreement with the Commission,
  draw up opinions with respect to:

in agreement with the Commission,

| (e) | draw up opinions with respect to: |
| --- | --- |

(e)

draw up opinions with respect to:

| | (i) | requests for cooperation and mutual assistance between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i)

requests for cooperation and mutual assistance between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation;

| | (i) | requests for cooperation and mutual assistance between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i)

requests for cooperation and mutual assistance between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation;

| | (ii) | requests for enforcement measures in case of disagreement between the requesting authority or body and the requested authority or body
  regarding the actions recommended
  pursuant to Article 14
  (4)
  of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(ii)

requests for enforcement measures in case of disagreement between the requesting authority or body and the requested authority or body
  regarding the actions recommended
  pursuant to Article 14
  (4)
  of this Regulation;

regarding the actions recommended

(4)

| | (ii) | requests for enforcement measures
  of national regulatory authorities or bodies in case of disagreement between the requesting authority or body and the requested authority or body pursuant to Article 14
  (3)
  of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(ii)

requests for enforcement measures
  of national regulatory authorities or bodies in case of disagreement between the requesting authority or body and the requested authority or body pursuant to Article 14
  (3)
  of this Regulation;

of national regulatory authorities or bodie

(3)

| | (iii) | national measures concerning media service providers established outside of the Union, in accordance with Article 16(2) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(iii)

national measures concerning media service providers established outside of the Union, in accordance with Article 16(2) of this Regulation;

| | (iii) | national measures
  of national regulatory authorities or bodies
  concerning media service providers established outside of the Union, in accordance with Article 16(2) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(iii)

national measures
  of national regulatory authorities or bodies
  concerning media service providers established outside of the Union, in accordance with Article 16(2) of this Regulation;

of national regulatory authorities or bodies

| | (iv) | factors pursuant to Article 21(3) of this Regulation or, on request of a national regulatory authority or body, the impact of a notifiable media market concentration on media pluralism and the functioning of the internal market pursuant to Article 21(4) of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(iv)

(iv)

factors pursuant to Article 21(3) of this Regulation or, on request of a national regulatory authority or body, the impact of a notifiable media market concentration on media pluralism and the functioning of the internal market pursuant to Article 21(4) of this Regulation.

factors pursuant to Article 21(3) of this Regulation or, on request of a national regulatory authority or body, the impact of a notifiable media market concentration on media pluralism and the functioning of the internal market pursuant to Article 21(4) of this Regulation.

Reason

Reason

To ensure the independence and political neutrality of supervision, the Board should be able to act on its own initiative and not in consultation with the Commission in the area of cooperation, enforcement measures, and vis-à-vis third-party providers. It should also be clarified that the Board’s task is to advice the national regulatory authorities or bodies on practical matters.

Further, follow-up adjustments are required as a result of amendments to Articles 14 and 21 of this Regulation.

Amendment 59

Amendment 59

Article 12, point (f)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (f) | upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(f)

upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:

| (f) | upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to measures of
  national authorities or bodies
  which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 20
  (2
  ) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

(f)

upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to measures of
  national authorities or bodies
  which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 20
  (2
  ) of this Regulation;

national authorities or bodies

(2

| | (i) | national
  measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 20
  (4)
  of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i)

(i)

national
  measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 20
  (4)
  of this Regulation;

national

(4)

| (ii) | media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;

media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;

Reason

Reason

According to the proposed amendment of Article 20 it should be clarified that the review solely concerns measures taken by national regulatory authorities and provides, thus, no legislative measures.

In line with the proposed deletion of Article 22, a consequential amendment is required in (f)(ii).

Amendment 60

Amendment 60

Article 12, point (h)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (h) | assist the Commission in drawing up guidelines with respect to: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(h)

assist the Commission in drawing up guidelines with respect to:

| (h) | assist the Commission in drawing up guidelines with respect to the application of Articles 23(1), (2) and (3) pursuant to Article 23(4) of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(h)

assist the Commission in drawing up guidelines with respect to the application of Articles 23(1), (2) and (3) pursuant to Article 23(4) of this Regulation.

| | (i) | the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13, in accordance with Article 15(2) of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i)

(i)

the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13, in accordance with Article 15(2) of this Regulation.

the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13, in accordance with Article 15(2) of this Regulation.

| (ii) | factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations, in accordance with Article 21(3) of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations, in accordance with Article 21(3) of this Regulation;

factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations, in accordance with Article 21(3) of this Regulation;

| (iii) | the application of Articles 23(1), (2) and (3) pursuant to Article 23(4) of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

(iii)

the application of Articles 23(1), (2) and (3) pursuant to Article 23(4) of this Regulation.

Reason

Reason

In line with the proposed amendments in Article 15(2) and Article 21(3) of this Regulation, (h)(i) and (ii) are to be deleted.

Amendment 61

Amendment 61

Article 13(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation or mutual assistance at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or
  the national measures implementing
  Directive 2010/13/EU. | 1.   A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation or mutual assistance at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or
  implementation of
  Directive 2010/13/EU. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation or mutual assistance at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or
  the national measures implementing
  Directive 2010/13/EU.

1.   A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation or mutual assistance at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or
  implementation of
  Directive 2010/13/EU.

Reason

Reason

The task of the Board should be to assist, where requested, in issues regarding the implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU), not in the application of national law implementing the Directive. The latter can only be the task of the national authorities or bodies.

Amendment 62

Amendment 62

Article 13(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   The requested authority may refuse to address the request only in the following cases: | 4.   The requested authority may refuse to address the request only in the following cases: |
| (a) | it is not competent for the subject matter of the request or for the measures it is requested to take; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

4.   The requested authority may refuse to address the request only in the following cases:

4.   The requested authority may refuse to address the request only in the following cases:

(a)

it is not competent for the subject matter of the request or for the measures it is requested to take;

| (a) | it is not competent for the subject matter of the request or for the measures it is requested to take; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

it is not competent for the subject matter of the request or for the measures it is requested to take;

| (b) | execution of the request would infringe this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU or other Union legislation or Member State law compliant with Union law to which the requested authority is subject. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

execution of the request would infringe this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU or other Union legislation or Member State law compliant with Union law to which the requested authority is subject.

| (b) | execution of the request would infringe this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU or other Union legislation or Member State law compliant with Union law to which the requested authority is subject. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

execution of the request would infringe this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU or other Union legislation or Member State law compliant with Union law to which the requested authority is subject.

The requested authority shall provide reasons for any refusal to address a request.

The requested authority shall provide reasons for any refusal to address a request
  and give, where necessary and possible, a reference to the competent authority.

and give, where necessary and possible, a reference to the competent authority

Reason

Reason

In the case of a refusal for reasons of competence, the authority which is competent from the point of view of the refusing authority should also be named if possible. This will enable the requesting authority to follow up on its request without further delay.

Amendment 63

Amendment 63

Article 13(5)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 5.   The requested authority shall inform the requesting authority of
  the results achieved or of the progress of
  the measures taken in response to the request. | 5.   The requested authority shall
  without undue delay
  inform the requesting authority of
  its refusal to address a request or of
  the measures taken in response to the request
  as well as the progress and results achieved
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

5.   The requested authority shall inform the requesting authority of
  the results achieved or of the progress of
  the measures taken in response to the request.

5.   The requested authority shall
  without undue delay
  inform the requesting authority of
  its refusal to address a request or of
  the measures taken in response to the request
  as well as the progress and results achieved
  .

Reason

Reason

For the sake of an effective procedure, it should be made clear that the requested authority must also refuse a request within an adequate time frame. The information should usefully begin with the measures taken by the requested authority. These can be followed by further steps.

Amendment 64

Amendment 64

Article 13(6)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 6.
     
  The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execution of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar days. | |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

6.
     
  The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execution of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar days.

Reason

Reason

The provision in paragraph 6 seems redundant and of no added value compared to the provision in paragraph 5, which already stipulates that a refusal may only be made in narrowly defined cases. The envisaged ‘do its utmost’ obligation to act is not clear and does not seem enforceable. The time limits also seem too rigid and, to the extent that they go beyond an ‘undue delay,’ unnecessary. Without calling into question the requirement of the effectiveness of the procedure and the seriousness of the treatment of the request by the requested authority or body, it should be ensured that, in particular, supervisory authorities that are structurally less broadly based can also perform their duties properly.

Amendment 65

Amendment 65

Article 13(7)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 7.
     Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall
  issue, in agreement with the Commission, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board
  . | 6.
     Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall
  work towards an amicable solution with the involvement of the regulatory authorities or bodies concerned. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

7.
     Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall
  issue, in agreement with the Commission, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board
  .

6.
     Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall
  work towards an amicable solution with the involvement of the regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.

Reason

Reason

The effect of the Board’s opinion cannot be clearly defined. In addition, the Board would possibly intervene in procedures that are subject to the respective national law. Intervention by the Board would override the competence of national regulators. Therefore, overall, a dispute resolution mechanism seems more appropriate and effective. A comparable mechanism is already provided for in Article 14(4) of the proposed regulation.

Amendment 66

Amendment 66

Article 14(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay
  and within 30 calendar days
  , inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1. | 2.   The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay
  and within 30 calendar days
  , inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1.

2.   The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1.

Reason

Reason

The time requirement seems too rigid and, compared to the 14-day period provided for in Article 13, not readily justified with a view to ensuring that the procedure is as expeditious as possible. Therefore, a fixed deadline should be omitted here as well.

Amendment 67

Amendment 67

Article 14(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion,
  in agreement with the Commission,
  without undue delay. | 4.   If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion without undue delay. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

4.   If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion,
  in agreement with the Commission,
  without undue delay.

4.   If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion without undue delay.

Reason

Reason

Coordination of the opinion with the Commission should not be foreseen for reasons of safeguarding the Board’s neutrality and independence. Instead, it should be left to the Board to further develop the procedure leading to an amicable agreement. In addition, there should be an obligation to inform the Commission about the results achieved and further steps.

Amendment 68

Amendment 68

Article 14(5)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 5.
     
  The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latest from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion. | 5.
     
  The Board shall inform the Commission of the results obtained, in particular of the actions taken or planned by the requested authority or body. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

5.
     
  The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latest from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion.

5.
     
  The Board shall inform the Commission of the results obtained, in particular of the actions taken or planned by the requested authority or body.

Reason

Reason

In addition to the Commission’s general participation and information rights, the Board should inform the Commission of the results of the conciliation procedure, in particular of the measures taken or planned by the requested authority. This will ensure a flow of information to the Commission that is compatible with the principles of independence and state neutrality of media supervision, and at the same time enable the Commission to fulfil its role as ‘guardian of the Treaties’.

Amendment 69

Amendment 69

Article 15(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices among the national regulatory authorities or bodies,
  consulting stakeholders, where appropriate, and in close cooperation with the Commission,
  on
  regulatory,
  technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent and effective application of this Regulation and of
  the national rules implementing
  Directive 2010/13/EU. | 1.   The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices among the national regulatory authorities or bodies on technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent and effective application of this Regulation and of the
  implementation of
  Directive 2010/13/EU. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices among the national regulatory authorities or bodies,
  consulting stakeholders, where appropriate, and in close cooperation with the Commission,
  on
  regulatory,
  technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent and effective application of this Regulation and of
  the national rules implementing
  Directive 2010/13/EU.

1.   The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices among the national regulatory authorities or bodies on technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent and effective application of this Regulation and of the
  implementation of
  Directive 2010/13/EU.

Reason

Reason

It seems useful for the Board to foster exchange among national regulatory authorities or bodies. The Commission might participate in this exchange. However, it should not have a (co)determining function. Further, as in Article 12, the tasks of the Board with regard to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU) should be limited to its implementation. The application of national law should remain in the hands of national regulatory authorities and bodies.

Furthermore, it does not seem necessary that targeted stakeholder consultations be carried out by the Board in this context. The Board would be free under Article 10(6) of this proposed regulation to consult experts in its deliberations. The further development of legislation should not, however, be the task of the Board as a media regulator and thus a regulated part of the executive branch itself.

Amendment 70

Amendment 70

Article 15(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   Where the Commission issues guidelines related to the application of this Regulation or the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU, the Board shall assist it by providing expertise on
  regulatory,
  technical or practical aspects
  , as regards in particular: | 2.   Where the Commission issues guidelines related to the application of this Regulation or the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU, the Board shall assist it by providing expertise on technical or practical aspects. |
| (a) | the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   Where the Commission issues guidelines related to the application of this Regulation or the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU, the Board shall assist it by providing expertise on
  regulatory,
  technical or practical aspects
  , as regards in particular:

2.   Where the Commission issues guidelines related to the application of this Regulation or the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU, the Board shall assist it by providing expertise on technical or practical aspects.

(a)

(a)

the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU;

the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU;

| (b) | making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU.

making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Reason

Reason

The Board’s input should relate to technical and practical issues, as with the ERGA in Article 30b of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU provides for a high degree of flexibility on the part of the Member States when it comes to defining requirements relating to the discoverability and, to that extent, prominence of content of general public interest. This approach and the objective pursued by it should not be undermined by a guideline competence of the Commission. At most, the Board should be able to publish (non-binding) opinions on empirical data collected via national regulatory authorities or bodies, which can be used as an indication for Member States to take action.

Amendment 71

Amendment 71

Article 16(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence. | 1.   The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers established outside the Union
  but subject to the jurisdiction of a Member State pursuant to Article 2(4) of Directive 2010/13/EU
  that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence.

1.   The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers established outside the Union
  but subject to the jurisdiction of a Member State pursuant to Article 2(4) of Directive 2010/13/EU
  that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia, in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence.

Reason

Reason

The improved cooperation of national regulators in cases where there is a serious and grave risk of harm to public security and defence is to be welcomed. The envisaged new mechanism should usefully complement the mechanisms of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU) to improve its effectiveness. For example, the mechanism should apply when there is a cross-border situation affecting several Member States.

Directive 2010/13/EU provides for the jurisdiction of a Member State in some cases where there is no establishment of an undertaking in the Union, such as in cases where signals from third countries are transmitted via a technical uplink in an EU Member State. In these cases, appropriate coordination is required between the target Member State and the Member State exercising jurisdiction over the media service provider.

However, purely national issues should not be subject to coordination by the Board. Therefore, when it comes to limiting signals that directly address Member State from outside the EU, there is no need for additional mandatory cooperation mechanisms, as enforcement measures can be taken by Member States themselves in line with the then applicable market place principle. In this respect, mandatory recourse to a cooperation mechanism would be rather obstructive for enforcement and would improperly restrict the sovereignty of Member State action.

Amendment 72

Amendment 72

Article 16(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   The Board
  , in agreement with the Commission, may
  issue opinions on appropriate
  national
  measures under paragraph 1.
  All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board. | 2.   The Board
  may, upon request of the national regulatory authorities or bodies of at least two Member States concerned,
  issue opinions on appropriate measures under paragraph 1. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   The Board
  , in agreement with the Commission, may
  issue opinions on appropriate
  national
  measures under paragraph 1.
  All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board.

2.   The Board
  may, upon request of the national regulatory authorities or bodies of at least two Member States concerned,
  issue opinions on appropriate measures under paragraph 1.

Reason

Reason

The Board should be able to make recommendations for action. These should not be subject to coordination with the Commission in order to ensure the independence and non-governmental character of media supervision. Consideration of the Board’s recommendation by the national regulatory authority or body can only take place under the condition of a corresponding legal basis. Without such, no obligation to implement should be addressed to the national regulatory authority or body.

Amendment 73

Amendment 73

Article 17

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Content of media service providers on very large online platforms | Content of media service providers on very large online platforms
  and in very large search engines |
| 1.
     Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that: | 1.
     
  Providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large search engines shall respect the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media and shall contribute in an appropriate manner to the plurality of the media. |
| (a) | it is a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2); |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Content of media service providers on very large online platforms

Content of media service providers on very large online platforms
  and in very large search engines

and in very large search engines

1.
     Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:

1.
     
  Providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large search engines shall respect the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media and shall contribute in an appropriate manner to the plurality of the media.

(a)

it is a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);

| (b) | it is editorially independent from Member States and third countries;
  and |
| --- | --- |

(b)

it is editorially independent from Member States and third countries;
  and

and

| (c) | it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States.

2.
     Where a provider of very large online platform decides
  to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to
  content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph
  1
  of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/
  XXX
  [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/
  XXX
  [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150,
  prior to the suspension taking effect
  .

2.   Providers of very large online platforms
  and very large search engines
  shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:

| (a) | it is a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2); |
| --- | --- |

(a)

it is a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);

| (b) | it is editorially independent from Member States and third countries; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

it is editorially independent from Member States and third countries;

| (c) | it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States;
  and |
| --- | --- |

(c)

it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States;
  and

and

| (d) | it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body or to the supervision of a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, stating its name and contact details. The provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine may ask the respective supervisor to confirm the information given by the media services provider. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

(d)

it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body or to the supervision of a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, stating its name and contact details. The provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine may ask the respective supervisor to confirm the information given by the media services provider.

it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body or to the supervision of a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, stating its name and contact details. The provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine may ask the respective supervisor to confirm the information given by the media services provider.

3.
     Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.

3.
     Where a provider of
  a
  very large online platform
  or a provider of a very large search engine that allows the dissemination of programmes or press publications
  decides
  to remove, disable access to or otherwise interfere with a service or
  content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph
  2
  of this Article, on the grounds that such
  service or
  content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that
  service or
  content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/
  2065
  (Digital Services Act), it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/
  2065
  [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider
  and the competent supervision authority or body declared
  concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150.

4.
     Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently
  restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to
  content provided by the media service provider
  without sufficient grounds
  , the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for
  terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in
  the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.

4.   
  If within 24 hours the media service provider gives the very large online platform sufficient grounds to consider that the respective service or content is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, the platform may not implement its decision. If, after due consideration, the very large online platform still considers the respective service or content incompatible with its terms and conditions, it shall have the right to refer the case to the competent supervision authority or body declared, which decides without undue delay whether the interference based on the platform’s terms and conditions is compatible with the freedom of expression and freedom of the media. Until such a decision is taken, the platform shall not implement its intended decision.

Providers of very large online platforms shall take all necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.

5.
     Providers of very large online platforms shall make publicly available on an annual basis information on:

| (a) | the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and

| (b) | the grounds for imposing such restrictions. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the grounds for imposing such restrictions.

5.
     Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently
  claims incompatibility of service or
  content provided by the media service provider
  with its terms and conditions
  , the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.

6.
     With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission may issue guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1.

6.
     Providers of very large online platforms shall make publicly available on an annual basis information on:

| (a) | the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the
  service or
  content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the
  service or
  content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and

service or

| (b) | the grounds for imposing such restrictions. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the grounds for imposing such restrictions.

7.
     With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission may issue guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1.

Reason

Reason

In view of the increasing importance of intermediary services for the discoverability of and access to media content, and in particular their importance for the offerings and content of regional and local media service providers, very large online platforms as well as very large search engines should assume their responsibility in this regard in a specific way.

Due to their prominent market position, their generally open orientation, the high degree of dependency of the users, and with the inclusion of affected interests of the platform operators and other third parties the right to determine use, which gives the platform the right, after weighing the conflicting fundamental rights and interests of the parties and the interests of third parties to be included, to require users to comply with certain communication standards in general terms and conditions that go beyond the requirements of criminal law, must find its limits not only in the principle of equality, which requires that at least all offerings be treated equally, but also in the guarantee of media freedom and plurality.

To this end, a mechanism should be introduced that takes into account the prominent role of media services and that involves the already existing national supervisory authorities to ensure compliance with legal standards.

Amendment 74

Amendment 74

Article 19(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer

  1.   Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU. | Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer

  1.   Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU
  or other national measures regarding the findability of media services or content to secure media pluralism
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer

1.   Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer

1.   Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU
  or other national measures regarding the findability of media services or content to secure media pluralism
  .

Reason

Reason

The addition is intended to ensure that discoverability rules are also valid and can be further developed beyond Article 7a Audiovisual Media Services Directive 2010/13/EU, as they serve to ensure plurality.

Amendment 75

Amendment 75

Article 20(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.
     
  Any national procedure used for the purposes of the preparation or the adoption of a regulatory or administrative measure as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to clear timeframes set out in advance. | |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.
     
  Any national procedure used for the purposes of the preparation or the adoption of a regulatory or administrative measure as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to clear timeframes set out in advance.

Reason

Reason

The principle idea of the provision is understandable, but the principle does not seem to be appropriate in all cases. Especially in the area of preparation or issuance of a legal provision or an administrative act in ex officio proceedings within the meaning of paragraph 1 a specific time limit already set in advance cannot be demanded here without further ado.

Amendment 76

Amendment 76

Article 20(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.
     The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where
  a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure
  is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services.
  Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.
  Opinions by the Board
  and, where applicable, by the Commission
  shall be made publicly available. | 3.
     The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where a
  measure taken by a national regulatory authority or body
  is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. Opinions by the Board shall be made publicly available. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

4.
     The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where
  a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure
  is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services.
  Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.
  Opinions by the Board
  and, where applicable, by the Commission
  shall be made publicly available.

3.
     The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where a
  measure taken by a national regulatory authority or body
  is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. Opinions by the Board shall be made publicly available.

Reason

Reason

It remains unclear how legislative and administrative measures are distinguished from regulatory measures. The Board in its composition of representatives of national executive bodies, which are themselves subject to national regulation, does not appear suitable for evaluating legislative measures.

The Commission should remain in its role as guardian of the Treaties and consult the Board accordingly on technical or other professional issues. The Board therefore is to have the opportunity, at the request of the Commission, to give its assessment of measures taken by national regulatory bodies where these affect the internal market.

Amendment 77

Amendment 77

Article 21(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Assessment of media market concentrations

  1.   Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure
  an assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence
  . These rules shall: | Assessment of media market concentrations

  1.   Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure
  that mergers in the media market are assessed with a view to safeguarding media pluralism and which include appropriate measures to ensure, maintain and promote media pluralism, also taking into account the importance of editorial independence
  . These rules shall: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Assessment of media market concentrations

1.   Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure
  an assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence
  . These rules shall:

Assessment of media market concentrations

1.   Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure
  that mergers in the media market are assessed with a view to safeguarding media pluralism and which include appropriate measures to ensure, maintain and promote media pluralism, also taking into account the importance of editorial independence
  . These rules shall:

Reason

Reason

With a view to avoiding the limitations to the scope of fundamental freedoms, the task of the Member States should be made clearer that they may (and must) enact measures to safeguard media pluralism in the context of media concentration law.

Amendment 78

Amendment 78

Article 21(1), point (b)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (b) | require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism
  and
  editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(b)

require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism
  and
  editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;

and

| (b) | require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism,
  including
  editorial independence, to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism,
  including
  editorial independence, to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;

including

Reason

Reason

Editorial freedom can be part of safeguarding media pluralism.

Amendment 79

Amendment 79

Article 21(1), point (d)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (d) | set out in advance
  objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate
  criteria for
  notifying media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for
  assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and
  editorial independence. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(d)

set out in advance
  objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate
  criteria for
  notifying media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for
  assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and
  editorial independence.

objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate

notifying media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for

and

| (d) | set out in advance criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism,
  including
  editorial independence; |
| --- | --- |

(d)

set out in advance criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism,
  including
  editorial independence;

including

Reason

Reason

The notification of mergers already follows from (b), the requirements in general (‘objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate’ criteria as well as their transparency) are already set out in (a). Further, editorial freedom is not an independent criterion, but a possible element in securing media pluralism.

Amendment 80

Amendment 80

Article 21(1), point (e) (new point)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (e) | provide, in advance and in accordance with the principles set out in Article 3, criteria or benchmarks for the identification and setting of criteria by the competent national regulatory authority or body against which the admissibility of a merger is to be assessed. In determining whether a merger is admissible, consideration shall also be given to whether the acquiring entity and the acquired entity would remain economically viable absent the merger, whether alternatives exist to ensure their economic viability, and the possibility and effectiveness of actions under subsection f; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(e)

(e)

provide, in advance and in accordance with the principles set out in Article 3, criteria or benchmarks for the identification and setting of criteria by the competent national regulatory authority or body against which the admissibility of a merger is to be assessed. In determining whether a merger is admissible, consideration shall also be given to whether the acquiring entity and the acquired entity would remain economically viable absent the merger, whether alternatives exist to ensure their economic viability, and the possibility and effectiveness of actions under subsection f;

provide, in advance and in accordance with the principles set out in Article 3, criteria or benchmarks for the identification and setting of criteria by the competent national regulatory authority or body against which the admissibility of a merger is to be assessed. In determining whether a merger is admissible, consideration shall also be given to whether the acquiring entity and the acquired entity would remain economically viable absent the merger, whether alternatives exist to ensure their economic viability, and the possibility and effectiveness of actions under subsection f;

Reason

Reason

Member States should provide, in advance and in accordance with the principles set out in Article 3, criteria or benchmarks for the identification and setting of criteria by the competent national regulatory authority or body against which the permissibility of a concentration is to be assessed.

In deciding whether a merger is permissible, consideration shall also be given to whether the acquiring and acquired entities would remain economically viable absent the merger, whether there are alternatives to ensure their economic viability, and whether measures under point (f) are feasible and effective.

Amendment 81

Amendment 81

Article 21(1), point (f) (new point)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | (f) | provide in advance for measures or benchmarks for identifying and determining measures that may in accordance with Article 3 be imposed on the entity in question in the event of a merger in order to ensure and maintain and promote media pluralism and editorial independence. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(f)

(f)

provide in advance for measures or benchmarks for identifying and determining measures that may in accordance with Article 3 be imposed on the entity in question in the event of a merger in order to ensure and maintain and promote media pluralism and editorial independence.

provide in advance for measures or benchmarks for identifying and determining measures that may in accordance with Article 3 be imposed on the entity in question in the event of a merger in order to ensure and maintain and promote media pluralism and editorial independence.

Reason

Reason

Member States should also provide in advance for measures or criteria for determining measures which may be imposed on the entity concerned in the event of a merger in accordance with Article 3, in order to ensure, preserve and promote media pluralism and media independence. In deciding whether a merger is permissible, consideration should also be given to whether the acquiring and acquired entities would remain economically viable in the absence of the merger, whether there are alternatives to ensure their economic viability.

Amendment 82

Amendment 82

Article 21(1), last paragraph

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The
  assessment
  referred to in this paragraph shall
  be distinct from
  the competition law assessments including those provided for under merger control rules.
  It
  shall be without prejudice to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, where applicable. | The
  assessments and measures
  referred to in this paragraph shall
  go beyond
  the competition law assessments including those provided for under merger control rules.
  They
  shall be without prejudice to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, where applicable. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

The
  assessment
  referred to in this paragraph shall
  be distinct from
  the competition law assessments including those provided for under merger control rules.
  It
  shall be without prejudice to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, where applicable.

assessment

be distinct from

It

The
  assessments and measures
  referred to in this paragraph shall
  go beyond
  the competition law assessments including those provided for under merger control rules.
  They
  shall be without prejudice to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, where applicable.

assessments and measures

go beyond

They

Reason

Reason

The relationship between the evaluations declared as different in this respect remains unclear so far. With the adjustment it is expressed that the assessment with elements securing plurality provided for here goes beyond a control under competition law, and can thus override it, if necessary, also in terms of the result.

Amendment 83

Amendment 83

Article 21(2), first paragraph

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   In the assessment referred to in paragraph 1, the following elements
  shall
  be taken into account: | 2.   In the assessment referred to in paragraph 1,
  in particular
  the following elements
  should
  be taken into account: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   In the assessment referred to in paragraph 1, the following elements
  shall
  be taken into account:

2.   In the assessment referred to in paragraph 1,
  in particular
  the following elements
  should
  be taken into account:

Reason

Reason

The criteria of the assessment introduced by Article 21 should focus on aspects of safeguarding diversity. The assessment should also include whether and which options exist for counteracting the limitations to or threats to media plurality which may arise as a result of a merger, by means of supplementary safeguarding measures.

Amendment 84

Amendment 84

Article 21(2), point (a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (a) | the impact of the concentration on media pluralism,
  including
  its effects on the formation of public opinion
  and
  on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(a)

the impact of the concentration on media pluralism,
  including
  its effects on the formation of public opinion
  and
  on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;

including

and

| (a) | the impact of the concentration on media pluralism
  at European, national, regional and local level
  ,
  in particular
  its effects on the
  free
  formation of public opinion, on the diversity of media players
  and content
  on the market,
  including the economic and editorial independence and diversity of service providers, and the availability of services and content
  taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the impact of the concentration on media pluralism
  at European, national, regional and local level
  ,
  in particular
  its effects on the
  free
  formation of public opinion, on the diversity of media players
  and content
  on the market,
  including the economic and editorial independence and diversity of service providers, and the availability of services and content
  taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;

at European, national, regional and local level

in particular

free

and content

including the economic and editorial independence and diversity of service providers, and the availability of services and content

Reason

Reason

It should be made clear that there are different levels (in addition to the European level) to be considered. There should be no predetermined weighting of the levels. The freedom to form opinions should be emphasised. It should be added that, in addition to the diversity of services, diversity of content must also be preserved, and that special consideration must be given to access and findability as a particular challenge to ensuring diversity, especially with regard to the online environment.

Amendment 85

Amendment 85

Article 21(2), point (c)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| (c) | whether, in the absence of the concentration, the acquiring and acquired entity would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure its economic sustainability. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(c)

(c)

whether, in the absence of the concentration, the acquiring and acquired entity would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure its economic sustainability.

whether, in the absence of the concentration, the acquiring and acquired entity would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure its economic sustainability.

Reason

Reason

Economic sustainability is not a question that is at the forefront of the evaluation of the merger from the point of view of safeguarding diversity. In order to pursue the goal of ensuring plurality consistently, the focus must be on journalistic competition and the question of whether or how this can be protected or supported by measures to safeguard media diversity. From the perspective of ensuring plurality, every merger is not necessarily justified if the economic viability of the company concerned would be lost without the merger, which is in this respect without alternative; it would, however, be justified if plurality in the market would otherwise (even further) suffer.

Amendment 86

Amendment 86

Article 21(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 3.   
  The Commission, assisted by the
  Board, may issue
  guidelines
  on the factors
  to be taken into account
  when applying the
  criteria
  for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies
  . | 3.   
  The
  Board may issue
  opinions
  on the factors
  that might be relevant
  when applying the
  elements referred to in paragraph 2
  for assessing the impact of media market concentrations
  relevant for the internal market
  on media pluralism. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

3.   
  The Commission, assisted by the
  Board, may issue
  guidelines
  on the factors
  to be taken into account
  when applying the
  criteria
  for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism
  and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies
  .

3.   
  The
  Board may issue
  opinions
  on the factors
  that might be relevant
  when applying the
  elements referred to in paragraph 2
  for assessing the impact of media market concentrations
  relevant for the internal market
  on media pluralism.

Reason

Reason

The Commission should not make any concretisations that restrict the possibilities of the Member States to react to national, regional and/or local needs when applying and weighting the factors.

Opinions of the Board could provide guidance to national regulators on how to respond to needs at national, regional and local level within the scope of their competence and the design of national measures. It should be clear that this opinion only refers to the elements contained in paragraph 2 and do not exhaustively cover the assessment of media concentrations in this respect, in order to allow an assessment on the basis of further necessary criteria by the national authorities.

Amendment 87

Amendment 87

Article 21(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 4.   The national regulatory authority or body shall
  consult
  the Board in advance on
  any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of
  a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market. | 4.   The national regulatory authority or body shall
  inform
  the Board in advance on a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.


  The national regulatory authority or body may, in advance of a decision or action taken, ask the Board for an opinion on the impact of a notifiable media market concentration on media pluralism and the functioning of the internal market. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

4.   The national regulatory authority or body shall
  consult
  the Board in advance on
  any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of
  a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.

4.   The national regulatory authority or body shall
  inform
  the Board in advance on a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.

The national regulatory authority or body may, in advance of a decision or action taken, ask the Board for an opinion on the impact of a notifiable media market concentration on media pluralism and the functioning of the internal market.

Reason

Reason

In view of the regulatory power, only those mergers or concentrations that are relevant for the internal market should be exempted from the binding requirements of Article 21. In all other respects, requirements should not go beyond recommendations.

There should be no obligation on the part of the national regulatory authority or body to consult the Board — on the one hand, to preserve the competence of the national authority and, on the other hand, to avoid delaying procedures at national level. However, the competent national regulatory authority should provide an indication of relevant cases to the Board so that it is informed. The Board should also have the right to take a position in all cases in which it recognises a relevance to the internal market.

Amendment 88

Amendment 88

Article 21(5)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 5.   
  Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of the consultation referred to in paragraph 4
  ,
  the
  Board shall draw up an opinion
  on the draft national opinion or decision referred to it
  , taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission. | 5.   
  Where the
  Board
  is asked for an opinion
  , it shall draw up an opinion
  without delay
  , taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2, and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

5.   
  Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of the consultation referred to in paragraph 4
  ,
  the
  Board shall draw up an opinion
  on the draft national opinion or decision referred to it
  , taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission.

5.   
  Where the
  Board
  is asked for an opinion
  , it shall draw up an opinion
  without delay
  , taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2, and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission.

Reason

Reason

The time limit seems rigid and may be too short for complex cases.

Amendment 89

Amendment 89

Article 21(6)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 6.   
  The national regulatory authority or body referred to in paragraph 4 shall take utmost account of the opinion referred to in paragraph 5. Where that authority does not follow the opinion, fully or partially, it shall provide the Board and the Commission with a reasoned justification explaining its position within 30 calendar days from the receipt of that opinion.
  Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. | 6.   Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

6.   
  The national regulatory authority or body referred to in paragraph 4 shall take utmost account of the opinion referred to in paragraph 5. Where that authority does not follow the opinion, fully or partially, it shall provide the Board and the Commission with a reasoned justification explaining its position within 30 calendar days from the receipt of that opinion.
  Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.

6.   Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.

Reason

Reason

The Commission should have the possibility to react to the opinion. A binding effect for the competent national authority does not seem appropriate in this context, since the merger is to be finally evaluated in the context of national law. The Commission in its function as ‘guardian of the Treaties’ is free to verifying the existence of appropriate regulations and ensuring their application in the light of Union law.

Amendment 90

Amendment 90

Article 21(7) (new paragraph)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | 7.
     
  Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

7.
     
  Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.

Reason

Reason

Taking over paragraph 3 of Article 22 due to the amendments proposed to Article 22.

Amendment 91

Amendment 91

Article 22(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Opinions on media market concentrations

  1.   In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board,
  upon request of the Commission,
  shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission. | Opinions on media market concentrations

  1.   In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Opinions on media market concentrations

1.   In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board,
  upon request of the Commission,
  shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission.

Opinions on media market concentrations

1.   In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission.

Reason

Reason

The Board should be able to draw up an opinion independently, without having to be requested to do so by the Commission.

Amendment 92

Amendment 92

Article 24(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   Public authorities, including national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  1 million
  inhabitants, shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details: | 2.   Public authorities, including
  EU, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  100 000
  inhabitants
  with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold
  , shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details: |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   Public authorities, including national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  1 million
  inhabitants, shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details:

2.   Public authorities, including
  EU, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than
  100 000
  inhabitants
  with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold
  , shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details:

Reason

Reason

The proposed amendment corresponds to that of the definition of ‘state advertising’ in Article 2.

Amendment 93

Amendment 93

Article 25

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 1.   The Commission shall ensure an independent monitoring of the internal market
  for
  media services
  , including
  risks to and progress in its functioning and resilience. The findings of the monitoring exercise shall be subject to consultation with the Board. | 1.   The Commission shall ensure an independent monitoring of the internal market
  regarding
  media services
  concerning
  risks to and progress in its functioning and resilience. The findings of the monitoring exercise shall be subject to consultation with the Board. |
| 2.   The Commission shall define key performance indicators to be used for the monitoring referred in paragraph 1, in consultation with the Board. | 2.   The Commission shall define key performance indicators to be used for the monitoring referred in paragraph 1, in consultation with the Board. |
| 3.   The monitoring exercise shall include: | 3.   The monitoring exercise shall include: |
| (a) | a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration
  and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference; |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1.   The Commission shall ensure an independent monitoring of the internal market
  for
  media services
  , including
  risks to and progress in its functioning and resilience. The findings of the monitoring exercise shall be subject to consultation with the Board.

1.   The Commission shall ensure an independent monitoring of the internal market
  regarding
  media services
  concerning
  risks to and progress in its functioning and resilience. The findings of the monitoring exercise shall be subject to consultation with the Board.

2.   The Commission shall define key performance indicators to be used for the monitoring referred in paragraph 1, in consultation with the Board.

2.   The Commission shall define key performance indicators to be used for the monitoring referred in paragraph 1, in consultation with the Board.

3.   The monitoring exercise shall include:

3.   The monitoring exercise shall include:

(a)

a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration
  and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference;

and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference;

| (a) | a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration;

| (b) | an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole;

| (b) | an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole.

| (c) | an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions
  . |
| --- | --- |

(c)

(c)

an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions
  .

an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions

4.   The monitoring shall be carried out annually, and its results shall be made publicly available.

4.   The monitoring shall be carried out annually, and its results shall be made publicly available.

Reason

Reason

The tasks of the Commission should be directed, in accordance with its competence, to aspects of the internal market as a whole. In this context, the consideration of national markets can also be an important element of an evaluation.

Amendment 94

Amendment 94

Article 28(2)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| 2.   This Regulation shall apply from [
  6
  months after the entry into force]. | 2.   This Regulation shall apply from [
  20
  months after the entry into force]. |
| However,
  Articles 7 to 12 and 27 shall apply from [3 months after the entry into force] and
  Article 19(2) shall apply from [48 months after the entry into force]. | However, Article 19(2) shall apply from [48 months after the entry into force]. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

2.   This Regulation shall apply from [
  6
  months after the entry into force].

2.   This Regulation shall apply from [
  20
  months after the entry into force].

However,
  Articles 7 to 12 and 27 shall apply from [3 months after the entry into force] and
  Article 19(2) shall apply from [48 months after the entry into force].

Articles 7 to 12 and 27 shall apply from [3 months after the entry into force] and

However, Article 19(2) shall apply from [48 months after the entry into force].

Reason

Reason

Extended entry into force should be provided for, as further transposition by the Member States is required.

II.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR),

| 1. | strongly supports efforts to safeguard media freedom, pluralism and independence, as well as the safety of journalists, as essential to preserve the integrity of the European information space and to ensure the functioning of European democracy at all levels — regional, local, national and European; notes in this regard the stated goals of the Commission’s initiative for a proposal for a regulation establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and the accompanying recommendation on internal safeguards for editorial independence and ownership transparency in the media sector; |
| --- | --- |

1.

strongly supports efforts to safeguard media freedom, pluralism and independence, as well as the safety of journalists, as essential to preserve the integrity of the European information space and to ensure the functioning of European democracy at all levels — regional, local, national and European; notes in this regard the stated goals of the Commission’s initiative for a proposal for a regulation establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and the accompanying recommendation on internal safeguards for editorial independence and ownership transparency in the media sector;

| 2. | considers it paramount to ensure strong pluralistic, economically viable, innovative, independent and reliable media landscapes in Europe that are able to reach all groups of society; this is very important for the European Union and its democracies, as well as for citizens, consumers and businesses; |
| --- | --- |

2.

considers it paramount to ensure strong pluralistic, economically viable, innovative, independent and reliable media landscapes in Europe that are able to reach all groups of society; this is very important for the European Union and its democracies, as well as for citizens, consumers and businesses;

| 3. | stresses the need for strong binding transparency requirements with regard to the allocation of state advertising. However, it deems the exemption for territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants from the requirements to be non-applicable to a number of smaller EU Member States, thus creating a de facto loophole to avoid transparency. Calls therefore for this threshold to be considerably lowered to 100 000 inhabitants. Further invites the Commission to consider the population criterion in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold; |
| --- | --- |

3.

stresses the need for strong binding transparency requirements with regard to the allocation of state advertising. However, it deems the exemption for territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants from the requirements to be non-applicable to a number of smaller EU Member States, thus creating a de facto loophole to avoid transparency. Calls therefore for this threshold to be considerably lowered to 100 000 inhabitants. Further invites the Commission to consider the population criterion in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold;

| 4. | reiterates strongly that subsidiarity, proportionality and multilevel governance are key principles and fundamental features for the functioning of the EU and its democratic accountability; emphasises that the legal act of a Directive would better serve these principles, while still attaining the goals of the initiative; |
| --- | --- |

4.

reiterates strongly that subsidiarity, proportionality and multilevel governance are key principles and fundamental features for the functioning of the EU and its democratic accountability; emphasises that the legal act of a Directive would better serve these principles, while still attaining the goals of the initiative;

| 5. | stresses that in many Member States the regions play a role in regulating and supporting the media and cultural sectors and regrets that the proposal for a regulation does not explicitly recognise this competence; |
| --- | --- |

5.

stresses that in many Member States the regions play a role in regulating and supporting the media and cultural sectors and regrets that the proposal for a regulation does not explicitly recognise this competence;

| 6. | warns of the potential negative effects of overregulation on the well-established media systems across the EU Member States in which media freedom and pluralism are ensured; in its efforts to improve media diversity and independence, the initiative should not harm functioning media systems present in the majority of EU Member States; |
| --- | --- |

6.

warns of the potential negative effects of overregulation on the well-established media systems across the EU Member States in which media freedom and pluralism are ensured; in its efforts to improve media diversity and independence, the initiative should not harm functioning media systems present in the majority of EU Member States;

| 7. | calls in this regard for caution in initiatives aiming to harmonise and centralise the regulation of the media at European level. This concerns both the European order of competences and the preservation of cultural diversity in the European Union, as well as the possible effects on media pluralism, especially on a regional and local level, that might arise if a purely internal market perspective is applied; |
| --- | --- |

7.

calls in this regard for caution in initiatives aiming to harmonise and centralise the regulation of the media at European level. This concerns both the European order of competences and the preservation of cultural diversity in the European Union, as well as the possible effects on media pluralism, especially on a regional and local level, that might arise if a purely internal market perspective is applied;

| 8. | questions furthermore the appropriateness of regulating media systems on the sole legal basis of the internal market competence under Article 114 TFEU, taking into account that in addition to the market dimension, media services have an important function in the cultural sector, education, social inclusiveness and the protection of freedom of expression; |
| --- | --- |

8.

questions furthermore the appropriateness of regulating media systems on the sole legal basis of the internal market competence under Article 114 TFEU, taking into account that in addition to the market dimension, media services have an important function in the cultural sector, education, social inclusiveness and the protection of freedom of expression;

| 9. | calls that, to this end, it should be made clear that safeguarding media freedom and pluralism is the responsibility of the Member States and that it should be recognised that these objectives go beyond the mere promotion of the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

9.

calls that, to this end, it should be made clear that safeguarding media freedom and pluralism is the responsibility of the Member States and that it should be recognised that these objectives go beyond the mere promotion of the internal market;

| 10. | warns against imposing restraints on the Member States’ ability to apply other or stricter rules in areas covered by the Regulation. It must remain possible to introduce more far-reaching or detailed provisions to safeguard media diversity in the respective constitutional traditions of the Member States, which should in case of doubt take precedence over market economy considerations; |
| --- | --- |

10.

warns against imposing restraints on the Member States’ ability to apply other or stricter rules in areas covered by the Regulation. It must remain possible to introduce more far-reaching or detailed provisions to safeguard media diversity in the respective constitutional traditions of the Member States, which should in case of doubt take precedence over market economy considerations;

| 11. | stresses that supervision in the area of safeguarding media pluralism must follow the structure of competences; insofar as this supervision acts in areas that do not solely concern the internal market, it must take sufficient account of the cultural sovereignty of the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

11.

stresses that supervision in the area of safeguarding media pluralism must follow the structure of competences; insofar as this supervision acts in areas that do not solely concern the internal market, it must take sufficient account of the cultural sovereignty of the Member States;

| 12. | stresses furthermore that there shall be no overlapping media supervision on European level concerning the safeguarding of media pluralism, including editorial independence, that instead, the duty and responsibility of the Member States to guarantee media pluralism must be implemented efficiently, and that the respect of the principles of independent media supervision that is free from political influence shall be ensured; |
| --- | --- |

12.

stresses furthermore that there shall be no overlapping media supervision on European level concerning the safeguarding of media pluralism, including editorial independence, that instead, the duty and responsibility of the Member States to guarantee media pluralism must be implemented efficiently, and that the respect of the principles of independent media supervision that is free from political influence shall be ensured;

| 13. | while acknowledging the need for closer cooperation between media regulatory authorities, requests due attention to the independence of the proposed European Board for Media Services from political and business influence; requests in addition that the composition of the board reflects the regulatory structure and traditions existing in the different Member States; |
| --- | --- |

13.

while acknowledging the need for closer cooperation between media regulatory authorities, requests due attention to the independence of the proposed European Board for Media Services from political and business influence; requests in addition that the composition of the board reflects the regulatory structure and traditions existing in the different Member States;

| 14. | calls for the introduction of concrete obligations for very large online platforms going beyond the submission of a statement of reasons prior to the imposition of a restriction, in order to protect the journalistic-editorial content in the online sector; |
| --- | --- |

14.

calls for the introduction of concrete obligations for very large online platforms going beyond the submission of a statement of reasons prior to the imposition of a restriction, in order to protect the journalistic-editorial content in the online sector;

| 15. | reiterates its commitment to pursuing efforts to safeguard democratic resilience, rule of law and fundamental rights, particularly in view of the growing threats of interference to the European democratic order; and firmly supports all efforts to ensure an open, fair and pluralistic political debate. |
| --- | --- |

15.

reiterates its commitment to pursuing efforts to safeguard democratic resilience, rule of law and fundamental rights, particularly in view of the growing threats of interference to the European democratic order; and firmly supports all efforts to ensure an open, fair and pluralistic political debate.

Brussels, 16 March 2023.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Vasco ALVES CORDEIRO

---

(50)  Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).

50

(50)  Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).

50

(55)  Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1).

55

(55)  Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1).

55

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1).

1

(2)  Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).

2

---