# Official Journal C 61/4 Fe

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 61 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 654 February 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 61

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 654 February 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | RESOLUTIONS |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021 |
| 2022/C 61/01 | Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the 2021 EU Annual Regional and Local Barometer | 1 |
| 2022/C 61/02 | Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the COP26 and global and local alliances for climate action | 5 |
| | OPINIONS |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021 |
| 2022/C 61/03 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — EU strategy on the rights of the child and the European Child Guarantee | 9 |
| 2022/C 61/04 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Effectively engaging local and regional authorities in the preparation of the Partnership Agreements and Operational Programmes for the 2021-2027 period | 15 |
| 2022/C 61/05 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — A Counter-Terrorism Agenda for the EU: anticipate, prevent, protect, respond | 21 |
| 2022/C 61/06 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Protecting industrial and craft geographical indications in the European Union | 26 |
| 2022/C 61/07 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — New Consumer Agenda — Strengthening consumer resilience for sustainable recovery | 30 |
| 2022/C 61/08 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 | 36 |

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Committee of the Regions

Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021

2022/C 61/01

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the 2021 EU Annual Regional and Local Barometer

1

2022/C 61/02

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the COP26 and global and local alliances for climate action

5

OPINIONS

Committee of the Regions

Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021

2022/C 61/03

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — EU strategy on the rights of the child and the European Child Guarantee

9

2022/C 61/04

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Effectively engaging local and regional authorities in the preparation of the Partnership Agreements and Operational Programmes for the 2021-2027 period

15

2022/C 61/05

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — A Counter-Terrorism Agenda for the EU: anticipate, prevent, protect, respond

21

2022/C 61/06

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Protecting industrial and craft geographical indications in the European Union

26

2022/C 61/07

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — New Consumer Agenda — Strengthening consumer resilience for sustainable recovery

30

2022/C 61/08

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025

36

---

| | III   Preparatory acts |
| --- | --- |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021 |
| 2022/C 61/09 | Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — European Digital Identity | 42 |

III   Preparatory acts

Committee of the Regions

Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021

2022/C 61/09

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — European Digital Identity

42

---

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

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Committee of the Regions

Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/1

---

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the 2021 EU Annual Regional and Local Barometer

(2022/C 61/01)

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

| — | having regard to its report ‘2021 Annual Regional and Local Barometer’, based on an inclusive, factual and evidence-driven approach, involving multiple partners and institutions; |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its report ‘2021 Annual Regional and Local Barometer’, based on an inclusive, factual and evidence-driven approach, involving multiple partners and institutions;

| — | whereas the report’s purpose is to reflect on the regional and local dimension of the State of the Union and to provide political decision-makers at European, national, regional and local level with evidence and key recommendations on the most pressing challenges for the year ahead; |
| --- | --- |

—

whereas the report’s purpose is to reflect on the regional and local dimension of the State of the Union and to provide political decision-makers at European, national, regional and local level with evidence and key recommendations on the most pressing challenges for the year ahead;

| — | whereas local and regional authorities have been at the frontline to fight the pandemic but also to implement measures to support people and companies and to prepare the gradual and sustainable recovery; |
| --- | --- |

—

whereas local and regional authorities have been at the frontline to fight the pandemic but also to implement measures to support people and companies and to prepare the gradual and sustainable recovery;

| — | whereas the 2020 Barometer report has demonstrated that the multi-faceted impact of the COVID-19 crisis was — and still is — very asymmetric and has a strong territorial dimension, and there is a undeniable need for a more nuanced understanding of how the pandemic affects local and regional development:






  1. | highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic and its myriad consequences have been a major test for the functioning of our democracy and the resilience of our societies and notably for our health systems, bringing some of the latter to a grinding halt; points out that the impact has been uneven across the Union: border regions and urban areas proved more vulnerable, while rural regions — in general more disadvantaged in terms of access to healthcare fared relatively better; calls for more strategic policy foresight and investment to make the European Health Union a reality and insists that regional health systems are the cornerstone of the EU resilience and must be part of the future health preparedness and response architecture; in view also of the Single Market Emergency Instrument announced by the European Commission for the beginning of 2022, urges that in any crisis situations with an impact on border regions consideration be given to the implications for Europe’s labour market and long-term special arrangements sought for all cross-border workers in order to prevent undue gaps in protection; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

whereas the 2020 Barometer report has demonstrated that the multi-faceted impact of the COVID-19 crisis was — and still is — very asymmetric and has a strong territorial dimension, and there is a undeniable need for a more nuanced understanding of how the pandemic affects local and regional development:

1.

highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic and its myriad consequences have been a major test for the functioning of our democracy and the resilience of our societies and notably for our health systems, bringing some of the latter to a grinding halt; points out that the impact has been uneven across the Union: border regions and urban areas proved more vulnerable, while rural regions — in general more disadvantaged in terms of access to healthcare fared relatively better; calls for more strategic policy foresight and investment to make the European Health Union a reality and insists that regional health systems are the cornerstone of the EU resilience and must be part of the future health preparedness and response architecture; in view also of the Single Market Emergency Instrument announced by the European Commission for the beginning of 2022, urges that in any crisis situations with an impact on border regions consideration be given to the implications for Europe’s labour market and long-term special arrangements sought for all cross-border workers in order to prevent undue gaps in protection;

| 2. | stresses that the pandemic also tested the resilience of our economies. The 6 % fall in EU GDP in 2020 conceals major regional disparities, which can be explained by regions’ respective exposure to restrictions but also by their structural characteristics such as the share of people employed in at-risk sectors, the level of education, the proportion of micro-enterprises or the quality of governance. To enable cities and regions to make the most of ‘Next Generation EU’ and focus on long-term investments that will improve these structural characteristics, the timeframe for the recovery measures should be extended until 2024; the increased co-financing rate for the short-term recovery measures should be extended for one more year and consistency between the various funding programmes and regulatory measures must be ensured; |
| --- | --- |

2.

stresses that the pandemic also tested the resilience of our economies. The 6 % fall in EU GDP in 2020 conceals major regional disparities, which can be explained by regions’ respective exposure to restrictions but also by their structural characteristics such as the share of people employed in at-risk sectors, the level of education, the proportion of micro-enterprises or the quality of governance. To enable cities and regions to make the most of ‘Next Generation EU’ and focus on long-term investments that will improve these structural characteristics, the timeframe for the recovery measures should be extended until 2024; the increased co-financing rate for the short-term recovery measures should be extended for one more year and consistency between the various funding programmes and regulatory measures must be ensured;

| 3. | stresses that the combination of falling revenues and rising expenditures put an unprecedented pressure on LRAs’ budgets, resulting in a ‘scissors effect’. For 2020, this gap can be estimated at approximately EUR 180 billion for all EU LRAs. This combines a EUR 124 billion expenditure increase due to measures in public health, business support and others, and a EUR 55 billion revenue fall due to decreased activity (and thus tax and fee income). Significant national government and EU support for LRA budgets has mitigated this effect but this mitigation is very uneven across Member States and LRAs will require continued support in 2021 and beyond. Budgetary stability has thus also been impacted, as has fiscal autonomy more broadly which can affect the efficient delivery of public services. The revision of the European economic governance framework — which currently does not sufficiently take into account the distinction between current expenditure and long-term/sustainable investment expenditure — needs to better reflect the needs of LRAs. In particular, a golden rule of sustainable public investment needs to be established and exclude net public investment from deficit calculations in the Stability and Growth Pact; |
| --- | --- |

3.

stresses that the combination of falling revenues and rising expenditures put an unprecedented pressure on LRAs’ budgets, resulting in a ‘scissors effect’. For 2020, this gap can be estimated at approximately EUR 180 billion for all EU LRAs. This combines a EUR 124 billion expenditure increase due to measures in public health, business support and others, and a EUR 55 billion revenue fall due to decreased activity (and thus tax and fee income). Significant national government and EU support for LRA budgets has mitigated this effect but this mitigation is very uneven across Member States and LRAs will require continued support in 2021 and beyond. Budgetary stability has thus also been impacted, as has fiscal autonomy more broadly which can affect the efficient delivery of public services. The revision of the European economic governance framework — which currently does not sufficiently take into account the distinction between current expenditure and long-term/sustainable investment expenditure — needs to better reflect the needs of LRAs. In particular, a golden rule of sustainable public investment needs to be established and exclude net public investment from deficit calculations in the Stability and Growth Pact;

| 4. | reaffirms the need to involve LRAs in the evaluation and the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and more specifically of its main operational tools — National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs). As feared in the first edition of the Barometer, this involvement has proved limited: a very small number of Member States have detailed the involvement of their LRAs in their consultation process or have systematically described the role of LRAs for each policy field. This lack of involvement is of concern given that LRAs are key drivers for public investment and that the very objectives of the RRF are of particular relevance for LRAs according to the breakdown of competences. Argues that the ways in which the NRRPs have been drawn up and the LRAs have been involved are not conducive to promoting ownership of the recovery plans. Many country-specific recommendations were not followed up due to the lack of ownership and involvement of the LRAs in the European Semester; |
| --- | --- |

4.

reaffirms the need to involve LRAs in the evaluation and the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and more specifically of its main operational tools — National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs). As feared in the first edition of the Barometer, this involvement has proved limited: a very small number of Member States have detailed the involvement of their LRAs in their consultation process or have systematically described the role of LRAs for each policy field. This lack of involvement is of concern given that LRAs are key drivers for public investment and that the very objectives of the RRF are of particular relevance for LRAs according to the breakdown of competences. Argues that the ways in which the NRRPs have been drawn up and the LRAs have been involved are not conducive to promoting ownership of the recovery plans. Many country-specific recommendations were not followed up due to the lack of ownership and involvement of the LRAs in the European Semester;

| 5. | emphasises that NRRPs also represent a crucial opportunity to push the green recovery forward. More than half of the key topics of the Green Deal are fully integrated in the NRRPs analysed in a recent CoR study and the green transition absorbs on average 41 % of the budget in the NRRPs. With 75 % of EU citizens living in urban areas (which produce most of the greenhouse gas emissions) and with a quickly increasing number of LRAs committed to act, LRAs are at the forefront of climate action. LRAs must consequently be full-fledged partners when it comes to the development and implementation of Green Deal initiatives — especially in policy areas such as renovation of buildings, sustainable mobility or urban greening for instance. They are also particularly well placed to ensure consistent use of the recovery funds with ESI Funds (including the Cohesion Fund and the ERDF); |
| --- | --- |

5.

emphasises that NRRPs also represent a crucial opportunity to push the green recovery forward. More than half of the key topics of the Green Deal are fully integrated in the NRRPs analysed in a recent CoR study and the green transition absorbs on average 41 % of the budget in the NRRPs. With 75 % of EU citizens living in urban areas (which produce most of the greenhouse gas emissions) and with a quickly increasing number of LRAs committed to act, LRAs are at the forefront of climate action. LRAs must consequently be full-fledged partners when it comes to the development and implementation of Green Deal initiatives — especially in policy areas such as renovation of buildings, sustainable mobility or urban greening for instance. They are also particularly well placed to ensure consistent use of the recovery funds with ESI Funds (including the Cohesion Fund and the ERDF);

| 6. | underlines that climate mitigation and adaptation, as well as environmental preservation and restoration, are key elements of building more resilient and sustainable societies and economies — as the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation vary significantly depending on the geographic, economic and social specificities of European areas; reiterates that efficient climate and environmental action calls for the full application of multi-level governance and calls on the Commission and Member States to fully integrate the sub-national level within the European Green Deal policies; highlights that climate change and biodiversity are global challenges and that 2021 is a crucial period for advancements in global concerted climate action for the formal recognition of LRAs’ contributions, within the UNFCCC COP26 and UN CBD COP15 as the focal points. The CoR will explore working with partners, such as the European Commission, UNDRR and Joint Research Centre, to establish a ‘Regional Resilience Platform’. The Platform aims to support local and regional authorities in strengthening their resilience against future crises in areas such as natural disasters, climate change and health by gathering data and best practices; |
| --- | --- |

6.

underlines that climate mitigation and adaptation, as well as environmental preservation and restoration, are key elements of building more resilient and sustainable societies and economies — as the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation vary significantly depending on the geographic, economic and social specificities of European areas; reiterates that efficient climate and environmental action calls for the full application of multi-level governance and calls on the Commission and Member States to fully integrate the sub-national level within the European Green Deal policies; highlights that climate change and biodiversity are global challenges and that 2021 is a crucial period for advancements in global concerted climate action for the formal recognition of LRAs’ contributions, within the UNFCCC COP26 and UN CBD COP15 as the focal points. The CoR will explore working with partners, such as the European Commission, UNDRR and Joint Research Centre, to establish a ‘Regional Resilience Platform’. The Platform aims to support local and regional authorities in strengthening their resilience against future crises in areas such as natural disasters, climate change and health by gathering data and best practices;

| 7. | regrets that, in 2020, the unemployment rate increased in the majority of the EU NUTS 2 regions and that young people are particularly affected by this deterioration after several consecutive years of improvement. To ensure that the ‘new normal’ in working, living and travelling in the EU does not leave anyone behind, a serious discussion on economic, social and territorial cohesion as well as cohesion as an overall value of the EU is needed. The Social Summit in Porto and the Subsequent Porto Social Commitment must pave the way for strengthening the social dimension of the EU and efforts must not be spared to achieve the targets it has set for 2030. Specific measures for population groups at risk should be developed. For instance, all young people should have access to the Erasmus+ programme and every young European should have a ‘minimum qualifications and skills guarantee’ recognised in all Member States; |
| --- | --- |

7.

regrets that, in 2020, the unemployment rate increased in the majority of the EU NUTS 2 regions and that young people are particularly affected by this deterioration after several consecutive years of improvement. To ensure that the ‘new normal’ in working, living and travelling in the EU does not leave anyone behind, a serious discussion on economic, social and territorial cohesion as well as cohesion as an overall value of the EU is needed. The Social Summit in Porto and the Subsequent Porto Social Commitment must pave the way for strengthening the social dimension of the EU and efforts must not be spared to achieve the targets it has set for 2030. Specific measures for population groups at risk should be developed. For instance, all young people should have access to the Erasmus+ programme and every young European should have a ‘minimum qualifications and skills guarantee’ recognised in all Member States;

| 8. | highlights the bright side of this ‘new normal’ as the pandemic also accelerated the digital transition. However, there is a significant urban-rural digital divide in most EU Member States in terms of infrastructure, internet usage and use of e-government services, as well as a strong concentration of tech industry in specific EU regions. Bridging this digital divide through comprehensive strategies involving all levels of government is a necessity for a sustainable recovery. The pandemic showed the value of digital connectivity and the need for digital cohesion, a concept that should be on a par with economic, social and territorial cohesion. In this regard, it is key to create a robust and comprehensive set of data at local and regional level to transpose digital targets in the 2030 Digital Compass to subnational levels — reflecting the role of LRAs in the digital transformation. These binding digital targets should be reflected in the European Commission’s implementation report on the long-term vision for rural areas; |
| --- | --- |

8.

highlights the bright side of this ‘new normal’ as the pandemic also accelerated the digital transition. However, there is a significant urban-rural digital divide in most EU Member States in terms of infrastructure, internet usage and use of e-government services, as well as a strong concentration of tech industry in specific EU regions. Bridging this digital divide through comprehensive strategies involving all levels of government is a necessity for a sustainable recovery. The pandemic showed the value of digital connectivity and the need for digital cohesion, a concept that should be on a par with economic, social and territorial cohesion. In this regard, it is key to create a robust and comprehensive set of data at local and regional level to transpose digital targets in the 2030 Digital Compass to subnational levels — reflecting the role of LRAs in the digital transformation. These binding digital targets should be reflected in the European Commission’s implementation report on the long-term vision for rural areas;

| 9. | advocates boosting the role of LRAs in the integration of refugees and migrants. Given the need to respond to the global challenges of migration and integration locally, many LRAs play an active role in receiving and integrating refugees and migrants by providing vital urban infrastructure and services to meet their needs, such as affordable and social housing, quality education and health services. Consequently, migrant reception and integration policies need to be formulated in a bottom-up approach in consultation with LRAs to ensure that these policies are not disconnected from the reality of host communities. Furthermore, LRAs’ access to supporting funds needs to be facilitated, and municipalities that participate in the EU relocation programme and/or develop their own integration projects should be able to receive direct funding; |
| --- | --- |

9.

advocates boosting the role of LRAs in the integration of refugees and migrants. Given the need to respond to the global challenges of migration and integration locally, many LRAs play an active role in receiving and integrating refugees and migrants by providing vital urban infrastructure and services to meet their needs, such as affordable and social housing, quality education and health services. Consequently, migrant reception and integration policies need to be formulated in a bottom-up approach in consultation with LRAs to ensure that these policies are not disconnected from the reality of host communities. Furthermore, LRAs’ access to supporting funds needs to be facilitated, and municipalities that participate in the EU relocation programme and/or develop their own integration projects should be able to receive direct funding;

| 10. | notes with concern that the relationship between the United Kingdom (UK) and the EU resulting from the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) lacks territorial ‘depth’. The CoR stands ready to contribute to a positive agenda for territorial cooperation with UK LRAs based on new avenues, which do not rely only on the TCA’s institutional framework. To do so, several concrete initiatives could be launched such as amending the regulation on European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) to facilitate the establishment of EGTCs with the UK or providing specific support for the administrative capacity of public institutions to engage in cooperation projects with UK partners. Monitoring the involvement of LRAs in the implementation of the Brexit Adjustment Reserve (BAR) will also be key to verifying whether the territorial impact of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU is remedied; |
| --- | --- |

10.

notes with concern that the relationship between the United Kingdom (UK) and the EU resulting from the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) lacks territorial ‘depth’. The CoR stands ready to contribute to a positive agenda for territorial cooperation with UK LRAs based on new avenues, which do not rely only on the TCA’s institutional framework. To do so, several concrete initiatives could be launched such as amending the regulation on European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) to facilitate the establishment of EGTCs with the UK or providing specific support for the administrative capacity of public institutions to engage in cooperation projects with UK partners. Monitoring the involvement of LRAs in the implementation of the Brexit Adjustment Reserve (BAR) will also be key to verifying whether the territorial impact of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU is remedied;

| 11. | emphasises that — according to the first-ever survey carried out on behalf of the CoR among more than one million politicians elected at subnational level — almost two thirds of local politicians (64 %) feel that there is not enough influence of regions, cities and villages on EU policy-making. Therefore, Europe can emerge more democratically, and also more environmentally, resilient from the COVID-19 crisis with a formal recognition and application of active subsidiarity to ensure that actions are taken at the level whose action will produce maximised added value for citizens, and that coordinated and effective decision-making processes are in place; |
| --- | --- |

11.

emphasises that — according to the first-ever survey carried out on behalf of the CoR among more than one million politicians elected at subnational level — almost two thirds of local politicians (64 %) feel that there is not enough influence of regions, cities and villages on EU policy-making. Therefore, Europe can emerge more democratically, and also more environmentally, resilient from the COVID-19 crisis with a formal recognition and application of active subsidiarity to ensure that actions are taken at the level whose action will produce maximised added value for citizens, and that coordinated and effective decision-making processes are in place;

| 12. | highlights that the Conference on the Future of Europe is an opportunity to be seized to foster the House of European Democracy. As key actors in implementing and developing practices of participatory and deliberative democracy that complement and strengthen representative democracy, cities and regions are vital for enhancing public trust in democratic decision making; therefore calls on the EU institutions to use the Conference as an opportunity to pilot innovative measures (such as the interactive multilingual digital platform and the citizens’ panels) that could potentially become permanent features of EU decision-making processes, and to learn better about the needs of local and regional authorities, while considering the need for Treaty changes; |
| --- | --- |

12.

highlights that the Conference on the Future of Europe is an opportunity to be seized to foster the House of European Democracy. As key actors in implementing and developing practices of participatory and deliberative democracy that complement and strengthen representative democracy, cities and regions are vital for enhancing public trust in democratic decision making; therefore calls on the EU institutions to use the Conference as an opportunity to pilot innovative measures (such as the interactive multilingual digital platform and the citizens’ panels) that could potentially become permanent features of EU decision-making processes, and to learn better about the needs of local and regional authorities, while considering the need for Treaty changes;

| 13. | stresses that regions’ development depends largely on the quality of their physical connectivity. In this context, points to the need to promote rail as a key element in addressing the issue of the public transport exclusion of remote and less developed regions; emphasises the need to deepen integration between environmentally friendly, innovative and safe transport modes; recognises that regional airports play a prominent role in EU territorial cohesion for sparsely populated, peripheral or less developed regions; highlights that, in view of the global challenges that can only be addressed through cooperation, EU regions and cities must focus at the same time within and beyond the EU; |
| --- | --- |

13.

stresses that regions’ development depends largely on the quality of their physical connectivity. In this context, points to the need to promote rail as a key element in addressing the issue of the public transport exclusion of remote and less developed regions; emphasises the need to deepen integration between environmentally friendly, innovative and safe transport modes; recognises that regional airports play a prominent role in EU territorial cohesion for sparsely populated, peripheral or less developed regions; highlights that, in view of the global challenges that can only be addressed through cooperation, EU regions and cities must focus at the same time within and beyond the EU;

| 14. | sees great potential for the million EU politicians elected at regional and local level to contribute to the House of European Democracy and notes from our most recent survey that an overwhelming majority of these politicians say strengthening their involvement will make democracy in the EU work better; |
| --- | --- |

14.

sees great potential for the million EU politicians elected at regional and local level to contribute to the House of European Democracy and notes from our most recent survey that an overwhelming majority of these politicians say strengthening their involvement will make democracy in the EU work better;

| 15. | instructs its President to transmit the 2021 Annual Regional and Local Barometer and the present resolution to the Presidents of the European Parliament, the European Commission and the European Council, as well as to the Heads of State of the 27 EU Member States, and encourages regional and local elected politicians in Europe to disseminate the report to citizens and local media. |
| --- | --- |

15.

instructs its President to transmit the 2021 Annual Regional and Local Barometer and the present resolution to the Presidents of the European Parliament, the European Commission and the European Council, as well as to the Heads of State of the 27 EU Member States, and encourages regional and local elected politicians in Europe to disseminate the report to citizens and local media.

Brussels, 13 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/5

---

Resolution of the European Committee of the Regions on the COP26 and global and local alliances for climate action

(2022/C 61/02)

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

1.

is deeply concerned about the findings presented in the latest IPCC report on Climate Change 2021 — The Physical Science Basis (1), which confirms the urgency of putting in place effective and comprehensive strategies to reach the objective of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1,5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels, to fight climate change and to mitigate and adapt to the evolving climate;

2.

underlines the fact that local and regional authorities (LRAs) implement 70 % of climate mitigation measures, 90 % of climate adaptation policies, and 65 % of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), representing one third of public spending and two thirds of public investment in the EU. As such, they are in the frontline for addressing climate change impacts at local and regional level and enhancing the resilience of their territories to climate challenges;

3.

recalls that the Paris Agreement recognises the important role played by multilevel governance in climate policies and the need to engage with regions, cities and non-state actors; urges that this principle be put fully into practice across all levels of government to develop synergies and close existing gaps between national, regional and local climate change policies; stresses that the voice of LRAs has become stronger in international negotiations and initiatives on climate change and welcomes existing initiatives of LRAs networks and their input to the UNFCCC Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (NAZCA); highlights the crucial role of Local Governments and Municipal Authorities (LGMA) in bringing together these voices globally and continuously reinforcing a worldwide network of subnational governments willing to fight climate change;

4.

considers that the stepping-up of politically-relevant, democratically elected non-state actors such as LRAs, which are the authorities closest to the public, in the global climate governance regime is a key condition to meet global climate targets and that it is therefore essential that the UNFCCC regulatory framework acknowledge this form of bottom-up governance by formally recognising its role in the decision-making process;

5.

highlights the key role of the CoR as the institutional representative of more than one million local and regional leaders and network of networks; considers that this unique position should be leveraged in order for the CoR to strengthen its role in global climate governance; calls therefore on the UNFCCC to establish a Memorandum of Understanding with the European Committee of the Regions, as the institutional representative of European cities and regions, focusing in particular on climate change mitigation and adaptation in sectors where governance already strongly includes LRAs, such as energy supply and demand, mobility and transport, agriculture, waste management, urban planning and buildings, and flood management;

6.

stresses that ongoing activities and commitments by regions and cities should have a strong role in the preparations for, and gain official visibility at the UNFCCC’s COP26 in Glasgow; thus calls on the UNFCCC to cooperate with the CoR and other relevant counterparts from the LGMA towards the formal recognition of the contribution from subnational governments (i.e. Regionally and Locally Determined Contributions (RLDCs)) to formally acknowledge, monitor and encourage the reduction of carbon greenhouse gas emissions by cities, local governments and regions globally — taking as an example the Edinburgh Declaration on biodiversity;

7.

calls on the UK COP26 Presidency to ensure that the planned COVID-19 sanitary measures allow non-state actors to play an active part in the COP26 works in Glasgow; calls in this light on the European Commission to ensure the sufficient participation and involvement of the CoR delegation, as part of the EU delegation to the COP26; renews its commitment to cooperate with the EP delegation;

8.

stresses that the ambition of the European Green Deal to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050 applies internally by integrating sustainability criteria into all EU policies while setting the pace at global level; underlines that the European Green Deal and Local and Regional Green Deal initiatives should be instruments for achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, fully implementing the UN 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, and making an ambitious EU contribution to the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, which will be decided on by the UN CBD COP15 (2). At the same time as achieving climate neutrality, the European Green Deal should be economically viable and not put heavy burdens and costs on consumers and businesses

9.

strongly believes that the UNFCCC COP26 is an opportunity to look ahead and prepare the ground for an ambitious global 2050 agenda, complementing the approach of the SDGs with the Paris Agreement. Since the European Green Deal already considers the systemic links with many relevant policy areas, if properly implemented, it might inspire and motivate a Global Green Deal;

10.

calls on the UNFCCC Parties to insert in the rules on the global stock take, an obligation for the Parties to consult and involve local and regional authorities during the drafting phase of their submission; in particular calls on the Parties to involve the sub-national level in the revision of their NDCs ahead of the COP meetings by setting up a system of national dialogue;

11.

stresses the importance of the EU leading the global talks with its ambitious and inclusive climate policy, therefore recognises the European Climate Law as an undeniable signal and commitment that places the European Union at the forefront of climate action; In this regard, also urges for climate ambitions to not further alienate citizens by hitting hard on their household budgets — many of which are highly impacted by the COVID pandemic. Citizens and small businesses should not have to foot the bill of ambitious policy packages;

12.

highlights in this regard that many European regions had declared a climate emergency before the announcement of the climate emergency by the European Parliament, and have already introduced their own ambitious climate laws; therefore, believes that their expertise should be more prominently present in global climate diplomacy;

13.

calls for faster adaptation and implementation of the EU Missions on ‘Adaptation to Climate Change’ and ‘Climate-Neutral Cities’ and other relevant missions like soil, health and oceans, once they are endorsed; calls on the LRAs to prepare their own climate adaptation and mitigation strategies to increase protection and resilience of local communities and natural habitats (3);

14.

while fully supporting the ambition of the EU climate framework, calls for concrete action to underpin these goals, ensuring that no region or citizen is left behind. Particular attention and increased dedicated support is required in the case of coal regions, carbon intensive regions, less developed regions and islands;

15.

welcomes the launch of the Conference on the Future of Europe and calls for the European Green Deal to be a central topic as climate change, just transition and sustainable development have a direct impact on the economy, public health and the wellbeing of EU citizens; considers that, in this framework, the European Climate Pact can play a crucial role and become a best practice to be replicated worldwide;

16.

stands ready to co-organise with the European Commission, European Parliament and other relevant organisations a series of Citizens Dialogues and a thematic day on local Climate Action to present the added value of the European Green Deal, as well as to showcase different local initiatives. At the same time, restates its call to CoR members to lead by example and promote local and regional COPs;

17.

calls on all Parties to the UNFCCC, in cooperation with subnational governments and non-state actors, to contribute constructively to the process leading up to COP26 by. among other things, promoting local consultative bodies, citizens’ conventions, local and regional COPs, as well as semi-formal institutions, such as local and regional youth councils and parliaments;

18.

highlights the importance of research and data collection on predicted climatic variations across different regions, and of climate modelling and climate impact assessments to build evidence-based climate policies that also respect the principle of technological neutrality. Considers it necessary to boost interregional cooperation to assist and protect the most vulnerable regions and groups of citizens;

19.

supports the development of local scientific platforms on climate change (already existing in various regions and playing the role of ‘local IPCC’) and their integration in information-sharing networks to encourage cooperation with scientists and support local elected officials’ decision-making;

20.

stresses that, despite ambitious actions undertaken by numerous cities and regions, many do still not know their current and past level of GHG emissions and do not have climate change vulnerability analysis, which makes it difficult for them to quantify and compare their efforts; calls on the European Commission, in particular by fully using local and regional energy agencies, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) and the European Energy Agency (EEA), in coordination with national services drawing up GHG inventories, to support LRAs in their emissions evaluation and reporting, in analysing the primary effects of climate change in their area, and in drawing up climate action plans, making commitments at local and regional level, such as joining the Covenant of Mayors, and recognising their efforts by providing European Funds;

21.

welcomes the work of UNFCCC on renewable energy deployment as a prerequisite for successful climate protection; considers that ambitious expansion targets and measures as well as large-scale and decentralised infrastructure planning are needed for large-scale renewable energy deployment in the near future;

22.

asks the European Commission to cooperate with the CoR to explore how regional climate action plans could act as RLDCs providing local contributions to the Paris Climate Agreement and be officially recognised as a complement to Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), taking particular care to avoid double counting; as a starting point, RLDCs should become an integral part of the National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) through a revision of the Governance of the Energy Union regulation;

23.

supports in this light the Common Reporting Framework by the Global Covenant of Mayors as a step towards the comparability of local and regional efforts and asks the European Commission to further support and expand initiatives such as the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, both within and beyond the EU;

24.

considers that local implementation of climate actions must be complemented and enriched via information sharing, peer-to-peer learning and the consideration of the diversity of territories; the networks and alliances of local and regional actors are of capital importance to increasing the knowledge at regional, national and global levels;

25.

will continue to strengthen its cooperation with global, European and national associations of local and regional authorities, with communities of stakeholders from regions and cities, with national parliaments, and with other actors;

26.

values inter-institutional cooperation and increased synergies with its partners, such as: regional parliaments through the Conference of Regional Legislative Assemblies of Europe (CALRE), the RLEG initiative promoted by a group of regions with legislative powers, the RegHub network and the Cohesion Alliance network, the CoR campaign on European Green Deal, young elected politicians (YEPs) through its own dedicated programme, regional and local politicians in charge of the Europe Direct centres and the Building Europe with Local Entities (BELE) pilot project;

27.

underlines the role of finance in the delivery of climate and climate adaptation objectives and the need for local governments to partner with the private sector and financial institutions to unlock sustainable investments in line with zero emission, zero pollution, minimum waste and climate adaptation ambitions; reiterates its call for EU funds to be accessed directly by local and regional authorities for the Green Deal projects, and proposes that the Commission set up a specific climate innovation programme for local governments;

28.

considers global urbanisation as a core climate sector for Climate Action and Finance (4); notes, in light of growing urbanisation, the fundamental role cities play in the road towards climate neutrality as testbeds for innovation and new approaches to mitigate and adapt to climate change, in particular when it comes to spatial planning, sustainable mobility, affordable housing and energy-efficient buildings; renews its support for initiatives aimed at showcasing best practices and transfer of knowledge, such as Horizon Climate Neutral Cities mission, the Urban Agenda partnerships, etc.;

29.

considers that European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) and other cross-border structures play an important role in facilitating and promoting cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation on climate adaptation and mitigation;

30.

welcomes the work of UNFCCC on the connection between gender and climate policies (5) and calls on the European Commission to work in the same direction; calls for global and European actors to invest in gender-analysis and sex-disaggregated data to understand fully the impact of climate change on all vulnerable groups, implement gender-budgeting techniques and ensure equal access to representation in policy making for all genders and all levels. In this light, supports the call for enhancing the gender balance in the EU and national delegations to the COP;

31.

reiterates its call to better reflect environmental and climate-change considerations in the EU’s external relations and notably in its trade policy. Also highlights the importance of sharing peer-to-peer experience within platforms of territorial cooperation such as ARLEM and CORLEAP, as well as through city-to-city partnerships. Climate change should remain a strategic diplomatic priority of the EU in order to support third countries in adopting and implementing ambitious policies to reach climate neutrality and to achieve the target of the Paris Agreement;

32.

considers that a WTO-compatible Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism could enhance the transition towards climate neutrality worldwide and sees a clear role for LRAs to contribute to this process through subnational climate diplomacy;

33.

fully supports the key actions national governments and financial institutions should take, as prerequisites for local climate action, as identified in the Human Settlements Climate Action Pathway (6);

34.

instructs its president to forward this resolution to the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Slovenian presidency of the Council of the European Union and the President of the European Council.

Brussels, 13 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

(1)  Full report available at https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf

1

(2)  15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

2

(3)  COR-2021-01903, CoR opinion on Forging a climate-resilient Europe — the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change.

3

Forging a climate-resilient Europe — the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change

(4)  Both Urban CDM/Emissions trading schemes (Article 6.4 on market mechanisms) and Sustainable, integrated urban and territorial development (Article 6.8 on non-market mechanism). Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.

4

Urban CDM/Emissions trading schemes

Sustainable, integrated urban and territorial development

(5)  https://unfccc.int/gender

5

(6)  Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action, 2021.

6

---

OPINIONS

Committee of the Regions

Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/9

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — EU strategy on the rights of the child and the European Child Guarantee

(2022/C 61/03)

| Rapporteur: | Jari ANDERSSON (FI/EPP), Member of a Local Assembly: Sastamala City Council |
| --- | --- |
| Reference documents: | Proposal for a Council Recommendation Establishing a European Child Guarantee
  COM(2021) 137 final
  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — EU strategy on the rights of the child
  COM(2021) 142 final |

Rapporteur:

Jari ANDERSSON (FI/EPP), Member of a Local Assembly: Sastamala City Council

Reference documents:

Proposal for a Council Recommendation Establishing a European Child Guarantee

COM(2021) 137 final

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — EU strategy on the rights of the child

COM(2021) 142 final

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | notes that local and regional authorities play an important role in the delivery of key services and in combating poverty, and that the European Commission and the Member States should ensure that authorities are involved in implementing the Communication on an EU strategy on the rights of the child and the proposal for a Council Recommendation Establishing a European Child Guarantee; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | points out that the European Committee of the Regions has commented in the past on the role of local and regional authorities in combating child poverty and promoting children's rights; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | notes that the Member States are adequately informed about how current European measures to combat child poverty and promote children's rights are implemented at various levels of local and regional government; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | would like to take part in future dialogue about child and youth policy and cooperation with the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, civil society, children’s rights groups and other relevant stakeholders. |
| --- | --- |

4.

General considerations

| 5. | welcomes the European Commission proposal for a Council Recommendation Establishing a European Child Guarantee and the Commission Communication on an EU strategy on the rights of the child, whose objective is to effectively encourage the efforts of the Member States and local and regional authorities to reduce child poverty and improve children’s rights to ensure greater fairness and inclusiveness in the Union, and in regions and municipalities/cities. The subsidiarity principle must be respected in the process; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | stresses that a child is above all a child, regardless of their ethnic origin, gender, nationality, social and economic background, ability or place of residence, and that the best interests of the child must be taken into account in all policies, processes and measures that affect children at every level. The European Commission and the Member States must ensure that the rights of the child are prioritised and considered, in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in all EU internal and external policies, measures and programmes that directly or indirectly affect children, and that consistency is maintained in all decision-making; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | points out that every child should have the right to an adequate standard of living and equal opportunities in life from their early years, in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; strengthening socio-economic inclusion of children and their families is critical in order to reduce poverty and disadvantage between the generations, and to achieve this it is crucially important to ensure that proper social and healthcare protection and support are provided, as well as access to high-quality education, training and jobs for families; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | urges the Member States to grant adequate and proper financial support so as to guarantee effective implementation of the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and calls on them to continue addressing structural inequalities; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | notes the importance of supranational, national, regional and local authorities implementing coordinated action so that the objectives of the European Commission’s initiatives can be effectively realised; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | points to the importance of close cooperation with local and regional authorities, of encouraging dialogue with local communities to improve the level of protection of children’s rights, and of organising information and promotional campaigns set up at local and regional level with EU funding to increase awareness of children’s rights in society in general and among children in particular; |
| --- | --- |

10.

Child Guarantee

| 11. | points out that poverty and the social inclusion of different ethnic groups and marginalised communities must be addressed in order to ensure effective protection of children's rights, and that poverty and social exclusion can significantly constrain the future opportunities of children and their families; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | draws attention to the need for specific actions implemented that address this to be targeted primarily at the most disadvantaged children; quality education must be ensured for all children so that every child is guaranteed the same opportunities to develop their own potential; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | emphasises the need to define good practices for reducing child poverty and to improve access to key children’s services and the enforcement of children’s rights; recommends here that local and regional authorities be included in efforts to raise awareness and share good practices across the Union, and suggests that international, national and regional conferences and study visits be organised to this end; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | welcomes the proposal for an EU Network for Children's Rights composed of national representatives as well as international and non-governmental organisations, representatives of local and regional authorities, and children. The network is intended to reinforce dialogue about children's rights and mutual learning between the European Union and Member States, and to support the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the strategy; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | is pleased to note that Member States with a rate of child at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion higher than the EU average will have to earmark 5 % of the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) for combating child poverty; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | urges all the Member States, and not just those most affected by child poverty, to allocate sufficient resources to supporting the recommendations of the European Child Guarantee. In this spirit, highlights the positive effects of financially supporting families with children as an effective method of tackling child poverty. The aim should be to develop a comprehensive investments ecosystem for European children, building on the Child Guarantee, the Recovery and Resilience Facility, Structural Funds and national resources in order to enhance the effective delivery of quality and inclusive services for all children; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | notes that businesses and social entrepreneurship can play a key role in implementing the European Child Guarantee, and points to the need to invest in developing this capacity, ensuring access to finance, and entrepreneurship training, at the same time, the development of educational institutions and social assistance systems in less developed Member States through EU funding is also essential for the implementation of the European Child Guarantee; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | welcomes the EU’s employment, skills and social protection objectives, including the objectives for child poverty, and points out that the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities, as well as the social partners, bear joint responsibility for implementing the Pillar of Social Rights; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | would endorse the proposal to appoint a National Child Guarantee Coordinator (ombudspersons for children, etc.) for each Member State, with sufficient resources and powers to promote, coordinate and monitor matters relating to the strategy on the rights of the child and the Child Guarantee. |
| --- | --- |

19.

EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child

| 20. | welcomes the Commission’s initiative to draw up a new, comprehensive strategy on the rights of the child; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | notes that European local and regional authorities are uniquely placed to take positive action to uphold the rights of children, to promote their development in a protective and respectful environment where they are treated well, and to act to ensure that children are protected from any form of violence, including abuse and neglect. Cooperation between local and regional authorities should be promoted and the EU should provide support for more effective partnerships between such authorities, in particular with a view to sharing good practice; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | calls on the Commission and the Member States to guarantee that the EU strategy on the rights of the child is appropriately financed, ensuring that EU internal and external funding, as well as national budgets, adequately support implementation of the priorities set out in the strategy; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | suggests that a roadmap and more precise timetable for implementing the initiative be drawn up in cooperation with the Member States, involving the local and regional authorities and specialised institutions at local and regional level. |
| --- | --- |

23.

Social protection

| 24. | welcomes the Commission’s undertaking to present an initiative to support the development and strengthening of integrated child protection measures. These measures will encourage all relevant authorities and bodies to work better together and to cooperate; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | calls on the national authorities responsible to ensure effective and accessible social protection and child and adolescent protection services providing safe and inclusive environments where children and young people are treated well, and to pay attention to preventive measures, early intervention, and support for vulnerable families; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | notes that children are to be duly considered in the next European semester policy framework; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | urges the Member States, bearing in mind the subsidiarity principle enshrined in Article 165 TFEU, to guarantee equal access to quality and inclusive early childhood education and care (ECEC) for all children with a view to attaining the Barcelona targets of participation and to turning ECEC from a demand-driven service into an entitlement for every child, enshrined in European law as a legal and social right. |
| --- | --- |

27.

Education

| 28. | further urges the Member States to ensure that every child has access to quality education, on an equal basis regardless of ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, nationality, residence or immigration status, gender or sexual orientation; calls on countries to take appropriate measures to combat and address the causes of absenteeism and children leaving school early; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | emphasises the role of a minimum threshold of a fully paid parental leave and child benefits. Parental leave could be divided into separate entitlements for each parent and allow flexible use of the leave, including later in childhood; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | points out that the quality of teachers’, educators’ and other relevant professionals’ basic training and updating it is crucially important for the education, well-being and inclusion of all children; stresses, furthermore, the need for adequate, long-term stable and needs-based funding for schools and crèches, which also guarantees the viability of smaller schools in rural areas; education grants for children with low socio-economic status can additionally be used; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | considers that preventing widening disparities in school quality within Member States and within the Union is a key objective; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | welcomes the proposal for a Council recommendation on blended learning for high quality and inclusive primary and secondary education, as well as for the Council recommendation on pathways to school success that aims to decouple educational attainment and achievement from social, economic and cultural status; supports the European Commission’s invitation to the Member States to ensure effective equal access to digital tools and high-speed Internet connection, digital literacy, accessible online educational material and tools for all children; at the same time stresses the necessity also to include in the strategy the provision of devices and out-of-school support to children with special needs, living in poverty, in marginalised communities, such as migrant and Roma children, or in remote and rural areas, along with guidance and training in digital skills for socially disadvantaged children and adolescents and their families; advocates for public financial support for digital equipment for the children concerned; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | encourages the creation of well-equipped talent-promoting schools, especially in regions facing major social challenges; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | stresses that online learning should never permanently replace face-to-face teaching, especially when access to technology is limited: face-to-face teaching plays an important role in social interaction, quality learning and development; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | emphasises the importance of developing independent living skills for young people and providing training for educators through grant programmes; |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | stresses the need to ensure the functioning of social services for young people who leave the child protection system, giving them housing resources, training and assistance to encourage independent life projects, in order for them to integrate socio-professionally; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | points to the need of running development centres, free talent care programmes for talented children living in difficult conditions and willing to learn; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | stresses that education establishments should have the capacity to provide basic services aimed at ensuring that children that attend these education establishments are sufficiently healthy, both physically and mentally. |
| --- | --- |

38.

Violence committed by and against children

| 39. | urges the European Union, its Member States and regions to step up measures to end all forms of violence and discrimination directed at children, including physical, sexual, economic and psychological violence, abuse, neglect, ill-treatment and online violence, forced marriage, trafficking of migrant children, torture, honour killings, FGM, incest, early school leaving, and use of children as soldiers; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | notes that the EU strategy on the rights of the child must take account of all regulatory and other initiatives relevant to children’s rights, so as to ensure consistency in protecting children from violence, human trafficking and abuse. The Commission is also urged to publish a precise timetable for the proposals in question and to ensure that the recommendations are properly implemented; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | emphasises the importance of developing preventive approaches to tackling all forms of violence against children at EU level and in the Member States. This includes promoting efforts to ensure that children and adolescents are treated well and creating protective environments for them in all areas where children live their lives. Local and regional authorities, local and regional specialised institutions must be involved in the development of preventive approaches at national level. |
| --- | --- |

41.

Children’s health

| 42. | calls on the European Commission and the Member States to promote accurate information about vaccination in order to improve trust in the vaccination strategy and ensure that children's health is not negatively affected by the consequences of disinformation; |
| --- | --- |

42.

| 43. | welcomes the recovery and resilience strategy to promote rapid and inclusive recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic; |
| --- | --- |

43.

| 44. | points to the need to carry out a specific assessment of the pandemic’s impact on the mental health of children and adolescents, to boost investment in mental healthcare and to come up with strategies to protect children and young people from mental illness. |
| --- | --- |

44.

Children’s rights and migration

| 45. | points to the need to ensure a child-friendly judicial system with appropriate and inclusive procedures that allow children’s particular needs to be taken into account, and notes the importance of guaranteeing children’s right to be heard, to be informed in clear, simple, intelligible language that they can understand and that is geared to their age, ability to understand and development, and to receive help from a legal representative where necessary; |
| --- | --- |

45.

| 46. | welcomes the European Commission’s commitment to support the Member States in developing effective and viable alternatives to the detention of children during migration procedures; |
| --- | --- |

46.

| 47. | stresses the importance of supporting children who are victims of domestic violence by easing their access to social and mental health services, in order to facilitate their recovery and mental well-being. In addition, these services must be mobilised against violent behaviour in children and facilitate the reintegration of young people who have committed violence; |
| --- | --- |

47.

| 48. | opposes detention of children on migration grounds. The child’s best interest must be the guiding principle; |
| --- | --- |

48.

| 49. | calls for children to be closely supervised at every stage by the competent authority and/or public service, whose duty it is to protect children; |
| --- | --- |

49.

| 50. | welcomes the European Commission’s commitment to work towards making supply chains of EU companies free of child labour, notably through a legislative initiative on sustainable corporate governance. Calls for the prohibition of the import of products resulting from child labour; |
| --- | --- |

50.

| 51. | stresses the importance of promoting social inclusion and combating racism and discrimination directed against unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents. |
| --- | --- |

51.

The child’s right to be heard and involved in matters and decisions that affect them

| 52. | reiterates that children must be guaranteed the opportunity to be involved in decisions that affect their lives and to be heard in a way that is appropriate to their age and maturity, in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

52.

| 53. | emphasises the importance of developing prevention activities, namely prevention of alcohol, tobacco, drug use, among young people. In this regard, recommends the involvement of local authorities, educational institutions and specialised institutions in the development of prevention activities and in raising awareness of the dangers of alcohol, tobacco and drug use; |
| --- | --- |

53.

| 54. | emphasises the importance of raising awareness of children’s rights and promoting children’s involvement in decision-making processes at all levels; |
| --- | --- |

54.

| 55. | welcomes the European Commission’s proposal to promote and improve children’s inclusive and systematic participation at local, national and EU level by setting up a Children's Participation Platform; |
| --- | --- |

55.

| 56. | urges the Member States and regions to introduce, improve and provide sufficient resources for new and existing approaches to children’s participation at local, regional and national level; |
| --- | --- |

56.

| 57. | encourages the European Union and its Member States to step up the promotion of dialogue between national decision-makers and young people. In this regard, proposes the organisation of joint workshops, in cooperation with the local authorities, aimed at involving young people in decision making and taking into account their views regarding policy developments that concern them; |
| --- | --- |

57.

| 58. | welcomes the recent appointment, by the European Commission, of the first European Youth Coordinator, Biliana Sirakova, in line with the proposal in the European Commission’s EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027; reiterates its call for regular meetings between the CoR and the Youth Coordinator to be planned and for the cooperation between the CoR and the Coordinator to be formalised (1); |
| --- | --- |

58.

CONCLUSIONS

| 59. | calls for at least 5 % of ESF+ funding under shared management to be earmarked for supporting projects under the European Child Guarantee and for the creation of an effective investments ecosystem for European children, combining EU funds and national resources. A National Child Guarantee Coordinator should be appointed for every Member State with the powers necessary to promote, monitor and report on matters relating to the strategy on the rights of the child and the Child Guarantee. All children must be guaranteed, in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the opportunity to be involved in decisions that affect their lives and to be heard in a way that is appropriate to their age and maturity; |
| --- | --- |

59.

| 60. | notes the need to recognise and identify the key role played by local and regional authorities in tackling child poverty and protecting children from any form of violence, and their critical role in preventing discrimination and social exclusion. This has been evident in local efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic, where many regions, cities and municipalities responded quickly and implemented measures to mitigate the negative effects on child poverty, e.g. by providing food assistance to families in need in various ways; |
| --- | --- |

60.

| 61. | notes that Member States and other players should prepare for the many challenges that can be expected to arise after the pandemic recedes due to changes in the living conditions of children and families. Local and regional authorities play a central role in delivering targeted key services in the European Child Guarantee proposal. It is therefore essential that local authorities and regions be involved as key partners in developing and implementing the Child Guarantee, promoting multilevel governance, and developing joint responsibility and coordinated strategies for the local, national and EU levels. |
| --- | --- |

61.

Brussels, 12 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

(1)  CoR opinion European Solidarity Corps and the new EU youth strategy COR-2018-03892-00-00-AC-TRA.

1

European Solidarity Corps and the new EU youth strategy

---

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/15

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Effectively engaging local and regional authorities in the preparation of the Partnership Agreements and Operational Programmes for the 2021-2027 period

(2022/C 61/04)

| Rapporteur: | Juraj DROBA (SK/ECR), President of the Bratislava Region |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Juraj DROBA (SK/ECR), President of the Bratislava Region

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | points out that, as the EU's main investment tool, cohesion policy primarily aims at reducing the economic, social and territorial disparities between EU regions and at addressing structural challenges, such as job creation, protecting the existing jobs, competitiveness, economic growth, and tackling climate change, sustainable mobility and social exclusion; stresses, at the same time, that regions, cities and municipalities have a responsibility for the overall and sustainable development of their own areas and should therefore be equipped with the appropriate financial means to deliver this task; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | emphasises that the added value of EU cohesion policy goes beyond the proven positive economic, social and territorial impact, as it also implies the commitment of Member States and regions towards strengthening European integration; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | underlines that EU legislation on cohesion policy requires the involvement of local and regional authorities at all stages of the programming period, from planning through implementation and monitoring to evaluation; believes that, as part of the programming procedure, these authorities should be fully involved in the process of analysing needs and identifying measures for the purposes of preparing the partnership agreements and thematic operational programmes, with a view to addressing specific challenges in the regions and meeting cohesion policy objectives. Otherwise, there is a risk that the way these documents are put together will not meet needs on the ground; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | highlights that the key rules for involving partners are enshrined in the European Code of Conduct on Partnership in the framework of the European Structural and Investment Funds (1) (European Code), which remains valid for the new programming period; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | notes that strategic planning is the basis for successful implementation of cohesion policy. The key documents of that policy are the partnership agreements and operational programmes that set the strategic priorities, including the financial allocation and proposed measures, which will have a major impact on how the regions develop over the next decade; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | calls for the main strategic documents for the new programming period to be adopted without delay so that implementation can get under way as soon as possible; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | welcomes the interest expressed by the Slovenian presidency of the Council of the EU in further exploring the topic of partnership in the ESIF with the aim to improve its application, and is ready to work together; |
| --- | --- |

7.

Applying the principles of partnership and multilevel governance

| 8. | the partnership principle and the multi-level governance model, which are based on enhanced coordination among public authorities, economic and social partners and civil society, can effectively contribute to better communicating EU policy objectives and results; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | notes that the partnership approach is a participative and collective process involving public authorities at European, national, regional and local level, as well as relevant socio-economic partners and representatives of civil society; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | points out that applying the principles of partnership and multilevel governance contributes to better identification of needs, a stronger collective commitment to meeting objectives, as well as a sense of ‘ownership’ among the partners involved and better complementarity with other instruments. It also helps strengthen support for the common European project by communicating how cohesion policy contributes to solving local problems, thus bringing the EU closer to the people and reducing the democratic deficit; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | takes the view that an in-depth analysis of their area by local and regional authorities provides the basis for good programme design. Moreover, cooperation between stakeholders at different levels of government contributes to better synergies between their policies and avoids duplication or conflicting approaches within a given area; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | stresses that regional and local authorities already have a wealth of experience in preparing and implementing several programming periods, which must be built on in accordance with the partnership principle in order to better design the new programming period; points out, however, that their experience also shows that respect for the principles of partnership and multilevel governance varies from one EU Member State to another and that central administrations' processes are not necessarily inclusive; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | notes, in general, that formal partnership is applied in decentralised states or federal states with established cooperation mechanisms, but there remains room for improvement; while the role of local and regional authorities is often limited in smaller unitary states. At the same time, the prevailing sentiment in many countries is that the further regions, cities and municipalities are from the capital, the weaker their role is in preparing the programming period; calls on all EU Member States to ensure a proper application of multilevel governance to ensure that all local and regional authorities benefit from it; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | is most concerned that it is not possible to apply the partnership principle properly in all Member States. Negotiations on partnership agreements and operational programmes have shown that although in most cases local and regional authorities were consulted, their involvement did not mean full partnership as set out in the European Code of Conduct on Partnership; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | is concerned about the limited progress in some Member States in opening up spaces for dialogue and communication with a view to drawing up the regional strategic documents for the 2021-2027 programming period, to the extent that the financial allocation from the Structural Funds to be made available for implementing the Operational Programmes is still not yet known; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | is concerned about the main findings of a study (2), which show that the involvement of partners in preparing the new programming period has improved only slightly compared to the 2014-2020 programming period, and that the way partnership is implemented has changed only slightly, thus not fully exploiting its potential; is equally concerned about the finding that an excessively high proportion of local and regional authorities are involved in public consultations only, and do not play a more direct role in compiling strategic documents. In countries where the partnership principle is not properly established and is purely superficial, the European Commission should also assist in examining mechanisms to ensure it is applied properly; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | calls on the European Commission and Member States to boost the attractiveness of EU cohesion policy funding through further simplification and limitation of gold plating, and to consider reducing the complexity and, where appropriate, the number of regulations and guidelines; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | takes the view that fully-fledged partnership cannot be imposed by any regulation or legislative act, but is the result of long-term dialogue based on mutual trust and respect, the political culture and the sincere interest of the parties involved in delivering the best solutions for the area concerned; points out that this long-term, trust-based dialogue also requires a clear and reliable legal and operational framework for which the EU institutions are also responsible; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | finds it regrettable that, the regulation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility does not require the application of the Code of Conduct, but only recommends the involvement of local and regional authorities, which led to the preparation of the national recovery and resilience plans behind closed doors and with very little involvement of or significant contribution from local and regional authorities, jeopardising their ability to absorb and implement funds. In practice, this makes local and regional authorities merely bodies that implement decisions taken by the Member States in relation to their own competences; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | points out that the potential of partnership is under-exploited and not taken sufficiently into account in a number of countries, and calls for examples of good practice to be sought out to enable stakeholders to play an effective role; finds it equally regrettable that governments in several Member States are not open to new approaches for involving partners, and replicate the established patterns of the past, which hinders the implementation of an effective partnership; in this context, however, welcomes the European Commission's intention to renew the European Community of Practice on Partnership, with a view to exchanging experience and building capacity, and is ready to contribute actively to this initiative; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | stresses that mobilising stakeholders, strengthening their capacity and taking their views into account remains the biggest challenge in implementing partnership, and finds it regrettable that several of the local and regional authorities' objections from the last programming period have not been taken into account and that the problems of mobilising partners thus persist; calls therefore that the European Commission requires Member States to explain the reasons for non-consideration, and to present concrete measures aiming to mobilise and strengthen stakeholders in the new programming period; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | takes the view that an effective set-up of multilevel governance processes requires not only a vertical approach involving the different levels of governance, but also a horizontal dimension involving relevant socio-economic partners, representatives of civil society or academia; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | points out that local authorities often feel under-represented and that they play a minor role or are not listened to in preparatory processes. Given the large number of municipalities in the negotiations, they are mainly represented by their umbrella associations, which therefore play an important role in the preparation process. However, within their structures, there is a need for appropriate capacity to ensure an efficient flow of information to cities and municipalities, so that they are sufficiently aware of ongoing processes and have the possibility to influence them through their associations; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | stresses the need for local and regional authorities to play a predominant role in operational programmes' monitoring committees, and calls on managing authorities to fully involve local and regional authorities in preparing Interreg programmes as well; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | calls for the partnership principles to be fully implemented under new instruments too, such as the Just Transition Mechanism, the Recovery and Resilience Facility and other new instruments financed under NGEU; points to the major impact that the Recovery and Resilience Facility will have on cohesion policy and to the risk of possible duplications and inconsistencies between these instruments; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | calls for the partnership principle to also be applied under the common agricultural policy (CAP) when drawing up and implementing the strategic plans; in this regard, local and regional authorities should be closely involved, in particular in European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) actions; underlines the opportunities, which the application of the partnership principle in the CAP offers, particularly in relation to finding synergies between projects, financed under the ERDF and the second pillar of the CAP; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | stresses the importance of parallel diplomacy by regional and local authorities at European level and calls on the European Commission to involve local and regional authorities in negotiations on the shape of the partnership agreements and operational programmes; by putting forward arguments based on their hard data and knowledge of local problems, these authorities can contribute to a more effective and realistic setting of priorities in the strategic documents; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | highlights that local and regional authorities can shape their operational programmes in a way that gender mainstreaming is given a prominent place in line with Article 16 (f) of the Interinstitutional Agreement and the European Commission's ambition to foresee gender mainstreaming included in EU programmes and the plan to implement a methodology on assessing the gender impact in impact assessments no later than 1 January 2023; calls on Member States and local and regional authorities to take this into consideration at all steps of the programming; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | stresses that differences in the timing of the preparation of national recovery and resilience plans and partnership agreements may, in some cases, hinder effective institutional coordination and limit the search for synergies; the potential priority of RRF funding over cohesion policy, owing to the pressure for rapid implementation and take-up, may reduce the activities in the programming and implementation of cohesion policy 2027, contributing to further delays and take-up of cohesion funding; warns of the risk of an unequal recovery between the different regions of Europe and an increase in inequality due to the lack of a spatial approach to developing the plans financed by the RRF; calls, therefore, on European and national authorities to speed up the preparation of partnership agreements and operational programmes and to strengthen synergies between partnership agreements and national recovery and resilience plans; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | calls for relevant documents to be sent to local and regional authorities in good time before working meetings; at the same time, finds it regrettable that partners often have very little time to comment on documents and therefore calls for them to be given an adequate timeframe commensurate with the importance of the documents being commented on. The involvement of regional and local authorities should not purely be a formality and feedback should always be given on comments made; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | calls on the European Commission to closely monitor application of the partnership principle both in informal negotiations with the Member States and in the assessment of draft partnership agreements and operational programmes, and to provide recommendations to Member States and relevant authorities to improve partnership processes; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | proposes organising, in cooperation with the Slovenian presidency of the Council of the EU, a joint workshop focused on involving regional and local authorities and taking account of their views in order to make the preparation and implementation of cohesion policy programmes more effective; furthermore, suggests that the topic of partnership in the ESIF is also dealt in the context of the ‘better regulation’ initiative, and also be put on the agenda of Council meetings so as to highlight the benefits of effective partnership and multilevel governance in preparing and implementing cohesion policy programmes, demonstrating that this approach helps to achieve common EU policy objectives and should therefore be applied in other policy areas as well; |
| --- | --- |

32.

European code of conduct on partnership in the framework of the European Structural and Investment Funds

| 33. | highlights the importance of the European Code of Conduct on Partnership and the role of the partnership principle in enhancing the collective commitment to and ownership of cohesion policy; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | notes that the European Code of Conduct provides detailed recommendations for the effective implementation of partnership while taking into account specific needs at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | stresses that Article 6 of the Commission Delegated Regulation requires the balanced involvement of partners in the drawing up of partnership agreements and operational programmes, as well as compliance with the European Code of Conduct; calls on the managing authorities and the central coordinating bodies, therefore, to fully implement these requirements and to involve partners beyond mere formal consultations; |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | intends to closely monitor the application of the European Code of Conduct during the drawing up of the partnership agreements and operational programmes, in keeping with its political priorities for 2020-2025 (3);similarly, requests that the Commission verify that the partnership principle has been properly applied before approving the national Partnership Agreements and Operational Programmes; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | notes that the partnership principle was established in connection with the European Code of Conduct for the 2014-2020 programming period and hence does not reflect new instruments and the situation since the outbreak of the pandemic; takes the view that the partnership principle should therefore be strengthened in the European Code of Conduct, as it has already called for in its earlier opinions; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | calls for regional and local governments to be fully involved in the mid-term review of the 2021-2027 programming period. This should include a CoR opinion on the experiences on the implementation in the first years and the expectations of local and regional authorities on the financial envelops as well as on the technical implementation for the remainder of the current programming period; further it could result in the drafting of a study evaluating experience with the application of the recommendations of the European Code of Conduct ten years on from its introduction in 2024; the CoR should be involved in the drafting of the Terms of Reference of the study, discuss the study and be associated to the formulation of recommendations to follow up the conclusions of the study; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | calls on the European Commission to closely monitor and evaluate the implementation of the European Code of Conduct and, if partnership is being insufficiently taken up, to revise it on the basis of examples of good practice in the Member States; calls on the European Commission to take this opinion's recommendations, as well as the conclusions of expert workshops, on board should the Code be revised; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | recommends that the European Commission, on the basis of the collected good examples, call on the Member States to draw up action plans on how to improve the partnership approach in the implementation and monitoring of the current programming period; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | at the same time, recommends that the European Commission contemplate setting up a barometer for the application of partnership that would encourage its greater use; |
| --- | --- |

41.

A place-based approach

| 42. | stresses that the involvement of local and regional authorities in the drawing up of partnership agreements and operational programmes is a key condition for these being configured strategically to mirror the real needs of the area in question and believes that effective implementation of partnership and multilevel governance is essential to better identify the investment priorities to be supported by the ESIF. In order to target investment effectively, it is essential that the regional and local specificities of the area concerned are considered and, including natural and demographic factors that put it at a disadvantage. Local and regional authorities should also be involved in selecting indicators and regional allocations, the volume of which should correspond to the area's structural problems; owing to disparities between regions and within regions, it is still necessary to invest in basic infrastructure, providing basic services in the areas of environment, transport, information and communication technologies, social services, health and education; |
| --- | --- |

42.

| 43. | stresses that it is the regions, cities and municipalities that know their areas and their main challenges to achieve European objectives such as the Green Deal, and global agendas such as the Sustainable Development Goals; they are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of their socio-economic fabric (e.g. areas with problems in mobility, the environment and sustainable transition, climate, energy transition, social inclusion and the fight against inequalities, education, digitalisation etc.) and are able to gauge, drawing on data, the expected impact of each measure and make proposals for more targeted measures or redesign of existing measures; |
| --- | --- |

43.

| 44. | underlines that the COVID-19 pandemic has shown once more the importance local and regional authorities play in the implementation of structural and investment funds; at the same time, the lack of financial means in many local and regional authorities was brought to light; welcomes in this respect the flexibility measures, which were introduced by the European Commission in the CRII and CRII+ packages; calls on the Commission to put a proposal forward to extend the 100 % co-financing rate for another year, extend the N+3 rule and temporarily increase the de minimis state-aid threshold, so that local and regional authorities receive sufficient support in these challenging times; |
| --- | --- |

44.

| 45. | is of the opinion that a place-based approach can significantly contribute to a sustainable green and digital transition and recommends that more frequent territorial impact assessments be conducted under the various cohesion policy objectives and those of the European Green Deal and the Digital Strategy; |
| --- | --- |

45.

| 46. | takes the view that, in addressing territorial challenges, a place-based, integrated approach should be reinforced at the expense of a purely sectoral one. It is precisely the adverse consequences of sectoral compartmentalisation and the stifling of the interests of those involved that hamper a comprehensive and integrated approach to problem-solving; |
| --- | --- |

46.

| 47. | takes the view that integrated territorial strategies for regions and cities (based on ITI and CLLD) have huge potential to beneficially influence the focus of national operational programmes so that the particular regional and local challenges are heeded; calls, therefore, for operational programmes to be congruent with these strategies so they are accurately targeted. The regional dimension should also be factored into the relevant sections of the operational programmes in order to avoid inconsistencies between the different strategic documents; |
| --- | --- |

47.

| 48. | welcomes the fact that the 2021-2027 programming period will have a strong emphasis on Integrated Territorial Investments in implementation and thinks that, where appropriate, the measures proposed in the integrated strategies should be supported as a matter of course without the need for demand-side calls for interest. The ITI strategies should be comprehensive and cover measures whatever the remits of the bodies involved (state, regions, municipalities); |
| --- | --- |

48.

| 49. | points out that, as part of the implementation of ITI, EU regions have well-established cooperation platforms based on the principles of partnership and multilevel governance that are capable of clearly determining the key challenges and identifying the most apt responses; |
| --- | --- |

49.

| 50. | calls for the establishment of effective mechanisms to enable local and regional authorities to participate in the selection of ITI measures on the basis of the territorial principle, regardless of the remits of the entities involved; recommends that the European Commission and the Member States analyse the existing effective collaborative mechanisms in the Member States, which can serve as examples of good practice; |
| --- | --- |

50.

| 51. | believes it useful to address the identification of priorities within smaller dynamic thematic groups that, on the basis of verifiable territorial data, will analyse the challenges and propose responses within a given sectoral topic; |
| --- | --- |

51.

| 52. | is aware that the lack of data at regional level and within cross-border regions is an obstacle to the effective targeting of investment; therefore calls on the European Commission to bolster the collection of statistical data (via Eurostat and ESPON) at NUTS 3 level within the various sectoral policies relevant to cohesion policy objectives — data which will also be used to measure the progress achieved in the area concerned; also regards the EU Social Progress Index, an updated version of which was presented by the European Commission at the end of 2020, as an appropriate instrument; |
| --- | --- |

52.

| 53. | also sees the lack of administrative and analytical capacity as a hindrance to the effective involvement of local and regional authorities and calls for this to be reinforced in the new programming period; |
| --- | --- |

53.

Use of digital tools and the consequences of the pandemic

| 54. | regrets that the outbreak of the pandemic has delayed the negotiations on EU programmes between the legislative authority and hence, the drafting of partnership agreements and operational programmes, which were not completed in time for the start of the new programming period, and calls for an immediate acceleration of the preparatory work and a stepping-up of the discussions; |
| --- | --- |

54.

| 55. | also regrets that the measures taken to mitigate the spread of the pandemic have also set back or shelved collaboration with regional and local authorities, in some instances by up to a few months, which will have negative consequences on the development of their areas; |
| --- | --- |

55.

| 56. | warns against trends towards centralisation in the programming and implementation of ESI Funds as a result of the pandemic and the parallel running of two programming periods; |
| --- | --- |

56.

| 57. | notes that the pandemic crisis has also offered an opportunity to involve partners through the widespread use of digital communication tools, which have in some measure facilitated interactions between stakeholders and could have a positive impact on the balanced involvement of partners who would otherwise not be able to be part of the preparations; |
| --- | --- |

57.

| 58. | notes, however, that the possibilities for partners to interact in online meetings are often limited and therefore considers it necessary to constantly improve the conditions for interaction with partners during online meetings. A range of techniques and approaches to leading discussions need to be adopted, together with support from technical assistance, to better facilitate online meetings; |
| --- | --- |

58.

| 59. | recommends also building on examples of good practice in the use of online and interactive communication tools for the future, but takes the view that digital solutions cannot replace physical meetings and consultations and should only be used as a complementary means depending on the format and nature of the discussion. |
| --- | --- |

59.

Brussels, 12 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

(1)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 240/2014 of 7 January 2014 on the European code of conduct on partnership in the framework of the European Structural and Investment Funds (OJ L 74, 14.3.2014, p. 1).

1

(2)  Application of the principles of partnership and multi-level governance in Cohesion Policy programming 2021-2027, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/effcb753-a6ff-11eb-9585-01aa75ed71a1

2

Application of the principles of partnership and multi-level governance in Cohesion Policy programming 2021-2027

(3)  https://cor.europa.eu/en/our-work/Pages/cor-priorities.aspx

3

---

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/21

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — A Counter-Terrorism Agenda for the EU: anticipate, prevent, protect, respond

(2022/C 61/05)

| Rapporteur: | Karl VANLOUWE (BE/EA)
  Member of a Regional Assembly: Flemish Parliament |
| --- | --- |
| Reference document: | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A Counter-Terrorism Agenda for the EU: anticipate, prevent, protect, respond
  COM(2020) 795 final |

Rapporteur:

Karl VANLOUWE (BE/EA)

Member of a Regional Assembly: Flemish Parliament

Reference document:

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A Counter-Terrorism Agenda for the EU: anticipate, prevent, protect, respond

COM(2020) 795 final

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Introduction

| 1. | welcomes the Commission’s counter-terrorism agenda (1), which recognises the key role of local and regional authorities, including in the prevention of radicalisation and in the protection of public spaces; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | agrees with the Commission that the transnational nature of terrorist networks requires stronger cooperation so as to safeguard and uphold our common values and norms, our European way of life and our pluralistic society; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | points out that counter-terrorism policy is part of security policy, which is a shared competence between the EU and the Member States, with the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security being the responsibility of the Member States in accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2), and in this regard also points to the role played by regional law enforcement authorities in certain Member States; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | stresses that the motivation for terrorist attacks in the EU is diverse, and has been divided into five categories by Europol: jihadist terrorism, left-wing and anarchist terrorism, right-wing terrorism, ethno-nationalist and separatist terrorism, and single-issue terrorism, and points to the growing phenomenon of perpetrators acting alone (3); |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | points out that the curtailing of freedom of movement through COVID-19 measures hinders terrorists’ activities, that unfortunately ways can be found to circumvent this, and that account must be taken of the socioeconomic impact of the pandemic, which creates an additional risk of radicalisation and a crisis situation that terrorists can use to further propagate their aims and activities (4) (5); |
| --- | --- |

5.

Anticipate

Strategic intelligence and threat assessment

| 6. | recognises, in view of the transnational nature of terrorist networks, the vital importance of the EU Intelligence and Situation Centre (EU INTCEN) for the EU’s internal security, and welcomes the Commission’s call to better integrate strategic intelligence and to continue providing EU INTCEN with high-quality threat assessments from national security and intelligence services and with the necessary resources; |
| --- | --- |

6.

Reinforcing early detection capacity

| 7. | welcomes the plan for EU security research to strengthen the capacity for early detection of potential terrorist threats, and stresses the importance here of interoperability in order to exchange information; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | supports the further integration of research within the security policy cycle of the Horizon Europe programme, and the proposal for Europol to assist in identifying key research themes and in drawing up and implementing the relevant EU framework programmes; |
| --- | --- |

8.

Staying ahead of the curve: the role of new technologies

| 9. | recognises the opportunities presented by new innovative technologies such as artificial intelligence and drones to proactively detect terrorist threats and contribute to the security of public spaces, welcomes the Commission’s commitment to fund projects to develop new technologies under the Urban Agenda for the EU (6), and calls for the exchange of best practices between governments, industry and experts; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | points out that new technologies also create new threats, and welcomes, inter alia, the Commission’s plans to better detect, track and identify potentially malicious drones; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | emphasises that a balance must always be sought, but especially with new technologies, between, on the one hand, the right to security and physical integrity and, on the other hand, other fundamental rights and freedoms; checks and balances should be built in here, and proportionality and independent judicial oversight should be priorities; |
| --- | --- |

11.

Prevent

Countering extremist ideologies online

| 12. | welcomes the Commission’s commitment, in cooperation with Europol, to see Europol’s competent unit strengthened in terms of resources and capacity, to support the further implementation of the EU Crisis Protocol and thus to tackle viral dissemination of terrorist content online; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | takes note of the Commission’s commitment to extend the list of EU-level crimes (7) to hate crime and hate speech and its proposal for a Digital Services Act (8), stresses the need to take into account here the legal frameworks in the Member States, and points out that all fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to freedom of expression, must always be taken into account; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | stresses the importance of disseminating counter- and alternative narratives in the drive to combat radicalisation, terrorism and disinformation, and welcomes the Commission’s commitment to support Member States in developing this strategic communication; |
| --- | --- |

14.

Supporting local actors for more resilient communities

| 15. | stresses its commitment to continue playing an active role in combating radicalisation, and welcomes the Commission’s support for the Radicalisation Awareness Network (9) and the EU Cities Against Radicalisation initiative (10); |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | emphasises, in particular with regard to early detection of radicalisation, the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in cooperation with civil society, points to best practices such as ‘local integrated security cells’, which bring together local administrations, police, social workers and prevention organisations, (non-formal) education services, religious counsellors, etc., and take a case-by-case approach to radicalised individuals (11), points here to the principle of shared professional secrecy, which is crucial, calls for an exchange of best practices in this regard, and stresses the need to take into account legislation in the Member States on the protection of privacy; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | points out that local and regional authorities are the most directly confronted with the opportunities and challenges of integration and expects, particularly at that level, support from the Commission to safeguard and strengthen social cohesion, including through its Action Plan on Integration and Inclusion (12); |
| --- | --- |

17.

Prisons, rehabilitation and reintegration

| 18. | welcomes the Commission’s commitment to focusing more on the issue of radicalisation in prisons through the disengagement, rehabilitation and reintegration of radicalised inmates, stresses the need for a comprehensive approach whereby prison staff, social workers, religious counsellors etc. receive specialised training on how to deal with radicalised prisoners and which ensures that the mentoring of radicalised individuals does not stop after their detention or disengagement, and points to the importance of exchanging best practices; |
| --- | --- |

18.

Consolidating knowledge and support

| 19. | welcomes the Commission’s commitment to support the further development of national networks of relevant actors, looks forward to the proposal on setting up an EU Knowledge Hub on prevention of radicalisation which, in addition to disseminating knowledge and expertise, should also promote the optimal use of funding opportunities under the various EU programmes, notes the high level of knowledge and expertise that already exists in local and regional authorities (13), and calls for competent regional law enforcement authorities and intelligence services to be involved in the development of national networks of relevant stakeholders and the EU Knowledge Hub on the prevention of radicalisation; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | stresses, moreover, the importance of the Internal Security Fund (ISF) in Europe’s fight against terrorism and highlights the need to ensure that the share of funds managed by the Member States reaches all competent national and regional authorities in this field; |
| --- | --- |

20.

Protect

Protecting people in public spaces

| 21. | stresses the vulnerability of public spaces to terrorist attacks, welcomes the Commission’s commitment to putting more emphasis on the ‘security by design’ principle, looks forward to the Commission’s ‘virtual architecture book’ on incorporating security aspects in the design of future and the renovation of existing public spaces, and points to the balance to be struck between the security of public spaces and the openness liveability and accessibility of those spaces; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | recognises the high symbolic value of places of worship, which often makes them the target of terrorists, and looks forward to the projects that the Commission intends to support in coordination with the Member States to enhance their physical protection, where once again a balance must be struck between openness, liveability and accessibility; |
| --- | --- |

22.

Cities as the backbone of urban security

| 23. | welcomes the Commission’s proposals regarding an EU Pledge on Urban Security and Resilience and a new Cities against Radicalisation and Terrorism initiative, and calls for the one-stop-shop principle to be used here to ensure a single point of contact; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | calls on the Commission to include the Committee of the Regions as a full partner in the EU Pledge on Urban Security and Resilience and for it to always be consulted on relevant proposals; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | stresses that EU cohesion policy funds can also be used to prevent radicalisation and upgrade public infrastructure through investments aimed at social cohesion, integration and resilience; |
| --- | --- |

25.

Making critical infrastructure more resilient

| 26. | emphasises that critical infrastructure runs the risk of being a terrorist target, highlights the importance of reporting cyber incidents under the legislation on the security of network and information systems (14), and looks forward to the Commission’s proposals to enhance the resilience of operators and step up security against physical and digital risks; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | welcomes the fact that the scope of the proposed directive on the resilience of critical infrastructure (15) has been substantially extended to cover energy, transport, health, drinking water, waste water, digital infrastructure, public administration and space. Reiterates (16) its call on the European Commission to consider in the future further increasing the number of sectors to be covered by the directive to also include the distribution chains of essential items; |
| --- | --- |

27.

Border security

| 28. | points out that the free movement of persons within the EU must be inextricably linked to proper external border control, agrees with the Commission that more needs to be done to achieve an effective border management system with the aim of ensuring systematic checks of all travellers at the external borders so that people suspected of terrorism are detected and denied entry into the EU, and looks forward to the Commission’s proposals for a new Schengen strategy; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | recognises the need to achieve interoperability and swift and full implementation of the Entry/Exit System (EES) (17), the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) (18) and the European Criminal Records Information System — Third Country Nationals (ECRIS-TCN) (19); |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | following the new regulations on the Schengen Information System (SIS) (20), recognises the need to implement the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) and to ensure that information on foreign terrorist fighters provided by trusted third countries is entered into SIS; |
| --- | --- |

30.

Denying terrorists the means to attack

| 31. | recognises the threat posed by homemade explosives, supports the Commission’s call for full implementation and enforcement of the legislation on explosives precursors (21), and stresses the importance of regularly reviewing and updating this legislation; |
| --- | --- |

31.

Respond

Operational support: strengthening Europol

| 32. | recognises the crucial role of Europol and its European Counter-Terrorism Centre (ECTC), stresses the need for additional resources, and welcomes the Commission’s commitment (22) to strengthen Europol’s mandate, so as to enable it to cooperate effectively with private parties, to support national criminal investigations into terrorism as regards the processing and analysis of big data, and to deploy its research and innovation expertise; |
| --- | --- |

32.

Law enforcement cooperation

| 33. | stresses the need for cross-border and cross-sectoral cooperation in combating terrorism, calls for close cooperation between regional and national law enforcement authorities and Europol, highlights the added value of the relevant CEPOL training (23), looks forward to the Commission’s proposal for an EU police cooperation code, while calling for it to take account of the decentralised nature of security policy in certain Member States, welcomes the Commission’s commitment to continue supporting and safeguarding the ATLAS network of special intervention units (24), and calls for pooling and sharing options to be explored; |
| --- | --- |

33.

Strengthening information exchange

| 34. | recognises the need for stronger coordination, cooperation and information exchange between local and regional authorities, the Member States, police forces, justice systems, and security and intelligence services, both among themselves and with the relevant European agencies, highlights best practices using multidisciplinary task forces, working groups and security cells at local, regional and national levels (25), looks forward to the Commission’s proposals for an efficient mechanism for information exchange in counter-terrorism cases, and stresses the importance of discretion and mutual trust; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | acknowledges the need for a better exchange of DNA profiles, fingerprints and palm prints, and national vehicle registration data between Member States that meets the operational needs of law enforcement authorities and complies with the EU legal framework for data protection, and looks forward to the Commission’s proposals to revise, update and extend the Prüm Decisions (26); |
| --- | --- |

35.

Supporting investigations and prosecution

| 36. | recognises that information encryption is not only an important tool for the protection of cyber security and fundamental rights, but is also misused by terrorists, and looks forward to the cooperation proposed by the Commission with Member States to identify solutions for lawful access to these data in line with our fundamental rights and freedoms and the EU data protection legal framework; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | acknowledges, in the context of identifying, detecting and prosecuting returning foreign terrorist fighters, the necessity and complexity of gathering evidence and battlefield information, looks forward to the Commission’s initiatives to support Member States in this regard, and welcomes the Commission’s commitment to strengthening cooperation with third countries; |
| --- | --- |

37.

Strengthened support to victims of terrorism

| 38. | stresses the enormous impact of terrorist attacks on victims, and points out that victim support should be based on recognition, remembrance, justice and truth-seeking; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | emphasises the need to unburden victims, and points out the good practice of a case management system with coaches, in which victims are individually supported both administratively and emotionally; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | stresses the added value of the pilot EU Centre of Expertise for Victims of Terrorism (27), and calls for it to be continued and expanded beyond 2021 in order to carry out further practical work on the ground, and calls for strong cooperation with the future EU Knowledge Hub on the Prevention of Radicalisation, and not integration of the two; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | welcomes the Commission’s commitment to exploring ways to improve victims’ access to compensation, including in relation to victims of terrorism in cross-border situations, who are residents of another Member State than that where the terrorist attack occurred, and calls for consideration of systems such as a guarantee fund for victims of terrorism. |
| --- | --- |

41.

Brussels, 12 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

(1)  COM(2020) 795 final.

1

(2)  Articles 4, 67 and 72 TFEU.

2

(3)  Europol (2020). European Union Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT) 2020.

3

(4)  Europol (2020). European Union Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT) 2020.

4

(5)  United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on terrorism, counter-terrorism and countering violent extremism.

5

(6)  https://futurium.ec.europa.eu/en/urban-agenda/security-public-spaces

6

(7)  Article 83(1) TFEU.

7

(8)  COM(2020) 825 final.

8

(9)  https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/networks/radicalisation_awareness_network_en

9

(10)  https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/policies/internal-security/counter-terrorism-and-radicalisation_en

10

(11)  https://preventie-radicalisering-polarisering.vlaanderen.be/sites/preventie-radicalisering-polarisering/files/leidraad_livc.pdf

11

(12)  COM(2020) 758 final.

12

(13)  Flemish Parliament (2015). Document 366 (2014-15) — No 3 and Flemish Government (2017). Flemish Action plan for the prevention of violent radicalisation and polarisation.

13

(14)  Directive (EU) 2016/1148.

14

(15)  COM(2020) 829 final

15

(16)  CoR opinion on the resilience of critical entities, NAT-VII/017.

16

(17)  https://www.eulisa.europa.eu/Activities/Large-Scale-It-Systems/Sis-Ii

17

(18)  https://www.eulisa.europa.eu/Activities/Large-Scale-It-Systems/Etias

18

(19)  https://www.eulisa.europa.eu/Activities/Large-Scale-It-Systems/Ecris-Tcn

19

(20)  Regulation (EU) 2018/1860, Regulation (EU) 2018/1861 and Regulation (EU) 2018/1862.

20

(21)  Regulation (EU) 2019/1148.

21

(22)  COM(2020) 796 final.

22

(23)  https://www.cepol.europa.eu/education-training/what-we-teach/counter-terrorism

23

(24)  Decision 2008/617/JHA.

24

(25)  https://www.besafe.be/sites/default/files/2019-06/planr_en.pdf

25

(26)  Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA.

26

(27)  https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/criminal-justice/eu-centre-expertise-victims-terrorism_en

27

---

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/26

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Protecting industrial and craft geographical indications in the European Union

(2022/C 61/06)

| Rapporteur: | Martine PINVILLE (FR/PES), Member of the Regional Council of Nouvelle-Aquitaine |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Martine PINVILLE (FR/PES), Member of the Regional Council of Nouvelle-Aquitaine

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | welcomes the European Commission’s announcement in its Intellectual property action plan of November 2020 that it would look into the feasibility of introducing a scheme to protect EU geographical indications (GIs) for non-agricultural products, and notes that the CoR had already called for this idea to be explored in February 2015 (1); |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | notes that Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) includes safeguarding and enhancing Europe’s cultural heritage as one of the objectives to be considered in relation to developing the internal market; that Article 118 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is intended to provide uniform protection of intellectual property rights throughout the Union within the internal market; and that Article 169 TFEU provides for protection of consumer rights (including promoting consumers’ right to information); |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | considers ‘industrial and craft geographical indications’ (ICGIs) to be clearer and more specific than ‘geographical indications (GIs) for non-agricultural products’, and would prefer to use this term; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | welcomes the very broad support for an EU initiative introducing a protection scheme for ICGIs, whether in the context of the public consultation on the initial impact assessment launched by the European Commission at the end of 2020 or of the stakeholder consultation held on 19 May 2021 prior to drawing up the current opinion. Calls, therefore, on its members and on the stakeholders on the ground to confirm this support by actively participating in the ‘Public consultation on GIs for non-agricultural products’ launched by the European Commission on 29 April 2021 and open until 22 July 2021 inclusive (2); |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | regrets that the lack of harmonisation at EU level with respect to ICGIs is resulting in a patchwork of national legal instruments, weakening the protection of products and businesses; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | notes that at EU level different types of IG are currently still subject to different legal regimes, with protected designations of origin (PDOs) and GIs only applied by the EU to wines, aromatised wines, spirit drinks and agricultural products/foodstuffs; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | points out that the WTO (in the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS) and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications, which the EU has recently signed, do not distinguish between GIs according to type of product; also considers that the EU’s signing of the Geneva Act gives it an obligation to address the issue of protecting ICGIs; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | draws attention to the fact that the companies engaging in GI strategies and procedures are primarily microenterprises and SMEs, including in rural areas, which are firmly rooted in a specific region and have a real fund of local expertise and which form genuine sectoral clusters; some of these businesses have become global market leaders, and are particularly important for the European economy and for increasing the EU’s independence from global markets; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | notes that GIs also respond to changing consumer demand: people want greater traceability, transparency about a product’s origin and manufacturing process, and locally-made products, and this trend has only increased with the impact of the COVID-19 crisis; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | believes that recognition of ICGIs is relevant to the priorities of EU programmes being developed, including those of the industrial strategy, the Green Deal and the review of trade policy, and also the future of rural areas and development of short supply chains. |
| --- | --- |

10.

Need for a uniform EU framework with a territorial dimension

| 11. | believes that a sui generis system for protecting ICGIs would, in particular, allow: strengthening of the legal protection for products covered by GIs, including on the internet; development of tools to help combat counterfeiting and unfair competition; creation and maintaining of jobs and training in a region; greater transparency for consumers; and real recognition of what is in some cases an exceptional level of expertise; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | recognises that the trademark system does not allow effective protection of product names and is quite costly for trademark holders; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | thus favours extending protection of GIs to include industrial and craft products under an EU Regulation based on the first paragraph of Article 118 TFEU. This would accord with the division of powers between the European Union and the Member States, and would fully comply with the subsidiarity principle, not least because it would create the conditions for equivalent and uniform protection of ICGIs throughout the internal market while avoiding distortions of competition; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | believes that local and regional authorities in Europe have a wealth of industrial and craft products that are made using knowledge that has often been passed down through the generations, and that promoting and protecting these products in the right way could help to maintain value added and jobs that cannot be outsourced, especially in rural areas, and to protect local heritage; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | points out that strengthening the position of businesses whose product has been recognised as an ICGI would allow parts of their production chains to be brought back to a region, helping to revive local industry and increase EU independence from global markets; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | points out that the impact assessments on GIs for agri-food products have shown that GIs have also brought about an increase in producers’ incomes, often in rural or peripheral areas. Establishing a European ICGI system should also help to increase incomes, as well as benefiting territorial cohesion. According to a study published in 2020 by the European Commission on the economic aspects of GI protection for non-agricultural products (3), GIs also increase producers’ competitiveness by making their products stand out, enhancing their products’ reputation and increasing consumers’ willingness to pay for products that come with a guarantee regarding their features and origin; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | adds that ICGIs help to shape and diversify local cultural and tourist amenities across a whole area, through industrial tourism for instance, based on sharing know-how and excellence-based activities; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | draws attention to the role that certain local and regional authorities can and already do play in supporting industries, both at the stage of designing ICGIs (consultation period) and in implementing (developing communication tools, support for certification, legal advice, etc.) and promoting them. |
| --- | --- |

18.

Practical aspects of registering, monitoring and protecting ICGIs

| 19. | points out that under a common system for all GIs it will be necessary as far as possible to draw on the experience with agriculture and foodstuffs, and to opt for a harmonised approach combining aspects of the different regimes; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | therefore recommends that, to ensure consistency between the two systems, a robust mechanism of coordination between the European Commission departments concerned be put in place, especially during the dossier examination phase, so as to avoid any conflicts over the use of names; also calls for ICGIs to be included in the European GIview database for agricultural GIs; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | reiterates its view that protection of ICGIs should not be time-limited and that it should always be possible to withdraw protection subject to the same conditions that govern GIs for agricultural products (4); |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | believes that a transition period will be needed for Member States that already have a system of protection so as to allow GIs previously registered at national level to be adapted and incorporated into the new EU system; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | thinks that a coordination or recognition system should also be provided for, which would protect products that are already under a designation of origin in certain Member States; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | considers it essential to use a mandatory European logo so that consumers or customers can recognise or identify these products; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | favours application for ICGIs of the two-stage model of the agricultural registration procedure — first, national or regional registration in accordance with a country’s internal arrangements, followed by registration at EU level; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | recommends that the registration procedure be time-limited and managed by the European Union Intellectual Property Office, subject to it being given the relevant powers; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | notes that the link between geographical region and product is fundamental and that a particular aspect of this is the paramount importance of the human factor and expertise for ICGIs. The fact that a raw material has disappeared or is no longer suitable in some regions has not prevented businesses and expertise from being maintained, or even developed to make high-quality products; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | believes that ICGI specifications must be transparent and credible to guarantee consumer confidence. Specifications must state the stages of manufacture, their location, and even their verification, and information about their compliance with the SDGs; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | is particularly concerned about innovation and research, which must not be hampered by specifications: there are many innovative businesses (global approach, design, origin of raw materials, social innovation, use of bio-based or recycled materials, use of technologies, patents), creating regional dynamism and maintaining a human and professional community around the products concerned; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | believes that since a GI is an official guarantee, reliable checks on the operators concerned must be put in place in order to ensure that specifications are adhered to by manufacturers, and to protect consumer safety and confidence; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | recommends opting for certification as the best way to achieve this, since it will guarantee external, independent auditing at an acceptable cost; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | recommends establishing the same level of protection as for agricultural GIs, with Member States taking appropriate legal or administrative measures to prevent or stop illegal use of ICGIs; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | notes that the rules for protecting ICGIs should include protection on the internet; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | believes that producer groups holding a GI are the mainstay of ICGIs because they deal with recognition of the GI and its day-to-day management; they must play a significant role in monitoring, protecting and promoting GIs; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | reiterates its position that in specific and well-founded cases it would be reasonable to provide for registration of a GI to be granted to a single entity, provided that access to the GI is open to any new producer who complies with its rules (5); |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | considers that the costs associated with the application and registration process should not be such as to deter producers, and that they should take the form of a one-off contribution such as a registration fee. In turn, the costs borne by the relevant national public authorities should be limited to those of ordering, promoting and, where necessary, supervising checks, and applying legal or administrative measures to stop the illegal use of ICGIs. |
| --- | --- |

36.

Trade and competition considerations

| 37. | notes that products to which a GI applies are marketed via different channels, such as short supply chains, the internet, or purely business channels such as hotels and catering. The protection afforded by GIs would allow such markets to be developed, for example by including these collections of products in regional and/or national advertising campaigns, or when promoting industrial tourism; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | calls on the European Commission to promote sustainable public procurement by clarifying to what extent the use of ICGIs can be made possible in procurement procedures under objective environmental criteria such as short supply chains and the internalisation of external costs; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | points out that many ICGI products are exported and require protection within and outside Europe. Without broader protection, collective GI strategies and the businesses involved cannot be fully effective. This undermines the protection of their industrial property rights and perpetuates counterfeiting and unfair competition, which will weaken businesses that are often located in rural areas; this protection should be extended to cover imported products of non-EU origin marketed in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | finally, notes that an EU Regulation for ICGIs would allow them to be included in the list of products covered by EU trade agreements with third countries, and thus guarantee their protection in key markets; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | therefore calls on the European Commission to draw up a corresponding proposal for a regulation to protect geographical indications for industrial and craft products from the European Union and to submit it for consultation and deliberation; asks the European Commission to take into account the considerations and recommendations set out in the present opinion and pledges its own active involvement and support. |
| --- | --- |

41.

Brussels, 13 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

(1)  CoR opinion ECOS-V-064 COR-2014-05386-00-00-AC-TRA on Extending geographical indication protection to non-agricultural products.

1

Extending geographical indication protection to non-agricultural products

(2)  https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/commission-seeks-public-opinion-protection-industrial-designs-and-eu-wide-geographical_en

2

(3)  European Commission, Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, Economic aspects of geographical indication protection at EU level for non-agricultural products in the EU, study conducted by ECORYS, VVA and ConPolicy, 2020.

3

(4)  Ibid.

4

(5)  Ibid.

5

---

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/30

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — New Consumer Agenda — Strengthening consumer resilience for sustainable recovery

(2022/C 61/07)

| Rapporteur: | Alexia BERTRAND (BE/Renew Europe), Member of a regional assembly: Parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region |
| --- | --- |

Rapporteur:

Alexia BERTRAND (BE/Renew Europe), Member of a regional assembly: Parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | stresses the importance of EU consumer policy, which aims to ensure that EU citizens have a solid set of rights protecting them from serious risks and threats that they are unable to tackle as individuals, which aims to empower consumers to make informed choices, enhance their welfare and effectively protect their safety and economic interests, and which guarantees them control mechanisms and appeal procedures to make those rights effective; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | emphasises that consumer protection at EU level will also help to boost economic recovery in Europe while implementing the circular economy model and reducing effects on the environment and human health; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | welcomes the publication of the long-awaited New Consumer Agenda, which examines ways to increase consumer protection and resilience during and after the COVID-19 pandemic while empowering European consumers to play an active role in the green and digital transitions; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | stresses the need to develop consumer protection and the associated implementation tools in order to take full account of the major challenges facing the European economy, such as the COVID-19 crisis, the green transition, digital transformation, globalisation and the emerging specific needs of certain vulnerable consumers; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | stresses that there is a need not to mechanically apply the ‘one in, one out’ approach introduced in the Better Regulation Communication, in order to maintain high consumer protection standards; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | welcomes the fact that the Conference on the Future of Europe covers the issue of European consumer policy; |
| --- | --- |

6.

Consumer protection in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

| 7. | strongly emphasises the need to safeguard and vigorously implement consumer rights and the relevant EU acquis in times of crisis, in particular to ensure that they are not weakened and to enable consumers to obtain adequate legal protection from them; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | welcomes the European Parliament’s adoption on 27 April 2021 of the Regulation on rail passengers’ rights and obligations (recast) confirming the rights and protections of consumers of rail services, in particular re-routing and support in the event of delays and cancellations, and greater assistance for people with reduced mobility. This strengthening of passenger rights is likely to encourage a modal shift among consumers towards this more sustainable mode of transport, and interoperability with modes of soft mobility, with the obligation for operators to provide space reserved for bicycles on trains; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | recommends that consideration be given to extending consumer protection against cancellations to other sectors, such as culture and events; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | encourages the various competent authorities to continue combating scams targeting consumers, in cooperation with the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network and in consultation with online platforms, intermediary service providers and all relevant stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | underlines the need to bear in mind the lessons learned from managing this crisis in terms of defining product, process, service and quality standards so as have standards that can be mobilised quickly by public authorities and businesses in order to ensure a high level of health protection for consumers of goods and services; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | underlines the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and the importance of maintaining a high level of consumer protection in times of crisis; in this regard, also recommends carrying out the necessary regulatory reviews in order to establish the consequences of exceptional circumstances in consumer contracts before the situation arises (rebus sic stantibus clause). Such an approach, taking into account the principles of anticipation and forecasting, would strengthen consumer protection; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | encourages the Commission to analyse the long-term repercussions of the COVID-19 crisis on Europeans’ consumption patterns and to build on this analysis to develop future EU policy initiatives in this area; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | in this regard, backs initiatives to support local businesses, including small producers and promote the local craft industry; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | stresses, moreover, that, with clearer and more comprehensive information, consumer law could promote stronger short supply chains for agricultural and food production, thereby reducing transport-related greenhouse gas emissions; in this regard, emphasises the importance of involving local and regional authorities in consumer protection policies; |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | stresses, moreover, the need to support policies aimed at bridging the digital divide in terms of equipment, territorial coverage and the requisite skills; |
| --- | --- |

16.

The green transition

| 17. | points out that sustainable consumption is essential for achieving the objectives of the Green Deal; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | stresses that EU consumers play an essential role in the green transition and therefore they need to be informed and empowered so that they can make informed choices based on comparable, transparent and clear information in accordance with the European Commission’s environmental footprint methodology, including information on the durability, reparability and social and environmental footprints of products; this information needs to be based on solid data and consumer research. In the process of information spreading the involvement of local and regional authorities is recommended; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | highlights the importance of enabling consumers to make a choice based on the durability of products, while incentivising producers to make their products last longer, and stresses the need for European legislation that penalises planned obsolescence and rewards longevity in industrial and technological production; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | points out that the transition to a green economy can only succeed if demand for sustainable products and services is not confined to specific groups of consumers and stresses here that access to sustainable products and services for all consumers, whatever their financial situation, must be ensured in order to attain the goals; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | recommends developing a holistic approach to consumer information by developing labels if possible, taking into account aspects relating to durability, health, respect for the environment, the origin of the product with particular focus on its origin in the EU or in a third-country and fair trade; also stresses the value of increasingly integrating social and environmental aspects into public procurement through a series of measures, including the definition of minimum environmental criteria in sectoral legislation, as provided for in the new Circular Economy Action Plan; |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | thinks it important for product standards to take into account durability and circularity issues and emphasises in this regard that the EU institutions responsible for standardisation have a key role to play in this area, in particular by developing standards that define what a ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ product is; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | stresses the need to improve and ensure interoperability between devices; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | recommends both considering the appropriateness of extending the legal guarantee period for consumer goods and better informing consumers about the expected lifespan of products; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | recommends assessing whether it would be worth implementing a scheme requiring prior authorisation for green claims and ecolabels based on the scheme used for healthcare; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | stresses the need to prioritise reusing or repairing faulty products over discarding them, provided that this does not undermine consumer rights and that the use or repair does not result in the production of lower quality products; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | emphasises the need to ensure the availability of spare parts, ensuring that products can be repaired and that the cost of these repairs does not deter the consumer from repairs, while respecting consumers’ rights to product conformity and product safety; recommends that the Commission look into measures to make this possible; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | encourages the Commission to consider, in relation to the revision of the Sale of Goods Directive, how to continue promoting repairs and more sustainable, circular products, while respecting consumer rights and the economic balance between consumers and businesses; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | stresses the importance of the role played by local and regional authorities in this area and thus the need to promote new consumption patterns and behaviours at local and regional level, such as the sharing economy; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | recommends supporting business models allowing consumers to buy services rather than goods, by encouraging repairs, social economy organisations’ actions and second-hand markets; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | stresses the need for an inventory of local good practices in the field of repair and the circular economy; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | emphasises the importance of extending the scope of local consumer measures to the service economy, for example with regard to renovating buildings and adapting consumer housing to a greener and more digital society, in particular by enhancing consumer information tools; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | backs initiatives to support local businesses with a view to improving consumers’ position on the market, protecting the environment and promoting the craft industry; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | emphasises the role that local and regional authorities can play in informing and educating consumers; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | highlights the importance of effective solutions that consumers can easily understand and implement; |
| --- | --- |

35.

| 36. | supports the Commission’s willingness to cooperate with economic operators in order to encourage them to voluntarily commit to taking action in favour of sustainable consumption that goes beyond legal obligations; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | highlights the need to expand the Eco-Design Directive to include energy-related products, but also to extend it to a broader range of products with a high environmental impact and to set out measures for waste prevention; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | strongly supports the publication of the sustainable products initiative, which aims to make such products the norm so as to combat early obsolescence and promote durability; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | calls for the European Commission, the Member States and local and regional authorities to direct financial incentives from the EU recovery plan towards guaranteeing long-term economic, social and environmental progress while reducing resource use, avoiding and removing hazardous substances and improving circularity of materials and systems; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | stresses again the urgent need to accelerate the transition towards a regenerative growth model, keeping resource consumption within planetary boundaries and reducing our environmental footprint. To this end, it is imperative to decouple growth from resource use, to move towards a true circular society and to cooperate at all levels of governance and society; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | emphasises the need to support SMEs, and local small producers in the green transition without increasing the administrative burden. EU funds are essential in ensuring these transitions. Highlights the need to involve local and regional authorities in providing information on available EU funds in the regard; |
| --- | --- |

41.

The digital transformation

| 42. | points out that the digital transformation is drastically altering consumers’ lives. It offers them great opportunities but also presents them with new difficulties. In this regard, it is necessary to combat unfair online commercial practices. Consumer protection interests must be strengthened when establishing rules governing the digital economy and requirements for artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things and robotics; in this regard, takes note of the European Commission’s innovative proposal in its regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and in its communication entitled ‘Fostering a European approach to Artificial Intelligence’, which will be the subject of a separate CoR opinion; |
| --- | --- |

42.

| 43. | stresses the need to step up action to protect consumers against unfair commercial practices on the internet. In particular, this involves developing new normative or market-surveillance tools to protect consumers against new practices that are appearing due to developments in artificial intelligence and to the use of algorithms (targeted price, product or service offers as a result of consumer profiling on the internet, etc.) and to effectively protect consumers’ personal data; likewise, urges the Commission and the European institutions to raise public awareness of the environmental and social impact of shopping online; |
| --- | --- |

43.

| 44. | points out that EU product safety legislation focusing on consumers’ physical safety should be modernised in order to address security issues relating to connected objects (respect for personal data, cybersecurity, reliability, transparency and consumer information); |
| --- | --- |

44.

| 45. | stresses the need for coherence and clear interaction between EU consumer protection legislation and EU legislation on digital markets in order to establish a high level of consumer protection as regards consumer rights, access to goods and services, including cross-border access, transparency, liability and a secure digital environment, and to clarify and strengthen the liability of online intermediaries. Mechanisms provided by online intermediaries should be put in place to allow companies’ online offers to be monitored over time, in order to avoid damage to consumer rights due to their volatile nature; |
| --- | --- |

45.

| 46. | welcomes the Commission’s intention to roll out an innovative electronic toolkit, which should support the relevant bodies to identify illegal trade practices online; these electronic tools should also serve to allow the disappearance of companies that offer their products online to be monitored; |
| --- | --- |

46.

| 47. | emphasises that geoblocking practices that deny consumers unhindered access to digital content across Europe are still in place in some sectors; |
| --- | --- |

47.

| 48. | recommends making use of data repositories held by public authorities in order to provide consumers with the best possible information through a dynamic open data policy; |
| --- | --- |

48.

| 49. | stresses the need to support SMEs and local small producers in the digital transition without increasing the administrative burden. EU funds are essential in ensuring this transition. Highlights the need to involve local and regional authorities in providing information on available EU funds in the regard; |
| --- | --- |

49.

Effective enforcement of legislation and effective appeal procedures

| 50. | encourages the Commission to play a coordinating and supporting role for Member States and regional and local authorities in monitoring compliance with consumer rights, in particular by guaranteeing that the measures adopted by a Member State are effective regardless of the company’s location, as should be the case with regard to sanctions; |
| --- | --- |

50.

| 51. | welcomes the fact that the New Consumer Agenda provides that the Commission will help the Member States to quickly implement and enforce consumer rights, particularly through the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network; highlights the positive role played here by the European Consumer Centres in shaping cross-border consumer protection; |
| --- | --- |

51.

| 52. | notes that the proper implementation of control measures, in accordance with the provisions of the New Agenda, will require a larger number of staff dedicated to market surveillance tasks. In this regard, the sectoral expertise of the staff involved in these tasks will need to be enhanced, while providing ongoing training and making appropriate material resources available with regard to the activities to be monitored: fraudulent practices, unfair practices, online sales etc. In addition, a proper network of accredited laboratories is needed to detect possible fraud or infringements that may affect security; |
| --- | --- |

52.

| 53. | recommends stepping up cooperation between local and regional authorities on the one hand and consumer organisations on the other; |
| --- | --- |

53.

| 54. | supports the development of voluntary consumer information measures in partnerships between local and regional authorities and businesses; |
| --- | --- |

54.

Addressing specific consumer needs

| 55. | welcomes the fact that the New Consumer Agenda flags up that certain groups of consumers can be particularly vulnerable in certain situations and need specific safeguards, including children, older people and people with disabilities, particularly as a result of the digital divide; |
| --- | --- |

55.

| 56. | highlights the need to strengthen protection for the most vulnerable consumers who need credit to buy essential goods and services such as medical care, education and public services; policies and instruments should be set out in the aforementioned sectors to strengthen consumer protection in situations where companies that provide continuous services in the essential education and health sectors become insolvent, in order to mitigate the damage resulting from business closures in these sectors; |
| --- | --- |

56.

| 57. | stresses the importance of developing consumers’ financial literacy, including in the area of new digital technologies, by supporting projects in this field at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

57.

| 58. | welcomes the fact that the New Consumer Agenda provides for increased funding for measures to improve the availability of debt counselling in the Member States from 2021, considering the importance of local authorities’ measures in this area; |
| --- | --- |

58.

| 59. | welcomes the Commission’s willingness to support initiatives providing local advice to consumers who, for structural or personal reasons, do not have access to support and information provided online or at central information offices; |
| --- | --- |

59.

| 60. | calls for cooperation to be established/stepped up between local and regional authorities, consumer organisations and businesses so that they can join forces to maximise the use of resources; |
| --- | --- |

60.

| 61. | recommends that, as part of the drive to combat over-indebtedness, the Commission analyse the feasibility of a corrective EU legal instrument for the collective settlement of consumers’ debts, going beyond preventive measures; also calls for specific policies to be adopted to avoid practices that have been shown to be particularly damaging to the consumer (such as revolving cards), by causing indebtedness and weakening the consumers’ position vis-a-vis other forms of credit; |
| --- | --- |

61.

| 62. | recommends addressing all aspects of consumer vulnerability and exclusion, including those that directly concern local issues, such as the digital divide experienced by consumers in unconnected, under-connected or poorly connected areas. A catalogue of basic face-to-face financial services should be promoted and regulated and measures taken to prevent the elimination of all or some of these services, which would involve discriminating between consumers in their access to financial services; |
| --- | --- |

62.

| 63. | also recommends addressing the digital divide that affects vulnerable consumers who will be excluded from the digital transition as they lack the necessary equipment or the basic skills needed, in particular in the less developed regions; |
| --- | --- |

63.

Consumer protection in a global context

| 64. | stresses that, in a globalised world where online shopping transcends borders, cooperation with international partners has become crucial; |
| --- | --- |

64.

| 65. | welcomes the Commission’s announcement of an action plan to be drawn up with China to enhance the safety of products sold online, and of the establishment of regulatory support, technical assistance and capacity-building assistance for EU partner regions, especially in Africa; |
| --- | --- |

65.

| 66. | nevertheless encourages the Commission to develop and step up cooperation with third countries where service providers are established that gear their offers towards the EU; |
| --- | --- |

66.

| 67. | urges the European Commission to ensure that goods and services imported into the EU comply with the relevant European Union standards and regulations; welcomes the fact that the European Commission is proposing to increase corporate responsibility in relation to human rights and social and environmental standards for a company’s entire value chain (including subcontractors), also in third countries; |
| --- | --- |

67.

Applying consumer protection policy to other areas

| 68. | points out that consumer policy is one of the most cross-cutting EU policies, touching on many other policies, from product safety to the digital market, financial services, food safety and labelling, energy, travel and transport; |
| --- | --- |

68.

| 69. | underscores the need to integrate consumer protection requirements into the formulation and implementation of other EU policies and activities, such as energy, telecommunications, transport, the insurance and credit sector and so on; |
| --- | --- |

69.

| 70. | stresses that the aim of promoting consumer welfare through robust competition policy in the EU should remain a priority objective in the implementation of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU; |
| --- | --- |

70.

Governance

| 71. | emphasises the need to develop the Consumer Conditions Scoreboard, which shows the situation of consumers throughout the EU, through an appropriate set of indicators, covering in particular circularity in consumption, so as to support the governance and monitoring of the New Consumer Agenda; |
| --- | --- |

71.

| 72. | supports the European Commission’s intention to set up a new governance model, with a broad partnership involving all relevant stakeholders. In this regard, the Commission’s aim to hold regular discussions with the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Committee of the Regions while working closely with the Member States through existing networks, working groups or ad hoc task forces, should be welcomed; |
| --- | --- |

72.

| 73. | reiterates the benefit of involving the European Committee of the Regions in this work. |
| --- | --- |

73.

Brussels, 13 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/36

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025

(2022/C 61/08)

| Rapporteur: | Kate FEENEY (IE-Renew E.), Councillor, Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council |
| --- | --- |
| Reference documents: | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025
  COM(2020) 698 final |

Rapporteur:

Kate FEENEY (IE-Renew E.), Councillor, Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council

Reference documents:

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025

COM(2020) 698 final

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| 1. | notes that equality is one of the fundamental values upon which the European Union is founded, reflected in the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which gives the EU both a mandate and a responsibility to combat discrimination; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | restates that the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, non-binary and queer (LGBTIQ) persons are human rights and as such inherent to all people, regardless of their legal status as non-citizens, refugees, migrants or foreign residents, regardless of whether they are women, men, children, elderly or have disabilities, regardless of their religion, ethnic background, political views or sexual orientation, gender identity or expression and sex characteristics; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | applauds all previous work (1) done at European and national levels, including the publication of the European Commission Communication Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 and the political objectives and measures it sets out towards advancing LGBTIQ equality in the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | warns however that while this first EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy is a long awaited step in the right direction in a Europe that has ‘United in Diversity’ as its motto, we are at the same time experiencing regression in respect of EU values, with authorities continuously using anti-LGBTIQ rhetoric and even adopting discriminatory policies and legislation; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | is encouraged to find that the European Commission expressly mentions and calls on the CoR to promote dialogue with LRAs and civil society, including the social partners, to advance LGBTIQ equality; |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | is concerned by the fact that despite increased policy efforts, structural discrimination and marginalisation of LGBTIQ people is still a reality across the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | believes strongly therefore that LRAs have a key role to play in building a European society that is based on the inclusion of all citizens, rather than the exclusion of some, and agrees that inclusive and diverse strategies are important in both the public and private sectors to better address the complex challenges and life situations encountered by LGBTIQ people; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | urges the European Commission to ensure that the fundamental principles of the European Union are observed, and that no municipality, region or state introduces systemic discriminatory initiatives, such as the ‘LGBT-free zones’, adopted as ‘Local Government Charter of The Rights of The Family’ or ‘Resolution against LGBT ideology’, or uses funds in ways that are non-compliant with the principle of non-discrimination; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | stresses in this light the importance of taking action to tackle discrimination against LGBTIQ people, welcomes the resolution of the European Parliament that declared the entire EU a LGBTIQ Freedom Zone (2) and emphasises the importance of mutual tolerance within communities; |
| --- | --- |

9.

What is the role of cities and regions?

| 10. | is convinced that fighting inequality in the EU is a shared responsibility that requires action at all levels of governance, as well as the active and permanent involvement of civil society, LGBTIQ organisations and advocacy groups which all play a key role in managing and shaping equality policies and their effective implementation; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | believes in the potential of local and regional action for building equality and for mainstreaming, as regional and local councillors and mayors interact daily with their citizens in a different context to national politicians, in places such as schools, work, cultural and sports activities, all those places in which human rights are forged and enforced; |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | highlights furthermore that local authorities have a role in explaining people’s rights, identifying key challenges in their communities, ensuring equal participation in community life and equal access to services, as well as introducing tailored services for marginalised members of society; |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | shares the view of the World Economic Forum (3) that the promotion of equality and rights has clear and positive correlations to the economic development and prosperity of cities and regions, and that any form of exclusionary behaviour can have an adverse effect on the community as a whole, as well as the broader economy. This is even more relevant at present as we begin rebuilding our communities following the COVID-19 crisis; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | is troubled by the apparent gap between rural and urban areas in terms of the general respect for and acceptance of diversity, which has the potential to exacerbate the demographic challenges of certain regions, further undermining their economic and social development; |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | notes and welcomes that there are examples of local authorities (4) taking an active stance towards inclusion of LGBTIQ communities, and even taking the lead in setting LGBTIQ friendly policies in cases where national governments are lagging; |
| --- | --- |

15.

Combating all forms of violence

| 16. | commits to fully promoting LGBTIQ freedom cities throughout the European Union and broader; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | urges the Commission to combat all forms of violence against LGBTIQ people, and asks for the adoption of measures aimed at preventing and combating violence against LGBTIQ people, including online violence, which could become normalised among younger people; |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | asks the Commission to adopt measures to counter hate speech, especially online hate speech, while recognising the importance of the freedom of expression. Hate speech against LGBTIQ people is one of the most harmful sources of discrimination and often evolves into hate crime and leads to violence. Countering hate speech requires cooperation between the European institutions, government authorities, LRAs and the private sector. This is a necessary step in halting discrimination and its devastating effect on society; |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | looks forward to the forthcoming Commission proposal to extend the list of EU crimes under Article 83(1) of the TFEU to include hate crime and hate speech, including when targeted at LGBTIQ people, not only at their sexual orientation but also gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics and emphasises the need to urgently implement the Victims' Rights Directive; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | urges for the ratification by all EU Member States of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention), whose measures to protect the rights of victims apply without discrimination on any ground, including sex, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity. Calls to this effect on the European Commission to deliver on its commitment to making the conclusion of the Convention a key priority and keenly awaits, inter alia, the proposal to combat violence against women, as announced in the 2021 State of the Union Address by President von der Leyen; |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | calls for the correct transposition and rigorous application of the revised Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which strengthens protection against content that incites hatred or violence and bans commercial media communications that include or promote any discrimination, including on the grounds of sex and sexual orientation; |
| --- | --- |

21.

Free movement and families

| 22. | considers it important that the strategy make specific reference to the regional, especially trans-regional, aspect of free movement, while respecting the fact, enshrined in the Treaties, that family law is a competence of the Member States, and points out that this can create barriers to free movement as to differences in family law across Member States, family ties often cease to be recognised when crossing the EU’s internal borders, namely for LGBTIQ families; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | welcomes the European Commission’s presentation in November 2020 of the first EU equality strategy for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, non-binary, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) people. One of the four pillars of this Commission strategy is to ensure LGBTIQ people's safety.
  However, the phenomenon of violence against LGBTIQ people has not yet been evaluated on the basis of representative data, which would make it possible to move on to delivering relevant approaches for combating violence in the future.
  Although the findings of the online survey conducted by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) ‘A long way to go for LGBTIQ equality’ provide valuable information about LGBITQ people’s experiences of discrimination and violence, participation was voluntary and the survey therefore not statistically representative, i.e. not based on a random sample. The Committee of the Regions consequently calls on the European Commission as part of its LGBTQ strategy to set up and fund on a regular basis an anonymous and representative study of experiences of violence not officially reported, including domestic violence, against LGBTIQ people in the EU that would be carried out and interpreted independently for all the EU Member States; |
| --- | --- |

23.

However, the phenomenon of violence against LGBTIQ people has not yet been evaluated on the basis of representative data, which would make it possible to move on to delivering relevant approaches for combating violence in the future.

Although the findings of the online survey conducted by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) ‘A long way to go for LGBTIQ equality’ provide valuable information about LGBITQ people’s experiences of discrimination and violence, participation was voluntary and the survey therefore not statistically representative, i.e. not based on a random sample. The Committee of the Regions consequently calls on the European Commission as part of its LGBTQ strategy to set up and fund on a regular basis an anonymous and representative study of experiences of violence not officially reported, including domestic violence, against LGBTIQ people in the EU that would be carried out and interpreted independently for all the EU Member States;

| 24. | agrees fully with the statement by European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen whereby ‘If you are a parent in one country, of course, you are a parent in every country’ (5). Thus, welcomes the announcement of a legislative initiative to support the mutual recognition of family between Member State; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | calls upon the Member States to ensure that clear information on the recognition of cross-border rights for LGBTIQ people and their families in the EU are easily accessible, and that civil servants at all levels of governance are thoroughly informed; |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | co-signs the request made by the European Parliament in its Resolution on the on LGBTIQ rights in the EU (6) with regards to rainbow families and same-sex couples and urges the Commission to work on improving the position of rainbow families by rigorous application of cross-border family law and intensified dialogue (including dedicated dialogues in relation to the implementation of the Coman judgment (7)) with Member States, as substantive family law falls under their competence; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | calls on local authorities to send a positive signal to their LGBTIQ communities by showing courage in establishing ambitious pro-LGBTIQ policies and bring change from below, such as the example of Turin (8) where civil partnerships between citizens of the same sex are officially acknowledged by the city administration, even though there were no national provisions in this regard until 2016. Since then Turin has continued to be a pioneer by recognising legal parenthood of same-sex couples, even though there are no such provisions under the national law; |
| --- | --- |

27.

Helping LGBTIQ youth in the EU

| 28. | acknowledges that LGBTIQ youth in Europe is particularly vulnerable, as they are exposed to discrimination, victimisation, stigmatisation and abuse from a young age; they experience difficulties coming out to family and their communities, limited understanding by professional service providers and broader society of LGBTI+ issues, as well as mental, physical and sexual health challenges; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | welcomes the Commission’s comprehensive strategy for the rights of the child published on 24 March 2021 which ensures that LGBTIQ children are able to develop their personality freely and to access rights that are protected, including information and guidance initiatives for families so that they can support minors to develop fully and completely; and explicitly supports the exchange of good practices on ending non-vital surgery and medical intervention on intersex infants and adolescents to make them fit the typical definition of male or female without their or their parents’ fully informed consent; |
| --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | urges Member States to evaluate in their national LGBTIQ Equality Plans, policies and practices that harm or further alienate LGBTIQ people, and young people in particular; calls on them to support local communities by providing proper services to help marginalised young people, such as creating safe environments, and ensure equal employment opportunities and inclusive work environments, positive LGBTIQ representation and participation in culture, society and sport; |
| --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | warns that LGBTIQ homelessness is a hidden problem in Europe, however the limited research (9) that exists demonstrates that the LGBTIQ community in general, and young people in particular, is strongly over-represented amongst the homeless population: an estimated 25-40 % of young people experiencing homelessness identify as LGBTIQ (10). Calls therefore for special attention to this problem to be given also in the frame of the European Platform on Combating Homelessness; |
| --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | draws attention to the fact that the Employment Equality Directive should be rigorously implemented and its implementation should be carefully monitored and evaluated. The CoR welcomes that after evaluating and monitoring the current legislation, in 2022 the Commission will put forward any legislation required as a result, in particular on the role of equality bodies; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | calls on the European Commission, national, regional and local governments to raise the visibility of youth LGBTIQ homelessness as the ultimate form of social exclusion and to develop youth care centres and shelters in their communities, following the examples of Krakow and Berlin; |
| --- | --- |

33.

Impact of COVID-19 on the lives of LGBTIQ persons

| 34. | notes that the COVID-19 health and societal crisis is generating complex challenges and risks for the LGBTIQ community. According to recent research (11), this includes diminishing mental health and difficulty accessing healthcare, increased hate speech and domestic violence, difficulty accessing public relief programmes including for housing, food and subsistence, as well as accessing justice, registration and other legal processes; |
| --- | --- |

34.

| 35. | applauds support programmes introduced in some communities to provide online psychological support, outdoor activities, access to healthcare, municipal housing, safe houses and additional funding; calls on national, regional and local authorities to ensure that emergency and recovery measures are non-discriminatory; |
| --- | --- |

35.

The way forward

| 36. | calls for increased cooperation and dialogue, based on facts, between governance bodies and stakeholders on all levels and across borders, with particular emphasis on the personal experiences of LGBTIQ people, as well as mainstreaming LGBTIQ issues into existing and new policy measures, thus ensuring the adoption of informed and properly adapted policies which reflect diversity; |
| --- | --- |

36.

| 37. | reiterates (12) the call to implement an intersectional approach to a greater extent and to combine intersectional measures with positive measures in sectoral areas; |
| --- | --- |

37.

| 38. | supports all efforts on the prevention of conversion therapies and forced medical interventions for intersex and trans people (including intersex genital mutilation and forced sterilisation), calls for local and regional authorities to stop those initiatives when operating on their premises, and to dedicate funds to promote the ending of such practices, with a particular focus on protections for children and adolescents; |
| --- | --- |

38.

| 39. | welcomes the approach taken by the European Commission to foster exchanges of good practice on gender recognition legislation and procedures based on the principle of self-determination, and is pleased that a cross-sectoral dialogue will be launched to raise awareness of trans and non-binary identities and intersex people, and to encourage inclusivity in all relevant actions and procedures; |
| --- | --- |

39.

| 40. | calls for increased protection of trans people who continue to face some of the highest levels of discrimination, violence and persecution. According to a recent study (13), only 13 out of the 31 countries surveyed have national legislation offering at least some protection on the basis of gender identity and/or sex characteristics; |
| --- | --- |

40.

| 41. | identifies the urgent need for multilevel governance and partnerships; fully supports the work of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe on ‘the role and responsibilities of local governments in protecting LGBTI persons’ and invites them to present the results to the CoR; |
| --- | --- |

41.

| 42. | calls for the recognition of the importance to grant access to transition-related healthcare. Transition-related healthcare is life-saving and must be treated as such. The COVID-19 pandemic cannot be treated as a reason to postpone, delay or limit access to any healthcare, including transition-related care and ongoing treatments; |
| --- | --- |

42.

| 43. | offers a helping hand both to the European Commission regarding the collection of relevant local and regional best practices and the implementation of relevant European legislation on the ground, and to the European Parliament, in particular its LGBTI Intergroup; |
| --- | --- |

43.

| 44. | urges the European Commission to provide support for research to examine the geographical differences between acceptance of LGBTIQ people with the aim of improving methods for tackling discrimination outside urban areas; |
| --- | --- |

44.

| 45. | believes in the significant added value of including the CoR in the formation of the Inclusive Capital Initiative, and so again calls for the CoR to be formally involved each year when designating one or more European Capitals of Inclusions and in the Council of Europe governmental LGBTI focal points network; |
| --- | --- |

45.

| 46. | calls on the European Commission to ensure that LRAs are fully involved in the design, implementation and monitoring of the national plans on LGBTIQ equality; |
| --- | --- |

46.

| 47. | agrees to join the European Commission’s approach involving leading by example and striving for a fully inclusive working environment, and calls for measures undermining the interests of LGBTIQ employees in the European institutions to be monitored; |
| --- | --- |

47.

| 48. | calls on all political leaders, to lead by example, by publicly denouncing any type of discrimination, homophobic, and transphobic and interphobic expressions, harassment and violence based on sexual orientation, or gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics; |
| --- | --- |

48.

| 49. | stresses the need for education measures and information campaigns for people of all ages and backgrounds, and the need to strengthen public services, build the capacity of support professionals and step up victim-centred access to justice; |
| --- | --- |

49.

| 50. | stresses the role of universal sex education in fighting stereotypes and discrimination, in building a positive image of members of the LGBTIQ community and in fostering an atmosphere of acceptance. Any attacks on educators should be condemned; |
| --- | --- |

50.

| 51. | looks forward to the new proposals for potential funding of projects to tackle intersectional discrimination and inequality experienced by LGBTIQ people, gender bias and other stereotypes through the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme; |
| --- | --- |

51.

| 52. | calls for the establishment of funding to support LGBTIQ civil society organisations, not only on a project basis, and for financial support for equality and diversity programmes in municipalities and regions where the LGBTIQ community face particularly hostile attitudes from governments; |
| --- | --- |

52.

| 53. | calls on the European Commission to ensure that European funds are not granted where structural discrimination mechanisms exist, and that funding is suspended or withdrawn where this is subsequently found to be the case; believes that the demonstrated power of such measures, in combination with dialogue, can create a fully inclusive European Union; |
| --- | --- |

53.

| 54. | invites CoR members and other LRAs to introduce, where national legislation is lacking, local provisions to reject discrimination and remedy the legal vacuum in order to promote diversity, mutual acceptance and respect. |
| --- | --- |

54.

Brussels, 14 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---

(1)  List of Actions to Advance LGBTI Equality published by the EC in 2015, the creation of a dedicated Commissioner for Equality, Helena Dalli, and the fact that 21 Member States have legally recognised same-gender couples, while four have introduced legal gender-recognition procedures without any medical requirements.

1

(2)  European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2021 on the declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0089_EN.html)

2

(3)  Great Reset: Why LGBT+ inclusion is the secret to cities' post-pandemic success | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)

3

(4)  There are examples in several cities across the EU, such as Barcelona, Ljubljana, Berlin, Budapest and Lodz as well as networks of cities, such as the RE.A.DY Network in Italy.

4

(5)  State of the Union Address 2020

5

(6)  2021/2679(RSP)

6

(7)  C-673/16, the Court of Justice of the EU clarified that the term ‘spouse’ as used in the Free Movement Directive also applies to same-sex partners.

7

(8)  Turin Municipal Regulation, 2010.

8

(9)  The European Federation of National Organisations Working with the Homeless AISBL, LGBTIQ Homelessness, Autumn 2017 and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, and Queer (LGBTIQ) Youth Homelessness in Europe Survey 2019.

9

(10)  https://www.ilga-europe.org/sites/default/files/COVID19%20_Impact%20LGBTI%20people.pdf

10

(11)  covid19-lgbti-assessment-2020.pdf (ilga-europe.org)

11

(12)  CoR opinion, A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, October 2020.

12

A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025

(13)  European Commission study Trans and Intersex Equality in Europe
  –
  A Comparative Analysis, 2018.

13

Trans and Intersex Equality in Europe

–

A Comparative Analysis

---

III Preparatory acts

Committee of the Regions

Interactio – Hybrid hybrid - 146th CoR Plenary Session, 12.10.2021-14.10.2021

| 4.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/42

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — European Digital Identity

(2022/C 61/09)

| Rapporteur: | Mark WEINMEISTER (DE/EPP), Secretary of State for European Affairs, Land of Hesse |
| --- | --- |
| Reference documents: | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing a framework for a European Digital Identity
  COM(2021) 281 final |

Rapporteur:

Mark WEINMEISTER (DE/EPP), Secretary of State for European Affairs, Land of Hesse

Reference documents:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing a framework for a European Digital Identity

COM(2021) 281 final

I.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

COM(2021) 281

Article 1(4)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 5

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Pseudonyms in electronic transaction
  Without prejudice to the legal effect given to pseudonyms under national law, the use of pseudonyms in electronic transactions shall not be prohibited. | Pseudonyms in electronic transaction
  Without prejudice to the legal effect given to pseudonyms under national law, the use of pseudonyms in electronic transactions
  and in the use of social networks
  shall not be prohibited. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Pseudonyms in electronic transaction

Without prejudice to the legal effect given to pseudonyms under national law, the use of pseudonyms in electronic transactions shall not be prohibited.

Pseudonyms in electronic transaction

Without prejudice to the legal effect given to pseudonyms under national law, the use of pseudonyms in electronic transactions
  and in the use of social networks
  shall not be prohibited.

Reason

Social networks must not prohibit the use of pseudonyms for registration in relation to the European Digital Identity Wallet.

Amendment 2

COM(2021) 281

Article 1(7)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 6a(1)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| For the purpose of ensuring that all natural and legal persons in the Union have secure, trusted and seamless access to cross-border public and private services, each Member State shall issue a European Digital Identity Wallet within
  12
  months after the entry into force of this Regulation. | For the purpose of ensuring that all natural and legal persons in the Union have secure, trusted and seamless access to cross-border public and private services, each Member State shall issue a European Digital Identity Wallet within
  24
  months after the entry into force of this Regulation. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

For the purpose of ensuring that all natural and legal persons in the Union have secure, trusted and seamless access to cross-border public and private services, each Member State shall issue a European Digital Identity Wallet within
  12
  months after the entry into force of this Regulation.

For the purpose of ensuring that all natural and legal persons in the Union have secure, trusted and seamless access to cross-border public and private services, each Member State shall issue a European Digital Identity Wallet within
  24
  months after the entry into force of this Regulation.

Reason

Experience has shown that European Digital Identity Wallets will be a prime target for IT attacks. In such a sensitive environment for personal ID data, quality trumps speed. The deadlines set for transposition at national level are too short (and partly dependent on the provisions of the NIS 2 Directive) and an extended transitional period is therefore necessary.

Amendment 3

COM(2021) 281 final — Part 1

Article 1(7)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 6a(12) (new)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | The European Digital Identity Wallet shall only be made available to people under the age of 18 on condition that their identity can be confirmed from an electronic ID card of their legal representative, who is responsible for them. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

The European Digital Identity Wallet shall only be made available to people under the age of 18 on condition that their identity can be confirmed from an electronic ID card of their legal representative, who is responsible for them.

Reason

A European Digital Identity Wallet will serve as proof of identity online and offline. Minors cannot be made fully responsible and held accountable for any legal implications or consequences.

Amendment 4

COM(2021) 281 final — Part 1

Article 1(7)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 6c(5)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Member States shall communicate to the Commission the names and addresses of the public or private bodies referred to in paragraph 3. The Commission shall make that information available to Member States. | Member States shall communicate to the Commission the names and addresses of the public or private bodies referred to in paragraph 3. The Commission shall make that information available to the Member States
  no later than six months after the entry into force of the Regulation. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Member States shall communicate to the Commission the names and addresses of the public or private bodies referred to in paragraph 3. The Commission shall make that information available to Member States.

Member States shall communicate to the Commission the names and addresses of the public or private bodies referred to in paragraph 3. The Commission shall make that information available to the Member States
  no later than six months after the entry into force of the Regulation.

Reason

To amend Article 6c(5) of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as it is appropriate to set a deadline for communicating the information.

Amendment 5

COM(2021) 281

Article 1(9)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 7

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| [...] within
  12
  months after entry into force [...] | [...] within
  24
  months after entry into force [...] |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

[...] within
  12
  months after entry into force [...]

[...] within
  24
  months after entry into force [...]

Reason

Experience has shown that European Digital Identity Wallets will be a prime target for IT attacks. In such a sensitive environment for personal ID data, quality trumps speed. The deadlines set for transposition at national level are too short (and partly dependent on the provisions of the NIS 2 Directive) and an extended transitional period is therefore necessary.

Amendment 6

COM(2021) 281

Article 1(11)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 10a(4)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list referred to in Article 6d without undue delay. | The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list referred to in Article 6d without undue delay
  and shall make these amendments available in a separate list
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list referred to in Article 6d without undue delay.

The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list referred to in Article 6d without undue delay
  and shall make these amendments available in a separate list
  .

Reason

A clear (blocking) list should make use easier.

Amendment 7

COM(2021) 281 — Part 1

Article 1(12)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 11a(4) (new)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| | The Member States shall use unique identification systems to ensure that no citizen is issued with two or more European Digital Identity Wallets as a result of multiple nationalities or residence in different Member States. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

The Member States shall use unique identification systems to ensure that no citizen is issued with two or more European Digital Identity Wallets as a result of multiple nationalities or residence in different Member States.

Reason

It should be ensured that citizens with more than one nationality and/or residence in more than one Member State are only issued one European Digital Identity Wallet.

Amendment 8

COM(2021) 281 — Part 1

Article 1(14)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 12a(3)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| Member States shall notify to the Commission with the names and addresses of the public or private body referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall make that information available to Member States. | Member States shall notify to the Commission with the names and addresses of the public or private body referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall make that information available to the Member States
  no later than six months after the entry into force of the Regulation
  . |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Member States shall notify to the Commission with the names and addresses of the public or private body referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall make that information available to Member States.

Member States shall notify to the Commission with the names and addresses of the public or private body referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall make that information available to the Member States
  no later than six months after the entry into force of the Regulation
  .

Reason

To amend Article 12a(3) of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as it is appropriate to set a deadline for communicating the information.

Amendment 9

COM(2021) 281

Article 1(29)

Regulation (EU) No 910/2014

Article 30(3a)

| Text proposed by the European Commission | CoR amendment |
| --- | --- |
| The certification referred to in paragraph 1 shall be valid for 5 years, conditional upon a regular 2 year vulnerabilities assessment. Where vulnerabilities are identified and not remedied, the certification shall be withdrawn. | The certification referred to in paragraph 1 shall be valid for 5 years, conditional upon a regular 2 year vulnerabilities assessment. Where vulnerabilities are identified and not remedied, the certification shall be withdrawn.
  Recertification may take place at the earliest after a waiting period of 2 years and a new vulnerability assessment. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

The certification referred to in paragraph 1 shall be valid for 5 years, conditional upon a regular 2 year vulnerabilities assessment. Where vulnerabilities are identified and not remedied, the certification shall be withdrawn.

The certification referred to in paragraph 1 shall be valid for 5 years, conditional upon a regular 2 year vulnerabilities assessment. Where vulnerabilities are identified and not remedied, the certification shall be withdrawn.
  Recertification may take place at the earliest after a waiting period of 2 years and a new vulnerability assessment.

Reason

The ban on recertification should be time-limited, since it should remain possible to remedy vulnerabilities, perhaps after a thorough technical revamping.

II.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Introduction

| 1. | backs the idea of a European Digital Identity Wallet. It should enable citizens to prove their identity, including while on the move, so they can access online public administration services, swap digital documents or just attest a personal identity attribute, such as age. And they can do this without disclosing their identity or other personal data; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | welcomes the European Commission’s proposals to create a European digital identity as an interim step towards a more comprehensive digital identity wallet and the amendment of the eIDAS Regulation this would necessitate. The European Digital Identity Wallet is not confined to personal identity data (EUid) as narrowly construed but is intended to hold other documents (including official ones) in electronic form, such as driving licences or educational qualifications; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | supports the European Commission’s aim of further developing the eIDAS Regulation for use in the economic sphere in response to evolving market demands, while continuing to make use of the current notified national means of identification. Secure means of electronic identification are of particular importance for the digitalisation of administrative procedures; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | calls for clear data protection provisions in the European Commission’s proposal for a European Digital Identity, which should adhere to the principles set out in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), notably data economy, data privacy and adequate justification, and also ensure that users will be able to control which data they want to share and with whom; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | sees the European Digital Identity Wallet — because it can be used anywhere, and especially on the go — as a tool that is intended to facilitate social participation and that once deployed throughout the EU, could become an element of European identity that every EU citizen is aware of and can grasp; |
| --- | --- |

5.

Use for citizens

| 6. | sees the creation of a European Digital Identity Wallet as a great opportunity to firmly establish among citizens an EU identity that is tangible and of practical use, including in the single market. The European Digital Identity Wallet creates an unequivocally binding form of identification for all parties concerned whose symbolism far exceeds its purely technical utility; |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | notes that the European Digital Identity Wallet is essentially a mobile technology capable of remaining functionally viable even as today’s devices (smartphones or watches) evolve. Further advances such as digital glasses (e.g. augmented reality glasses or digital avatars) or similar digital devices should be able to use the European Digital Identity Wallet via an appropriate (possibly optical) interface; |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | recommends that the development and deployment of the European eID and the European Digital Identity Wallet should be carried out with a view to providing services with real cross-border added value for citizens; |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | emphasises the need to ensure that all users are autonomous and not subject to discrimination, and therefore recommends that the Communication state clearly that there must be no indirect coercion to use the European Digital Identity Wallet when services are offered to natural persons. It is a matter of principle that use is a voluntary act; |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | emphasises that the European Digital Identity Wallet should be perceived as an offer to citizens so that it is positively received by civil society; |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | calls for a simple recommendation for the design that, in the nature of a toolbox, goes beyond mere data protection and accessibility and also enables people with minor impediments or lack of language knowledge to use the European Digital Identity Wallet (e.g. by more use of pictograms); |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | urges that provision be made in the proposal for the use of digital identities by minors or in cases where responsibility lies with a guardian or carer, as well as for dealing with digital identities when somebody dies; |
| --- | --- |

12.

Involving the economic sphere

| 13. | sees the close involvement of technology leaders through a relaxation of the rules on industry as a particularly essential ingredient for success. Only a market-based approach will guarantee a use on the right scale in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | draws attention to one essential aspect regarding use for economic purposes, namely the use of e-payment interfaces (Paypal, Google/Apple-Pay, SWIFT, etc.), which, in the economic sphere, are currently based on proprietary user accounts. A European Digital Identity Wallet should comply with the relevant rules on money laundering and digital currencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Digital EUR, etc.); |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | calls for account to be taken of two existing and substantively competing business models where use of the European Digital Identity Wallet in the economic sphere is concerned.
  These are, on the one hand, the major global social networks, which have a valid interest in getting their pseudonym accounts verified, possibly by a public institution. This would, however, undermine the freedom to use the internet and further drive users from its protected area into the dark web. The Committee of the Regions can see no interest in this.
  On the other hand, there are identity providers who make offers competing with the European Digital Identity Wallet and in order to do so also want to use an identity validated by a public institution; |
| --- | --- |

15.

These are, on the one hand, the major global social networks, which have a valid interest in getting their pseudonym accounts verified, possibly by a public institution. This would, however, undermine the freedom to use the internet and further drive users from its protected area into the dark web. The Committee of the Regions can see no interest in this.

On the other hand, there are identity providers who make offers competing with the European Digital Identity Wallet and in order to do so also want to use an identity validated by a public institution;

| 16. | advises that, when it comes to the ID used for access by economic operators, the authorisation check should be designed with a secured certificate whose validity is of limited duration or cyclical. The Committee of the Regions welcomes similar considerations regarding trust service providers, but points out that the justification for the demand for data from the European Digital Identity Wallet by institutions or organisations must also be protected from abuse; |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | notes that digital solutions for the public and private sectors have already been developed and implemented in some Member States. These country-specific specificities should be integrated as far as possible into the European eID, firstly as changing the existing systems would involve a considerable administrative and financial burden and, secondly, as over the years citizens of these Member States have developed a high level of trust in the existing systems, which should not be jeopardised by the introduction of the European eID; |
| --- | --- |

17.

Implementation and involvement of the Member States

| 18. | therefore strongly recommends that the recommendation to Member States referred to in the Commission’s legislative proposal to develop a common toolbox for a coordinated approach to creating the necessary technical framework for the EUid draws heavily on national expertise.
  This should include current examples of best practice, such as the outcomes and experience of Germany’s ‘Digital Identities’ and ‘Secure Digital Identities Showcase’ projects; |
| --- | --- |

18.

This should include current examples of best practice, such as the outcomes and experience of Germany’s ‘Digital Identities’ and ‘Secure Digital Identities Showcase’ projects;

| 19. | believes that, when considering the costs and expenses incurred in the planning, the national parameters also need to be logged and merged into an overall EU plan that fairly reflects costs. The national implementation timetables in particular should be gathered and included for this purpose, in addition to timeframes in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | calls for the staffing and monetary costs of implementation in the Member States and in local and regional authorities to be taken into account in the overall planning. The European Digital Identity Wallet will be successful if it can be used often enough.
  National administrations at all levels play a key role here, alongside business. They are increasingly involved by virtue of their own actions, but also through Commission initiatives. The EU Services Directive and the EU Single Digital Gateway make valuable contributions to the digitalisation of the EU single market; |
| --- | --- |

20.

National administrations at all levels play a key role here, alongside business. They are increasingly involved by virtue of their own actions, but also through Commission initiatives. The EU Services Directive and the EU Single Digital Gateway make valuable contributions to the digitalisation of the EU single market;

| 21. | suggests that implementation, particularly in the start-up phase, should be configured incrementally. This is important because the hitherto partly unregulated economy is sometimes being involved for the very first time in the use of electronic identities at the assurance levels ‘substantial’ to ‘high’ as the current eIDAS environment evolves; |
| --- | --- |

21.

Data protection and cybersecurity

| 22. | warns against hasty implementation of a European Digital Identity Wallet solution because of the technical risks inherent in the centralised storage of identity data in a mostly mobile application. Such a solution will undoubtedly be seen as a prime target for a wide range of cyberattacks and must therefore be able to fend off the threats at any particular moment; |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | draws attention to the importance of an adequate definition of certification schemes for digital identity wallets and electronic identification schemes, which should not be developed by a commercial entity, but by the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), in close cooperation with groups of experts, including representatives of local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | draws attention to the risk of centrally bundling forms of identity with varying levels of confidentiality in a single technical component. There are significant risks for the authorised user if these fall prey to unauthorised use by third parties. Damage to reputation and integrity can be envisaged as well as financial harm. Spear phishing could also cause significant consequential damage; |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | calls for a technical implementation of the European Digital Identity Wallet that ensures it is sufficiently reinforced against cyberattacks and that suitable blocking facilities and dedicated secure backup systems permit secure reinstallation by the rights-holder.
  The strengthening of the European Digital Identity Wallet must be a permanent process. Security by design is the foundation for successful use over the long term and is also essential for the user economy, so it should already be provided in the toolbox; |
| --- | --- |

25.

The strengthening of the European Digital Identity Wallet must be a permanent process. Security by design is the foundation for successful use over the long term and is also essential for the user economy, so it should already be provided in the toolbox;

| 26. | sees a methodically sound solution tailored to the target group of users, with information and documentation, as a critical factor for success, in addition to the requirements of data protection, accessibility and cybersecurity; |
| --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | proposes binding rules on service providers to ensure, as a matter of principle, simple and transparent means of access to European Digital Identity Wallet data via uniform tools (e.g. dashboard) and to make these visible to users; |
| --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | advocates designing the EUid scheme in a way that encourages progress towards the objective of Europe’s digital resilience and digital sovereignty; |
| --- | --- |

28.

| 29. | recommends evaluating whether a general technical platform could be created for essential European Digital Identity Wallet functions by making an EU-certified open source toolbox available; maintenance and further development of the toolbox should then be coordinated by the EU; |
| --- | --- |

29.

Familiarising use

| 30. | recommends a requirement, when translating the European Digital Identity Wallet into specific applications, for detailed user guidance in a process-oriented form understandable to the target group of users.
  The European Digital Identity Wallet is to be profiled in usage scenarios as a homogeneous component with clear data transfer interfaces and to be presented visually as an EU product by means of distinctive labelling and design; |
| --- | --- |

30.

The European Digital Identity Wallet is to be profiled in usage scenarios as a homogeneous component with clear data transfer interfaces and to be presented visually as an EU product by means of distinctive labelling and design;

| 31. | proposes that access to the European Digital Identity Wallet be standardised so that granting use or access to it can become almost a matter of routine for users, while also taking data minimisation requirements into account. This characteristic of routine both makes it easier to use it and enables even the less IT-savvy to do so without error; |
| --- | --- |

31.

Promotion and uptake

| 32. | thinks a big publicity drive is needed to connect with the EU population about the European Digital Identity Wallet and the opportunities it offers for use in the EU internal market, and about the safeguards for data protection and data security; points out that high-speed connectivity is a basic condition for everyone in the European Union, including those living in rural and remote areas, to be able to use and accept the European Digital Identity Wallet; |
| --- | --- |

32.

| 33. | advocates an extension — beyond the original use of the European Digital Identity Wallet — to an EU identity worldwide, including features such as a passport (digital deposit of visas, for instance) or an official EU vaccination certificate. Agreements to be concluded along these lines should enable the European Digital Identity Wallet and the credentials in it to also be used outside the EU; |
| --- | --- |

33.

| 34. | urges the European Commission to engage in intensive discussions and negotiations with suppliers of equipment for the technical provision of the European Digital Identity Wallet to end-users. The aim is to make the technology base available as soon as possible, including in equipment in the low-cost sector.
  At present, the first mid-priced and high-end product families with sufficient certification for the ‘substantial’ assurance level under eIDAS are available. It is also useful, in terms of dissemination of the European Digital Identity Wallet, to make sure industry is involved as much as possible as a service provider; |
| --- | --- |

34.

At present, the first mid-priced and high-end product families with sufficient certification for the ‘substantial’ assurance level under eIDAS are available. It is also useful, in terms of dissemination of the European Digital Identity Wallet, to make sure industry is involved as much as possible as a service provider;

Subsidiarity

| 35. | notes that the proposal for a Regulation is compatible with the subsidiarity principle. An EU-wide technical design of this kind will only have the right effect if the rules are sufficiently uniform. The specific design is a matter exclusively for national rules. Only the cross-cutting tools from the toolbox will have to be assessed. |
| --- | --- |

35.

Brussels, 12 October 2021.

The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS

---