# Official Journal C 31/7 Fe

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 31 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 497 February 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 31

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 497 February 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Preparatory Acts |
| | Committee of the Regions |
| | 60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005 |
| 2006/C 031/1 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Devolution in the European Union and the place of local and regional self-government in the draft Constitutional Treaty | 1 |
| 2006/C 031/2 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Fourth Report on Citizenship of the Union and the Communication from the Commission on the Fundamental Rights Agency | 6 |
| 2006/C 031/3 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress towards accession | 11 |
| 2006/C 031/4 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament — Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process (Romania) | 15 |
| 2006/C 031/5 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament: Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process | 19 |
| 2006/C 031/6 | Own-initiative opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Draft Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports | 23 |
| 2006/C 031/7 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Revision of the guidelines for regional State aids | 25 |
| 2006/C 031/8 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda | 32 |
| 2006/C 031/9 | Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration | 36 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Preparatory Acts

Committee of the Regions

60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005

th

2006/C 031/1

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Devolution in the European Union and the place of local and regional self-government in the draft Constitutional Treaty

1

2006/C 031/2

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Fourth Report on Citizenship of the Union and the Communication from the Commission on the Fundamental Rights Agency

6

2006/C 031/3

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress towards accession

11

2006/C 031/4

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament — Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process (Romania)

15

2006/C 031/5

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament: Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process

19

2006/C 031/6

Own-initiative opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Draft Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports

23

2006/C 031/7

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Revision of the guidelines for regional State aids

25

2006/C 031/8

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda

32

2006/C 031/9

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration

36

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

EN

---

II Preparatory Acts

Committee of the Regions

60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/1

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on Devolution in the European Union and the place of local and regional self-government in the draft Constitutional Treaty

(2006/C 31/01)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 15 June 2004, in accordance with Article 265(5) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to instruct its Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance to draw up this opinion, Devolution in the European Union and the place of local and regional self-government in the draft Constitutional Treaty;

Having regard to Articles 7(2) and 263 et seq of the Treaty establishing the European Community as amended by the Treaties of Amsterdam and Nice;

Having regard to the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, in particular the Preamble to the Constitution, the Preamble to Title II, Fundamental Rights and Articles I-3, I-5, I-11(3), I-46(3), II-82, III-280(1), and Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and Protocol No 29 on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion;

Having regard to its Opinion on the Recommendation of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe on the European Charter of Regional Self-Government (CdR 39/2000 fin (1));

Having regard to its contribution to the European Convention of 4 July 2002 (CdR 127/2002 fin);

Having regard to the declaration of the Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance of the Committee of the Regions and the Institutional Committee of the Council of Europe's Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe adopted at Prague on 21 September 2004 (CdR 202/2004 fin);

Having regard to the White Paper on European Governance drawn up by the European Commission (COM(2001) 428 final);

Having regard to the European Parliament Resolution of 14 January 2003 on the role of regional and local authorities in European integration (P5_TA (2003) 0009 — 2002/2141 (INI));

Having regard to the Council of Europe's European Charter of Local Self-Government of 15 October 1985;

Having regard to the draft European Charter on Regional Self-Government of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe of 5 June 1997;

Having regard to Resolution 154 of 22 May 2003 of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe on accession to the European Charter of Local Self-Government;

Having regard to Resolution 186 of 27 May 2004 of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe on the draft Convention on Regional Self-Government;

Having regard to the Declaration of the Assembly of European Regions of 4 December 1996 on Regionalism in Europe;

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 222/2004 rev. 3) adopted on 22 April 2005 by its Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance (rapporteur: Mr José María Muñoa Ganuza, Commissioner for External Relations for the President of the Basque Government (ES-ALDE);

| 1. | WHEREAS the development of the various arrangements for the vertical distribution of power within the various Member States must meet the requirements of the process of European integration. |
| --- | --- |

1.

WHEREAS the development of the various arrangements for the vertical distribution of power within the various Member States must meet the requirements of the process of European integration.

| 2. | WHEREAS regionalisation must also provide greater democratic transparency and greater efficiency in economic, social and cultural development. |
| --- | --- |

2.

WHEREAS regionalisation must also provide greater democratic transparency and greater efficiency in economic, social and cultural development.

| 3. | WHEREAS there is a desire to build a Europe that is ‘united in diversity’ and to make European public life more democratic and more transparent. |
| --- | --- |

3.

WHEREAS there is a desire to build a Europe that is ‘united in diversity’ and to make European public life more democratic and more transparent.

| 4. | WHEREAS strengthening regional and local democracy within the enlarged European Union is one of the main political priorities that the CoR has set itself for its third four-year mandate. |
| --- | --- |

4.

WHEREAS strengthening regional and local democracy within the enlarged European Union is one of the main political priorities that the CoR has set itself for its third four-year mandate.

| 5. | WHEREAS the CoR has expressed, in a number of opinions and resolutions, the need for the Union to respect the principle of regional self-government, as well as the rights linked to local self-government, enshrined in the European Charter of Local Self-Government adopted in 1985 by the Council of Europe. |
| --- | --- |

5.

WHEREAS the CoR has expressed, in a number of opinions and resolutions, the need for the Union to respect the principle of regional self-government, as well as the rights linked to local self-government, enshrined in the European Charter of Local Self-Government adopted in 1985 by the Council of Europe.

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 7 July).

1.   Views of the Committee of the Regions

PART I

Type and balance of power between States, Regions and Local Authorities

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.1 | notes that that the Regions have different statuses, which vary according to their history, their culture and their constitutional principles and characterise the territorial organisation of each State; |
| --- | --- |

1.1

notes that that the Regions have different statuses, which vary according to their history, their culture and their constitutional principles and characterise the territorial organisation of each State;

| 1.2 | considers that all of these authorities are first and foremost the guardians of democracy, shape cultural diversity in Europe and are major partners in the continent's socioeconomic development; |
| --- | --- |

1.2

considers that all of these authorities are first and foremost the guardians of democracy, shape cultural diversity in Europe and are major partners in the continent's socioeconomic development;

| 1.3 | notes that at local level, there are local authorities, metropolitan areas, capital cities, coordinating authorities, etc. and at regional level, there are economic regions, administrative regions, regions with legislative powers, etc., with differing origins and functions. This diversity has become even greater with the incorporation of the ten new States; |
| --- | --- |

1.3

notes that at local level, there are local authorities, metropolitan areas, capital cities, coordinating authorities, etc. and at regional level, there are economic regions, administrative regions, regions with legislative powers, etc., with differing origins and functions. This diversity has become even greater with the incorporation of the ten new States;

| 1.4 | considers that the balance of power between the central State and regional and local authorities contributes to the enormous complexity of today's society. This complexity is apparent both in the content of these relationships and in their dynamics; |
| --- | --- |

1.4

considers that the balance of power between the central State and regional and local authorities contributes to the enormous complexity of today's society. This complexity is apparent both in the content of these relationships and in their dynamics;

| 1.5 | considers, therefore, that such relations should be based on the principles of fairness, cooperation, solidarity and complementarity and must take account of a wide range of aspects, such as socioeconomic, political, legal and cultural issues. |
| --- | --- |

1.5

considers, therefore, that such relations should be based on the principles of fairness, cooperation, solidarity and complementarity and must take account of a wide range of aspects, such as socioeconomic, political, legal and cultural issues.

Developments in devolution and the transfer of powers, in particular the financial independence of regional and local authorities

| 1.6 | considers that the two strands of the devolution process, regional and local, must be based on two fundamental criteria or two broad guiding principles: dynamism and flexibility; |
| --- | --- |

1.6

considers that the two strands of the devolution process, regional and local, must be based on two fundamental criteria or two broad guiding principles: dynamism and flexibility;

| 1.7 | takes the view that this dynamism and flexibility are apparent in the constant changes that have been taking place at constitutional, legislative and administrative levels, in almost all EU Member States, and most particularly in those that have recently acceded; |
| --- | --- |

1.7

takes the view that this dynamism and flexibility are apparent in the constant changes that have been taking place at constitutional, legislative and administrative levels, in almost all EU Member States, and most particularly in those that have recently acceded;

| 1.8 | considers that the process of devolution that has taken place or which is currently underway in the new Member States can give a significant boost to strengthening local and regional democracy in the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

1.8

considers that the process of devolution that has taken place or which is currently underway in the new Member States can give a significant boost to strengthening local and regional democracy in the European Union;

| 1.9 | notes that some progress is being made in the process of regional and local devolution, especially in the field of competition, on achieving financial independence and on developing institutional guarantees; |
| --- | --- |

1.9

notes that some progress is being made in the process of regional and local devolution, especially in the field of competition, on achieving financial independence and on developing institutional guarantees;

| 1.10 | acknowledges that European integration has made a useful contribution to the process of regional and local devolution in its Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.10

acknowledges that European integration has made a useful contribution to the process of regional and local devolution in its Member States;

| 1.11 | notes that regions and local authorities are capable of assuming responsibility and of effectively undertaking and fulfilling these responsibilities; |
| --- | --- |

1.11

notes that regions and local authorities are capable of assuming responsibility and of effectively undertaking and fulfilling these responsibilities;

| 1.12 | considers that transferring powers to regional and local authorities must necessarily go hand in hand with transferring the necessary financial means to enable them fully to undertake these responsibilities. A lack of resources makes it impossible to exercise these powers properly and for these to be effective and implemented in a sustainable manner; |
| --- | --- |

1.12

considers that transferring powers to regional and local authorities must necessarily go hand in hand with transferring the necessary financial means to enable them fully to undertake these responsibilities. A lack of resources makes it impossible to exercise these powers properly and for these to be effective and implemented in a sustainable manner;

| 1.13 | notes the clear increase in influence and in economic and social power of the European Union's large cities and city-regions, and considers that relations between regional, urban and local authorities should become closer in the new framework for governance that the EU is advocating. |
| --- | --- |

1.13

notes the clear increase in influence and in economic and social power of the European Union's large cities and city-regions, and considers that relations between regional, urban and local authorities should become closer in the new framework for governance that the EU is advocating.

Legal safeguards for regional and local authorities and the status of their representatives

| 1.14 | notes that people of Europe increasingly identify with their region and local authority because they feel that these public authorities are close to them and better represent their interests; |
| --- | --- |

1.14

notes that people of Europe increasingly identify with their region and local authority because they feel that these public authorities are close to them and better represent their interests;

| 1.15 | considers, therefore, that the independence of regional and local authorities must be guaranteed at the highest legislative level and that changes to the status of their representatives must not be made without their involvement; |
| --- | --- |

1.15

considers, therefore, that the independence of regional and local authorities must be guaranteed at the highest legislative level and that changes to the status of their representatives must not be made without their involvement;

| 1.16 | considers that where the independence of regional and local authorities is subject to any monitoring measures by the national authority that might hamper representatives in the free exercise of their duties, such monitoring should be enshrined in the constitution and governed by law; |
| --- | --- |

1.16

considers that where the independence of regional and local authorities is subject to any monitoring measures by the national authority that might hamper representatives in the free exercise of their duties, such monitoring should be enshrined in the constitution and governed by law;

| 1.17 | emphasises that the TCE states that CoR members must be representatives of regional and local authorities who either hold a regional or local authority electoral mandate or are politically accountable to an elected assembly; |
| --- | --- |

1.17

emphasises that the TCE states that CoR members must be representatives of regional and local authorities who either hold a regional or local authority electoral mandate or are politically accountable to an elected assembly;

| 1.18 | considers that political representatives of existing local and regional structures in the Member States should be directly elected by the citizens or be accountable to an elected assembly. |
| --- | --- |

1.18

considers that political representatives of existing local and regional structures in the Member States should be directly elected by the citizens or be accountable to an elected assembly.

Governance and support for Europe's citizens

| 1.19 | is of the view that regional and local self-government forms an essential factor for developing democracy and good governance in the European Union and for the participation of Europe's citizens in public affairs; |
| --- | --- |

1.19

is of the view that regional and local self-government forms an essential factor for developing democracy and good governance in the European Union and for the participation of Europe's citizens in public affairs;

| 1.20 | considers that the European Commission should further develop regular dialogue with regional and local authorities, in their capacity as the democratic authorities closest to the citizens, in order to improve its opportunities for interacting with the public. This will make it easier to apply the basic principles of good governance, such as openness, participation, coherence and effectiveness, as set out in the White Paper on Governance; |
| --- | --- |

1.20

considers that the European Commission should further develop regular dialogue with regional and local authorities, in their capacity as the democratic authorities closest to the citizens, in order to improve its opportunities for interacting with the public. This will make it easier to apply the basic principles of good governance, such as openness, participation, coherence and effectiveness, as set out in the White Paper on Governance;

| 1.21 | takes the view that regions and local authorities, as the authorities responsible for implementing Community policy in their respective fields, must be more actively and effectively involved at an early stage in drawing up and then in implementing both Community legislation and European Union policies; |
| --- | --- |

1.21

takes the view that regions and local authorities, as the authorities responsible for implementing Community policy in their respective fields, must be more actively and effectively involved at an early stage in drawing up and then in implementing both Community legislation and European Union policies;

| 1.22 | notes that, despite being an essential element, the task performed by local and regional authorities in managing structural policies is not always accompanied by the independence necessary to developing this management and that greater responsibility for local and regional players will result in a greater sense of commitment and a better use of funds; |
| --- | --- |

1.22

notes that, despite being an essential element, the task performed by local and regional authorities in managing structural policies is not always accompanied by the independence necessary to developing this management and that greater responsibility for local and regional players will result in a greater sense of commitment and a better use of funds;

| 1.23 | considers, furthermore, that in order to ensure the effective management of structural policies, regional and local authorities must be involved in drawing up and taking decisions on these policies. |
| --- | --- |

1.23

considers, furthermore, that in order to ensure the effective management of structural policies, regional and local authorities must be involved in drawing up and taking decisions on these policies.

PART II

Direct and indirect effects of the European Constitution's recognition of regional and local self-government

| 1.24 | considers that the plan set out in the TCE is a first step towards a clearer definition of the allocation of powers between the Union and the Member States, and that this will allow for greater transparency, which will benefit the process of regional and local devolution; |
| --- | --- |

1.24

considers that the plan set out in the TCE is a first step towards a clearer definition of the allocation of powers between the Union and the Member States, and that this will allow for greater transparency, which will benefit the process of regional and local devolution;

| 1.25 | considers that the TCE also expressly recognises regional and local self-government at the highest legislative level, thereby giving it constitutional status, which represents a significant step forward in the shared aspiration to ensure that the EU meets the legitimate interests and expectations of local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

1.25

considers that the TCE also expressly recognises regional and local self-government at the highest legislative level, thereby giving it constitutional status, which represents a significant step forward in the shared aspiration to ensure that the EU meets the legitimate interests and expectations of local and regional authorities;

| 1.26 | notes that this recognition of local and regional self-government is generic, and does not define the specific role of local and regional authorities in European policies, and that a definition of this nature is thus reserved, in accordance with the principle of institutional independence, for the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.26

notes that this recognition of local and regional self-government is generic, and does not define the specific role of local and regional authorities in European policies, and that a definition of this nature is thus reserved, in accordance with the principle of institutional independence, for the Member States;

| 1.27 | considers that, in order to ensure that this definition of regional and local self-government is effective, the Member States should lay down the necessary legislation, at constitutional, legislative and administrative levels, to enable them to develop and define, at both national and European level, self-government for regional and local authorities; |
| --- | --- |

1.27

considers that, in order to ensure that this definition of regional and local self-government is effective, the Member States should lay down the necessary legislation, at constitutional, legislative and administrative levels, to enable them to develop and define, at both national and European level, self-government for regional and local authorities;

| 1.28 | considers that, despite the generic nature of this recognition, the TCE enables regional and local authorities to participate more actively at Community level and supports the legal protection of local and regional self-government; |
| --- | --- |

1.28

considers that, despite the generic nature of this recognition, the TCE enables regional and local authorities to participate more actively at Community level and supports the legal protection of local and regional self-government;

| 1.29 | considers that the TCE makes this more active participation possible both downstream and upstream of Community decision-making, given that downstream, the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality recognise and establish local and regional authorities' right to be involved in implementing Community legislation and policy, and that, upstream, it enables representatives of the regions and of local authorities to be directly involved in the decision-making bodies of the European institutions or in consultative bodies, in particular, itself (the Committee of the Regions); |
| --- | --- |

1.29

considers that the TCE makes this more active participation possible both downstream and upstream of Community decision-making, given that downstream, the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality recognise and establish local and regional authorities' right to be involved in implementing Community legislation and policy, and that, upstream, it enables representatives of the regions and of local authorities to be directly involved in the decision-making bodies of the European institutions or in consultative bodies, in particular, itself (the Committee of the Regions);

| 1.30 | considers that both the direct participation of some regional representatives in meetings of the Council and other related bodies such as Coreper, and the participation of local and regional authorities in all preparatory phases in the Council, all within the corresponding national delegation, will encourage quality, relevance and effectiveness in Community policies. Greater participation will create greater confidence in the final outcome and in the institutions that draw up these policies; |
| --- | --- |

1.30

considers that both the direct participation of some regional representatives in meetings of the Council and other related bodies such as Coreper, and the participation of local and regional authorities in all preparatory phases in the Council, all within the corresponding national delegation, will encourage quality, relevance and effectiveness in Community policies. Greater participation will create greater confidence in the final outcome and in the institutions that draw up these policies;

| 1.31 | considers that, in view of the tasks conferred on it by the TCE, it should act as a qualified intermediary between the Community bodies and local and regional authorities and is pleased to note that its powers have been extended, which will help to strengthen regional and local self-government; |
| --- | --- |

1.31

considers that, in view of the tasks conferred on it by the TCE, it should act as a qualified intermediary between the Community bodies and local and regional authorities and is pleased to note that its powers have been extended, which will help to strengthen regional and local self-government;

| 1.32 | considers, furthermore, that in addition to recognising its direct legitimate right to bring actions before the Court of Justice as regards legislative acts for the adoption of which the Constitution provides that the CoR be consulted, the TCE presents an opportunity for some Regions to bring actions of this nature via their respective States through their national parliaments, if the latter deem this to be appropriate; |
| --- | --- |

1.32

considers, furthermore, that in addition to recognising its direct legitimate right to bring actions before the Court of Justice as regards legislative acts for the adoption of which the Constitution provides that the CoR be consulted, the TCE presents an opportunity for some Regions to bring actions of this nature via their respective States through their national parliaments, if the latter deem this to be appropriate;

| 1.33 | considers that recognising and implementing the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality at local and regional level, as rendered possible by the TCE, enhances guarantees for the exercise of powers, and that this will make it possible to bring Community decision-making closer to the people and consequently for the people to participate more directly in the European process; |
| --- | --- |

1.33

considers that recognising and implementing the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality at local and regional level, as rendered possible by the TCE, enhances guarantees for the exercise of powers, and that this will make it possible to bring Community decision-making closer to the people and consequently for the people to participate more directly in the European process;

| 1.34 | considers that the European Charter of Local Self-Government is a crucial tool because it identifies and sets out the basic foundations of local self-government, provides legislative guarantees for local authority powers and the allocation of the necessary resources, provides criteria and benchmarks that are common but, at the same time flexible and versatile, for extending the scope of devolution and democratic participation and makes it possible for local authorities to maintain a presence by association at international level; |
| --- | --- |

1.34

considers that the European Charter of Local Self-Government is a crucial tool because it identifies and sets out the basic foundations of local self-government, provides legislative guarantees for local authority powers and the allocation of the necessary resources, provides criteria and benchmarks that are common but, at the same time flexible and versatile, for extending the scope of devolution and democratic participation and makes it possible for local authorities to maintain a presence by association at international level;

| 1.35 | welcomes, furthermore, the adoption of an international convention that includes the draft European Charter of Regional Self-Government. drawn up by the Congress of European Local and Regional Authorities, because this recognises the substance of regional self-government in a way that is flexible and which can be adapted to differing situations. This should make it possible to provide an appropriate definition of the principles that underpin regional self-government, such as democratic legitimacy, institutional independence, adequate financing and judicial safeguards and would encourage the pan-regional presence of the regions at national, European and international level. |
| --- | --- |

1.35

welcomes, furthermore, the adoption of an international convention that includes the draft European Charter of Regional Self-Government. drawn up by the Congress of European Local and Regional Authorities, because this recognises the substance of regional self-government in a way that is flexible and which can be adapted to differing situations. This should make it possible to provide an appropriate definition of the principles that underpin regional self-government, such as democratic legitimacy, institutional independence, adequate financing and judicial safeguards and would encourage the pan-regional presence of the regions at national, European and international level.

2.   Recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | recommends that the Member States boost measures to extend regional and local self-government, making use of the processes of decentralisation and devolution currently underway in those Member States where reforms of this nature are being undertaken; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

recommends that the Member States boost measures to extend regional and local self-government, making use of the processes of decentralisation and devolution currently underway in those Member States where reforms of this nature are being undertaken;

| 2.2 | calls on the new Member States to draw on the experience of the other EU States, at the same time encouraging them to develop their own model of devolution that takes account of their specific national characteristics; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

calls on the new Member States to draw on the experience of the other EU States, at the same time encouraging them to develop their own model of devolution that takes account of their specific national characteristics;

| 2.3 | proposes that a dynamic strategy to promote regional and local self-government be set in motion, implementing initiatives to raise the awareness of the European Commission and the Member States about the advantages of uniting the aims of cohesion policy and the need for democratic devolution; |
| --- | --- |

2.3

proposes that a dynamic strategy to promote regional and local self-government be set in motion, implementing initiatives to raise the awareness of the European Commission and the Member States about the advantages of uniting the aims of cohesion policy and the need for democratic devolution;

| 2.4 | urges Member States to be dynamic in pursuing the process of regional devolution in order to ensure that this gradually encompasses the socioeconomic, administrative, historical, cultural and political aspects; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

urges Member States to be dynamic in pursuing the process of regional devolution in order to ensure that this gradually encompasses the socioeconomic, administrative, historical, cultural and political aspects;

| 2.5 | calls on Member States to develop and extend, on the basis of the Charter on Regional Self-government, a project for regionalisation that is flexible and which can be adapted to the variety of situations that exist in each Member State; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

calls on Member States to develop and extend, on the basis of the Charter on Regional Self-government, a project for regionalisation that is flexible and which can be adapted to the variety of situations that exist in each Member State;

| 2.6 | calls on Member States to grant local authorities the right and the real power to organise and manage a significant share of public affairs, and to establish that local authorities have an assembly elected by free, secret, equal, direct and universal suffrage and have an executive body accountable to the assembly; |
| --- | --- |

2.6

calls on Member States to grant local authorities the right and the real power to organise and manage a significant share of public affairs, and to establish that local authorities have an assembly elected by free, secret, equal, direct and universal suffrage and have an executive body accountable to the assembly;

| 2.7 | calls on those Member States that have not yet done so to recognise regional and local self-government in their respective legal systems at the highest legal level possible and to ensure that this concept is protected under the law by legislative, institutional and judicial mechanisms and that the regional authorities have the financial resources necessary to perform the duties entrusted to them; |
| --- | --- |

2.7

calls on those Member States that have not yet done so to recognise regional and local self-government in their respective legal systems at the highest legal level possible and to ensure that this concept is protected under the law by legislative, institutional and judicial mechanisms and that the regional authorities have the financial resources necessary to perform the duties entrusted to them;

| 2.8 | recommends that political representatives of existing local and regional structures in the Member States should be directly elected by the citizens or be accountable to an elected assembly; |
| --- | --- |

2.8

recommends that political representatives of existing local and regional structures in the Member States should be directly elected by the citizens or be accountable to an elected assembly;

| 2.9 | urges Member States to put in place the necessary legal means and to adopt the appropriate measures to ensure that the diversity of languages and cultures that exist within their borders is preserved, respected and encouraged; |
| --- | --- |

2.9

urges Member States to put in place the necessary legal means and to adopt the appropriate measures to ensure that the diversity of languages and cultures that exist within their borders is preserved, respected and encouraged;

| 2.10 | recommends that the European institutions support territorial devolution as a key factor for promoting cultural diversity; |
| --- | --- |

2.10

recommends that the European institutions support territorial devolution as a key factor for promoting cultural diversity;

| 2.11 | calls on Member States to establish the necessary procedures to ensure that, within their territories, the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are applied in relations between the Union, the Member States and regional and local authorities; |
| --- | --- |

2.11

calls on Member States to establish the necessary procedures to ensure that, within their territories, the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are applied in relations between the Union, the Member States and regional and local authorities;

| 2.12 | calls on Member States, through the intermediary of their national parliaments and, where they exist, regional parliaments, to defend regional and local self-government when the European Commission refers its legislative proposals to them under the ‘early warning’ mechanism, with the aim of delivering a reasoned opinion on respecting the principle of subsidiarity; |
| --- | --- |

2.12

calls on Member States, through the intermediary of their national parliaments and, where they exist, regional parliaments, to defend regional and local self-government when the European Commission refers its legislative proposals to them under the ‘early warning’ mechanism, with the aim of delivering a reasoned opinion on respecting the principle of subsidiarity;

| 2.13 | calls on the European Commission to guarantee the necessary means to facilitate real involvement by the representatives of regional and local authorities in drafting policies from the earliest stage and in implementing Community legislation; |
| --- | --- |

2.13

calls on the European Commission to guarantee the necessary means to facilitate real involvement by the representatives of regional and local authorities in drafting policies from the earliest stage and in implementing Community legislation;

| 2.14 | recommends that the European Commission establish the necessary procedures to ensure the participation of the Regions in drawing up, adopting, managing and evaluating the structural measures that affect them; |
| --- | --- |

2.14

recommends that the European Commission establish the necessary procedures to ensure the participation of the Regions in drawing up, adopting, managing and evaluating the structural measures that affect them;

| 2.15 | recommends that the EU and the Member States take account of the variety of existing situations, such as local authorities, coordinating bodies of local authorities, metropolitan areas, capitals etc when defining and implementing local self-government; |
| --- | --- |

2.15

recommends that the EU and the Member States take account of the variety of existing situations, such as local authorities, coordinating bodies of local authorities, metropolitan areas, capitals etc when defining and implementing local self-government;

| 2.16 | urges the Member States that have regional authorities with legislative powers to push forward the process of political devolution by establishing the necessary mechanisms to allow these regional authorities to participate effectively in Community decision-making processes; |
| --- | --- |

2.16

urges the Member States that have regional authorities with legislative powers to push forward the process of political devolution by establishing the necessary mechanisms to allow these regional authorities to participate effectively in Community decision-making processes;

| 2.17 | recommends cooperation between major cities and the political and administrative structures above them, especially in the case of city-regions, because their spheres of governance over economic, social and political interests are contiguous and complement one another; |
| --- | --- |

2.17

recommends cooperation between major cities and the political and administrative structures above them, especially in the case of city-regions, because their spheres of governance over economic, social and political interests are contiguous and complement one another;

| 2.18 | calls on the regions to establish an ongoing dialogue with major cities to work jointly on issues of common interest in order to take fuller advantage of the opportunities for participation offered by the constitutional Treaty; |
| --- | --- |

2.18

calls on the regions to establish an ongoing dialogue with major cities to work jointly on issues of common interest in order to take fuller advantage of the opportunities for participation offered by the constitutional Treaty;

| 2.19 | asks the EU, as regards governance, to adapt the participation of local and regional authorities in keeping with the various roles that these bodies play; |
| --- | --- |

2.19

asks the EU, as regards governance, to adapt the participation of local and regional authorities in keeping with the various roles that these bodies play;

| 2.20 | proposes to take account in its operational organisation of the diversity of situations that exist at regional and local level, in order to respond as efficiently as possible to the new responsibilities conferred on it by the constitutional Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

2.20

proposes to take account in its operational organisation of the diversity of situations that exist at regional and local level, in order to respond as efficiently as possible to the new responsibilities conferred on it by the constitutional Treaty.

| 2.21 | calls on those Member States that have not yet done so to ratify the European Charter on Local Self-government; |
| --- | --- |

2.21

calls on those Member States that have not yet done so to ratify the European Charter on Local Self-government;

| 2.22 | urges the European Union to adopt the necessary decisions to ensure that the European Charter on Local Self-government is included in the Community acquis; |
| --- | --- |

2.22

urges the European Union to adopt the necessary decisions to ensure that the European Charter on Local Self-government is included in the Community acquis;

| 2.23 | urges the Council of Europe and the Member States to adopt and ratify the draft Charter of Regional Self-Government as an international convention. This will give the convention its own legal value and protection under international law; |
| --- | --- |

2.23

urges the Council of Europe and the Member States to adopt and ratify the draft Charter of Regional Self-Government as an international convention. This will give the convention its own legal value and protection under international law;

| 2.24 | recommends that the CoR set up a continuous system for monitoring the application of the European Charter on Local Self-Government and the process of developing the draft Charter on Regional Self-Government in order to ensure that the Member States are able fully to implement local and regional self-government within their borders; |
| --- | --- |

2.24

recommends that the CoR set up a continuous system for monitoring the application of the European Charter on Local Self-Government and the process of developing the draft Charter on Regional Self-Government in order to ensure that the Member States are able fully to implement local and regional self-government within their borders;

| 2.25 | recommends that the Community institutions establish a relationship of closer cooperation with the Council of Europe, and more specifically with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, in areas linked to the local and regional issue; |
| --- | --- |

2.25

recommends that the Community institutions establish a relationship of closer cooperation with the Council of Europe, and more specifically with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, in areas linked to the local and regional issue;

| 2.26 | proposes to further develop its relationship of cooperation with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe and other supranational organisations involved with local and regional self-government. |
| --- | --- |

2.26

proposes to further develop its relationship of cooperation with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe and other supranational organisations involved with local and regional self-government.

Brussels, 7 July 2005

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 144, 16.5.2001, p. 5.

1

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/6

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Fourth Report on Citizenship of the Union and the Communication from the Commission on the Fundamental Rights Agency

(2006/C 31/02)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Fourth Report on Citizenship of the Union — 1 May 2001 — 30 April 2004 — (COM(2004) 695 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission on the Fundamental Rights Agency (COM(2004) 693 final);

Having regard to the Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (COM(2005) 280 final);

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 26 October 2004 to consult it on the Fourth Report on Citizenship of the Union and on the Communication from the Commission on the Fundamental Rights Agency under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 30 June 2005 to consult it, under Article 265(1) of the ECT, on the Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights;

Having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 15 June 2004 to instruct its Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance to draw up an opinion on the Fourth Report on Citizenship of the Union and the Communication from the Commission on the Fundamental Rights Agency;

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, with specific reference to Articles 6 and 7, and the Treaty establishing the European Community, with specific reference to Part II;

Having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, signed on 29 October 2004, with specific reference to Articles I — 2, I — 9 and 1-10 and Title VI — the Democratic Life of the Union under Part I, the Charter of Fundamental Rights which constitutes Part II, and Article III-129 under Part III;

Having regard to its opinion on the Process of drawing up a Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CdR 327/1999 final (1)), its resolution on the draft Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CdR 140/2000 final (2)) and its resolution on the approval of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CdR 381/2000 final (3));

Having regard to its opinion on the Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States (COM(2001) 257 final — 2001/0111 COD) (CdR 287/2001 final (4));

Having regard to its opinion on the Third Report from the Commission on Citizenship of the Union (COM(2001) 506 final) and the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of Directive 94/80/EC on the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in municipal elections (COM(2002) 260 final) (CdR 121/2002 final (5));

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on an information and communication strategy for the European Union (COM(2002) 350 final) (CdR 124/2002 final (6));

Having regard to Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the Right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States;

Having regard to the draft report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on the Promotion and protection of fundamental rights: the role of national and European institutions including the Fundamental Rights Agency (Rapporteur: Ms K. Gál (- LIBE/6/25781);

Having regard to the EU Network of Independent Experts in Fundamental Rights' Report on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2003 (CFR-CDF.rapUE.2003);

Having regard to its opinion (CdR 280/2004 rev. 2) adopted on 22 April 2005 by the Commission for Constitutional Affairs and European Governance (rapporteur: Ms Claude du Granrut, member of the Picardy Regional Council, deputy mayor of Senlis (FR/EPP));

| 1) | WHEREAS Part II of the Treaty establishing the European Community establishes European citizenship; whereas the rights attaching to Union citizenship shall consist primarily of the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, to vote and stand as a candidate in municipal elections in their Member State of residence, to enjoy, on the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which they are nationals is not represented, the protection of the diplomatic and consular authorities of any Member State, to petition the European Union and to apply to the European Ombudsman; whereas the Treaty establishing a Constitution of Europe reaffirms the aforementioned rights; |
| --- | --- |

1)

WHEREAS Part II of the Treaty establishing the European Community establishes European citizenship; whereas the rights attaching to Union citizenship shall consist primarily of the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, to vote and stand as a candidate in municipal elections in their Member State of residence, to enjoy, on the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which they are nationals is not represented, the protection of the diplomatic and consular authorities of any Member State, to petition the European Union and to apply to the European Ombudsman; whereas the Treaty establishing a Constitution of Europe reaffirms the aforementioned rights;

| 2) | WHEREAS citizenship and fundamental rights are, first and foremost, to be enjoyed at grassroots level; whereas, in several Member States, local authorities exercise considerable authority in matters pertaining to public records, official document issuance, education, police, and social assistance, without which effective citizenship could not be exercised and fundamental rights could not be safeguarded; |
| --- | --- |

2)

WHEREAS citizenship and fundamental rights are, first and foremost, to be enjoyed at grassroots level; whereas, in several Member States, local authorities exercise considerable authority in matters pertaining to public records, official document issuance, education, police, and social assistance, without which effective citizenship could not be exercised and fundamental rights could not be safeguarded;

| 3) | WHEREAS the Committee of the Regions, in its capacity as representative of local and regional authorities and guardian of grassroots democracy in the European decision-making process, considers the implementation of the attributes of European citizenship to be of great relevance; |
| --- | --- |

3)

WHEREAS the Committee of the Regions, in its capacity as representative of local and regional authorities and guardian of grassroots democracy in the European decision-making process, considers the implementation of the attributes of European citizenship to be of great relevance;

| 4) | WHEREAS European citizenship does not replace national citizenship but constitutes an advantage for citizens as free persons, who are at once responsible and secure, and as economic and political operators; just as the single market and the solidarity policy underlying the Structural Funds are beneficial to the Member States' economy and the well-being of their citizens; |
| --- | --- |

4)

WHEREAS European citizenship does not replace national citizenship but constitutes an advantage for citizens as free persons, who are at once responsible and secure, and as economic and political operators; just as the single market and the solidarity policy underlying the Structural Funds are beneficial to the Member States' economy and the well-being of their citizens;

| 5) | WHEREAS the efficacy of the protection and promotion of fundamental rights is the bedrock of all democracy and constitutes an essential precondition for creating an area of freedom, security and justice; |
| --- | --- |

5)

WHEREAS the efficacy of the protection and promotion of fundamental rights is the bedrock of all democracy and constitutes an essential precondition for creating an area of freedom, security and justice;

| 6) | WHEREAS the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe strengthens the EU's legal obligation to ensure the promotion of fundamental rights in all relevant policies within its sphere of competence; |
| --- | --- |

6)

WHEREAS the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe strengthens the EU's legal obligation to ensure the promotion of fundamental rights in all relevant policies within its sphere of competence;

| 7) | WHEREAS it is essential to guarantee the exercise of their rights to EU citizens throughout the territory of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

7)

WHEREAS it is essential to guarantee the exercise of their rights to EU citizens throughout the territory of the European Union.

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 6 July):

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

The Committee of the Regions,

1.1   Comments on the Commission's Fourth report on Citizenship of the Union

| 1.1.1 | thanks the Commission for the referral, which satisfies the Committee's request and sets a useful precedent that compensates for the fact that no appropriate legal basis is provided under the Treaties currently in force (Article 22 of the Consolidated Treaties) or the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (Article III-129); |
| --- | --- |

1.1.1

thanks the Commission for the referral, which satisfies the Committee's request and sets a useful precedent that compensates for the fact that no appropriate legal basis is provided under the Treaties currently in force (Article 22 of the Consolidated Treaties) or the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (Article III-129);

| 1.1.2 | welcomes the inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which places the human being at the centre of the European project and includes a specific chapter on citizenship, in the Constitutional Treaty, thus conferring upon the Charter binding legal force; it further enables the citizens of all Member States to equate their European citizenship with the acquisition of new rights and expressions of belonging to this new community, the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.2

welcomes the inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which places the human being at the centre of the European project and includes a specific chapter on citizenship, in the Constitutional Treaty, thus conferring upon the Charter binding legal force; it further enables the citizens of all Member States to equate their European citizenship with the acquisition of new rights and expressions of belonging to this new community, the European Union;

| 1.1.3 | notes that the rights thus conferred under the Charter, which complete those rights laid down in the Constitutional Treaty and affect their daily lives, are still not properly understood by European citizens; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.3

notes that the rights thus conferred under the Charter, which complete those rights laid down in the Constitutional Treaty and affect their daily lives, are still not properly understood by European citizens;

| 1.1.4 | welcomes the general thrust of the Commission's Fourth report on citizenship of the Union and takes note of the positive developments in the implementation of European citizenship and the fundamental rights attaching to it; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.4

welcomes the general thrust of the Commission's Fourth report on citizenship of the Union and takes note of the positive developments in the implementation of European citizenship and the fundamental rights attaching to it;

| 1.1.5 | notes that Article I-10 of the Constitutional Treaty reiterates and summarises Articles 17 and 22 TEC, clarifies the application of the right of free movement and residence, the right to vote and to stand as candidate in elections to the European Parliament and in municipal elections, and henceforth extends the right to communicate in one's mother tongue, which had previously applied exclusively to European institutions, to include EU advisory bodies; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.5

notes that Article I-10 of the Constitutional Treaty reiterates and summarises Articles 17 and 22 TEC, clarifies the application of the right of free movement and residence, the right to vote and to stand as candidate in elections to the European Parliament and in municipal elections, and henceforth extends the right to communicate in one's mother tongue, which had previously applied exclusively to European institutions, to include EU advisory bodies;

| 1.1.6 | welcomes the initiation of dialogue between citizens and local and regional representatives, especially in respect of the citizens' need for information regarding the rights and benefits accruing to them through the application of said rights by regional and local authorities; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.6

welcomes the initiation of dialogue between citizens and local and regional representatives, especially in respect of the citizens' need for information regarding the rights and benefits accruing to them through the application of said rights by regional and local authorities;

| 1.1.7 | regrets that, in referring to the efforts required in the field of education to ensure that young people acquire the necessary skills to participate as European citizens, the Commission's fourth report fails to mention the role played by regional and local authorities, which have responsibility for education in certain Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.7

regrets that, in referring to the efforts required in the field of education to ensure that young people acquire the necessary skills to participate as European citizens, the Commission's fourth report fails to mention the role played by regional and local authorities, which have responsibility for education in certain Member States;

| 1.1.8 | notes with satisfaction that due to the Directive on the right of Union citizens and the members of their families to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, progress has been made with regard to the right to move and reside freely, which constitutes a significant step forward, and provides regulatory clarification that is due for national implementation by 20 April 2006; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.8

notes with satisfaction that due to the Directive on the right of Union citizens and the members of their families to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, progress has been made with regard to the right to move and reside freely, which constitutes a significant step forward, and provides regulatory clarification that is due for national implementation by 20 April 2006;

| 1.1.9 | regrets, however, the failure to mention the local authorities' responsibility for reception and follow-up formalities on behalf of European citizens on arrival and throughout their stay in the host Member State, including any changes to their situation or that of their families, whereas these authorities are responsible for verifying, should the need arise, their registration, professional or other resources, accommodation, and eligibility for social assistance during their first five years of residence; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.9

regrets, however, the failure to mention the local authorities' responsibility for reception and follow-up formalities on behalf of European citizens on arrival and throughout their stay in the host Member State, including any changes to their situation or that of their families, whereas these authorities are responsible for verifying, should the need arise, their registration, professional or other resources, accommodation, and eligibility for social assistance during their first five years of residence;

| 1.1.10 | notes that in cases of death, departure or separation, the Directive also grants family members an autonomous right of residence; and welcomes the fact that, in line with the Committee's opinion of 21 November 2002 (CdR 121/2002 final) on the relevant proposal for a Directive, the Directive has extended the definition of family members to include unmarried partners who have equivalent status to married partners in the Member State of origin; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.10

notes that in cases of death, departure or separation, the Directive also grants family members an autonomous right of residence; and welcomes the fact that, in line with the Committee's opinion of 21 November 2002 (CdR 121/2002 final) on the relevant proposal for a Directive, the Directive has extended the definition of family members to include unmarried partners who have equivalent status to married partners in the Member State of origin;

| 1.1.11 | considers that this measure is indeed justified but could entail social actions and support from the local authorities of the family's place of residence, which the European legislation fails to take into account; the Committee therefore recommends that during the two-year implementation period for this Directive, steps be taken to address any relevant issues; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.11

considers that this measure is indeed justified but could entail social actions and support from the local authorities of the family's place of residence, which the European legislation fails to take into account; the Committee therefore recommends that during the two-year implementation period for this Directive, steps be taken to address any relevant issues;

| 1.1.12 | is in favour of simplifying procedures for repatriating mortal remains in the event of a Union citizen's death in another Member State and considers that since municipalities are often responsible for burial and cremation, it should be closely involved in the ongoing drafting process of the relevant European Commission document; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.12

is in favour of simplifying procedures for repatriating mortal remains in the event of a Union citizen's death in another Member State and considers that since municipalities are often responsible for burial and cremation, it should be closely involved in the ongoing drafting process of the relevant European Commission document;

| 1.1.13 | recalls that Part III of the Constitutional Treaty makes provision for the functioning of the internal market and the freedom of establishment for EU workers, thus ensuring the right to work, and thereby entailing the abolition of restrictions arising from the implementation of national legislation, and the harmonisation of economic and social rights; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.13

recalls that Part III of the Constitutional Treaty makes provision for the functioning of the internal market and the freedom of establishment for EU workers, thus ensuring the right to work, and thereby entailing the abolition of restrictions arising from the implementation of national legislation, and the harmonisation of economic and social rights;

| 1.1.14 | notes that, although it has now become a matter of common mores that European citizens have the right to vote and stand for election to the European Parliament in the Member State of their residence, there is still a need to intensify the dissemination and educational efforts made in the run-up to the 2004 elections, and that their participation in municipal elections has involved a number of difficulties; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.14

notes that, although it has now become a matter of common mores that European citizens have the right to vote and stand for election to the European Parliament in the Member State of their residence, there is still a need to intensify the dissemination and educational efforts made in the run-up to the 2004 elections, and that their participation in municipal elections has involved a number of difficulties;

| 1.1.15 | is, in principle, in favour of Union citizens being eligible to vote in national elections, but feels that it is not its role to propose the procedures for such participation; it is also in favour of Union citizens being eligible to vote in regional elections and is willing to examine the conditions for their participation, which would entail the need for Member States to identify the appropriate ‘regional’ level and the minimum residence periods required; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.15

is, in principle, in favour of Union citizens being eligible to vote in national elections, but feels that it is not its role to propose the procedures for such participation; it is also in favour of Union citizens being eligible to vote in regional elections and is willing to examine the conditions for their participation, which would entail the need for Member States to identify the appropriate ‘regional’ level and the minimum residence periods required;

| 1.1.16 | welcomes the development of political parties at European level but regrets the fact that its opinion was not requested on the proposal for a regulation on the statute and financing of European political parties implementing the second paragraph of Article 191 TEC (7); |
| --- | --- |

1.1.16

welcomes the development of political parties at European level but regrets the fact that its opinion was not requested on the proposal for a regulation on the statute and financing of European political parties implementing the second paragraph of Article 191 TEC (7);

| 1.1.17 | is satisfied with the processing of petitions to the European Parliament and the Ombudsman but is nevertheless concerned by the number of inadmissible petitions that could not be followed up; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.17

is satisfied with the processing of petitions to the European Parliament and the Ombudsman but is nevertheless concerned by the number of inadmissible petitions that could not be followed up;

1.2   Comments on the Fundamental Rights Agency

| 1.2.1 | would like to express an opinion on the sphere of action, the missions, geographical scope, and structure of this new body, whose objective is not only to safeguard but also to promote the fundamental rights of all citizens of present and future EU Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.1

would like to express an opinion on the sphere of action, the missions, geographical scope, and structure of this new body, whose objective is not only to safeguard but also to promote the fundamental rights of all citizens of present and future EU Member States;

| 1.2.2 | believes that the Agency must be granted sufficient intellectual and material resources to fulfil its mission in full independence; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.2

believes that the Agency must be granted sufficient intellectual and material resources to fulfil its mission in full independence;

| 1.2.3 | considers that the Agency's sphere of action should focus on the application of European law, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, now incorporated in the Constitutional Treaty, and the provisions for implementation laid down therein for safeguarding and promoting the rights attaching to Union citizenship; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.3

considers that the Agency's sphere of action should focus on the application of European law, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, now incorporated in the Constitutional Treaty, and the provisions for implementation laid down therein for safeguarding and promoting the rights attaching to Union citizenship;

| 1.2.4 | wishes the Agency's scope to cover all forms of discrimination cited under the Charter, especially when directed against national minorities; and stresses that it will have to be especially vigilant in those situations where fundamental rights are continually violated; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.4

wishes the Agency's scope to cover all forms of discrimination cited under the Charter, especially when directed against national minorities; and stresses that it will have to be especially vigilant in those situations where fundamental rights are continually violated;

| 1.2.5 | considers that the Agency's core mission should remain data collection and analysis based on an independent and reliable methodological tool and a network of experts; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.5

considers that the Agency's core mission should remain data collection and analysis based on an independent and reliable methodological tool and a network of experts;

| 1.2.6 | believes that, as proposed, the Agency should be granted the authority to address negative as well as positive recommendations to the European institutions regarding their legislative and judicial responsibilities; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.6

believes that, as proposed, the Agency should be granted the authority to address negative as well as positive recommendations to the European institutions regarding their legislative and judicial responsibilities;

| 1.2.7 | considers that the Agency should act as an umbrella network with horizontal competences and the ability to develop a fundamental rights culture within the European Union, its Member States and their regional and local authorities, and that, consequently all specialised fundamental rights bodies, such as the Institute for Gender Equality, should be attached to it; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.7

considers that the Agency should act as an umbrella network with horizontal competences and the ability to develop a fundamental rights culture within the European Union, its Member States and their regional and local authorities, and that, consequently all specialised fundamental rights bodies, such as the Institute for Gender Equality, should be attached to it;

| 1.2.8 | considers that the scope of the Agency's studies should be restricted to the territory of EU Member States, applicant countries and associated countries since extending its scope to third countries, a CFSP sphere of action, would lead to a dilution of its tasks without adding value to existing international provisions, and more specifically to United Nations legislative instruments; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.8

considers that the scope of the Agency's studies should be restricted to the territory of EU Member States, applicant countries and associated countries since extending its scope to third countries, a CFSP sphere of action, would lead to a dilution of its tasks without adding value to existing international provisions, and more specifically to United Nations legislative instruments;

| 1.2.9 | nevertheless, recalls the need for the Agency to draw up a work programme establishing priorities to ensure its effectiveness; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.9

nevertheless, recalls the need for the Agency to draw up a work programme establishing priorities to ensure its effectiveness;

| 1.2.10 | supports the proposal that the Agency should cooperate with the Council of Europe, the national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, and the network of independent experts, but should not undertake to conduct studies on a country-by-country basis; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.10

supports the proposal that the Agency should cooperate with the Council of Europe, the national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, and the network of independent experts, but should not undertake to conduct studies on a country-by-country basis;

| 1.2.11 | would not be against the Agency conducting a study under the terms of Article 7 TEU, which are reiterated under Article I-59 of the Constitutional Treaty, i.e. in cases of grave and persistent breaches by a Member State of the European Union's fundamental principles, provided that such a study were conducted following an express referral from the Council, the European Parliament, or the European Commission and not at the Agency's own initiative. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.11

would not be against the Agency conducting a study under the terms of Article 7 TEU, which are reiterated under Article I-59 of the Constitutional Treaty, i.e. in cases of grave and persistent breaches by a Member State of the European Union's fundamental principles, provided that such a study were conducted following an express referral from the Council, the European Parliament, or the European Commission and not at the Agency's own initiative.

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions,

2.1   European citizenship

| 2.1.1 | recommends that the Charter of Fundamental Rights be included in the information campaign on the Constitutional Treaty and that regional and local authorities be involved, since they are able to reach all citizens and are responsible for the day-to-day application of the rights enshrined in the Charter; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.1

recommends that the Charter of Fundamental Rights be included in the information campaign on the Constitutional Treaty and that regional and local authorities be involved, since they are able to reach all citizens and are responsible for the day-to-day application of the rights enshrined in the Charter;

| 2.1.2 | suggests that regional and local authorities should play a role in the procedures provided for ensuring the free movement of Union citizens in order to facilitate their integration in their Member State of residence; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.2

suggests that regional and local authorities should play a role in the procedures provided for ensuring the free movement of Union citizens in order to facilitate their integration in their Member State of residence;

| 2.1.3 | recommends that European citizens' economic and social rights be promoted by achieving uniform standards for these rights throughout the European Union and by striving, in cooperation with regional and local authorities, to prevent all forms of discrimination; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.3

recommends that European citizens' economic and social rights be promoted by achieving uniform standards for these rights throughout the European Union and by striving, in cooperation with regional and local authorities, to prevent all forms of discrimination;

| 2.1.4 | urges the parties to forestall, with the Committee's support, all difficulties that could result from granting an autonomous right of residence to the family members of a Union citizen residing in another Member State in the event of the latter's departure or death, or the couple's separation, with particular regard to the family members' right to social protection and to work; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.4

urges the parties to forestall, with the Committee's support, all difficulties that could result from granting an autonomous right of residence to the family members of a Union citizen residing in another Member State in the event of the latter's departure or death, or the couple's separation, with particular regard to the family members' right to social protection and to work;

| 2.1.5 | requests that municipal representatives also be involved in drawing up the European instrument on simplifying procedures for repatriating mortal remains in the event of a Union citizen's death in another Member State; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.5

requests that municipal representatives also be involved in drawing up the European instrument on simplifying procedures for repatriating mortal remains in the event of a Union citizen's death in another Member State;

| 2.1.6 | proposes that a recommendation be drawn up to promote European citizenship courses in schools, an action that would be led by the European Commission, with the CoR's participation in its capacity as representative of the authorities with responsibility for education; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.6

proposes that a recommendation be drawn up to promote European citizenship courses in schools, an action that would be led by the European Commission, with the CoR's participation in its capacity as representative of the authorities with responsibility for education;

| 2.1.7 | recommends that initiatives such as the European Year of Citizenship through Education be given an adequate budget to enable them to carry out actions at both European and local/regional level; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.7

recommends that initiatives such as the European Year of Citizenship through Education be given an adequate budget to enable them to carry out actions at both European and local/regional level;

| 2.1.8 | recommends that consideration be given to extending European citizens' political rights by granting them the right to vote in the regional and national elections of the Member State of their residence; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.8

recommends that consideration be given to extending European citizens' political rights by granting them the right to vote in the regional and national elections of the Member State of their residence;

| 2.1.9 | recommends that the right to vote in the local elections of the Member State of residence should not be automatically extended to the nationals of the Contracting States to the European Economic Area; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.9

recommends that the right to vote in the local elections of the Member State of residence should not be automatically extended to the nationals of the Contracting States to the European Economic Area;

| 2.1.10 | suggests that formal procedures be established for forwarding to the authority with jurisdiction in the matter (for instance, the national ombudsman, should one exist, or directly to the regional and local authorities) any inadmissible petitions or complaints addressed to the European Parliament or Ombudsman; |
| --- | --- |

2.1.10

suggests that formal procedures be established for forwarding to the authority with jurisdiction in the matter (for instance, the national ombudsman, should one exist, or directly to the regional and local authorities) any inadmissible petitions or complaints addressed to the European Parliament or Ombudsman;

2.2   Fundamental Rights Agency

| 2.2.1 | recommends that the future Fundamental Rights Agency be granted the material and intellectual resources to ensure its efficacy and independence; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.1

recommends that the future Fundamental Rights Agency be granted the material and intellectual resources to ensure its efficacy and independence;

| 2.2.2 | proposes that the Agency's sphere of action be restricted to the application of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, and subject to the conditions specified under Article II-112 of the Constitutional Treaty; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.2

proposes that the Agency's sphere of action be restricted to the application of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, and subject to the conditions specified under Article II-112 of the Constitutional Treaty;

| 2.2.3 | recommends that the Agency be considered as an umbrella network with the ability to develop a fundamental rights culture within the European Union, its Member States and their regional and local authorities, and that, consequently, all specialised fundamental rights bodies should be attached to it; further recommends that its structure enable it to respond to diverse fundamental rights aspects, and that it have an annual or multiannual work programme to ensure its effectiveness; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.3

recommends that the Agency be considered as an umbrella network with the ability to develop a fundamental rights culture within the European Union, its Member States and their regional and local authorities, and that, consequently, all specialised fundamental rights bodies should be attached to it; further recommends that its structure enable it to respond to diverse fundamental rights aspects, and that it have an annual or multiannual work programme to ensure its effectiveness;

| 2.2.4 | requests that, in addition to its role as an independent and reliable body that collects and analyses data with a view to submitting recommendations to the European institutions, including the Court of Justice, the Agency should also be involved in implementing education and communication policies for fundamental rights; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.4

requests that, in addition to its role as an independent and reliable body that collects and analyses data with a view to submitting recommendations to the European institutions, including the Court of Justice, the Agency should also be involved in implementing education and communication policies for fundamental rights;

| 2.2.5 | suggests that the Agency's geographical sphere of action be restricted to the Member States of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.5

suggests that the Agency's geographical sphere of action be restricted to the Member States of the European Union;

| 2.2.6 | invites the future European Agency to establish relations, on the one hand, with the Council of Europe, national institutions and non-governmental organisations for the protection of fundamental rights and the network of independent experts, but also with the regional and local authorities, since their specific approach is liable to facilitate the Agency's work; and to deliver an annual report on the fundamental rights situation in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.6

invites the future European Agency to establish relations, on the one hand, with the Council of Europe, national institutions and non-governmental organisations for the protection of fundamental rights and the network of independent experts, but also with the regional and local authorities, since their specific approach is liable to facilitate the Agency's work; and to deliver an annual report on the fundamental rights situation in the EU;

| 2.2.7 | proposes that the Agency should act in strict accordance with the terms of Article 7 TEU, which are reaffirmed under Article I-59 of the Constitutional Treaty, i.e. upon express referral from the Council, the European Parliament, or the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.2.7

proposes that the Agency should act in strict accordance with the terms of Article 7 TEU, which are reaffirmed under Article I-59 of the Constitutional Treaty, i.e. upon express referral from the Council, the European Parliament, or the European Commission;

| 2.2.8 | requests that a representative of local and regional authorities sit on the Management Board of the future European Agency. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.8

requests that a representative of local and regional authorities sit on the Management Board of the future European Agency.

Brussels, 6 July 2005

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 156 of 6 June 2000, p. 1

1

(2)  OJ C 22 of 24 January 2001, p. 1

2

(3)  OJ C 144 of 16 May 2001, p. 42

3

(4)  OJ C 192 of 12 August 2002, p. 17

4

(5)  OJ C 73 of 26 March 2003, p. 64

5

(6)  OJ C 73 of 26 March 2003, p. 46

6

(7)  Article 191 TEC, amending the Nice Treaty, provides that ‘Political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the Union. They contribute to forming a European awareness and to expressing the political will of the citizens of the Union.’ These provisions are reaffirmed under Article I-46 (4) of the Constitutional Treaty.

7

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/11

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress towards accession

(2006/C 31/03)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress towards accession (COM(2004) 656 final);

having regard to the European Commission's decision of 29 November 2004 to consult it under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

having regard to its Bureau's decision of 28 September 2004 to instruct its Commission for External Relations to draw up an opinion on the European Commission's strategy on progress in the enlargement process;

having regard to the European Council presidency conclusions of 17 December 2004 to open accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005; the presidency conclusions of the Thessaloniki European Council of 19 and 20 June 2003; the conclusions of the Copenhagen European Council of 12 and 13 December 2002; and the conclusions of the Helsinki European Council of 10 and 11 December 1999;

having regard to the European Parliament's report on the regular report and the recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress towards accession (COM(2004) 656 final) (A6-0063/2004 final);

having regard to its resolution of 18 November 2004 on the opening of negotiations for Turkey's accession to the EU (CdR 476/2004);

having regard to the conclusions adopted at the seminar between Turkish local authorities and the CoR Commission for External Relations held in Ankara on 11 October 2004 (the Ankara declaration, CdR 477/2004);

having regard to the European Charter of Local Self-Government which Turkey ratified in 1992;

having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 495/2004 rev. 1) adopted by the Commission for External Relations on 26 April 2005 (rapporteur: Ms Helene Lund, Local Councillor, Farum, DK/PES);

wishing to submit views on Turkey's progress towards accession from a local and regional perspective;

whereas:

| 1. | the Council's decision to open negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005 has given that country a European outlook for the future. However, further substantial progress is needed. The negotiations must remain an open process; |
| --- | --- |

1.

the Council's decision to open negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005 has given that country a European outlook for the future. However, further substantial progress is needed. The negotiations must remain an open process;

| 2. | Turkey is currently undergoing radical changes — in attitudes among other things. It can thus become an important role model for countries of the Middle East as a state with a mainly Muslim population that is committing itself to basic principles such as freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Turkey is currently undergoing radical changes — in attitudes among other things. It can thus become an important role model for countries of the Middle East as a state with a mainly Muslim population that is committing itself to basic principles such as freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law;

| 3. | the Turkish authorities have abolished the death penalty, introduced a ‘zero-tolerance’ policy on torture, lifted many restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly and religion, and guaranteed certain cultural rights for all Turkish citizens, including citizens of Kurdish extraction. Steps have also been taken to tackle corruption, which is a serious problem, not least in public administration. However, efforts on this front still need to be stepped up at all levels of government. Moreover, physical and mental violence against women is deemed completely unacceptable; |
| --- | --- |

3.

the Turkish authorities have abolished the death penalty, introduced a ‘zero-tolerance’ policy on torture, lifted many restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly and religion, and guaranteed certain cultural rights for all Turkish citizens, including citizens of Kurdish extraction. Steps have also been taken to tackle corruption, which is a serious problem, not least in public administration. However, efforts on this front still need to be stepped up at all levels of government. Moreover, physical and mental violence against women is deemed completely unacceptable;

| 4. | Turkey is a centralised state, where few tasks are devolved to elected local and regional authorities. Moreover, under the legally recognised principles and procedures, the state exercises considerable supervisory powers over local authorities. In many fields, government-appointed officials — including the governors — have more power than local and regional elected representatives. Administrative supervision of local authorities is exercised by the interior minister and the governors of the 81 provinces; |
| --- | --- |

4.

Turkey is a centralised state, where few tasks are devolved to elected local and regional authorities. Moreover, under the legally recognised principles and procedures, the state exercises considerable supervisory powers over local authorities. In many fields, government-appointed officials — including the governors — have more power than local and regional elected representatives. Administrative supervision of local authorities is exercised by the interior minister and the governors of the 81 provinces;

| 5. | the Commission has put forward a three-pillar strategy. The first pillar concerns cooperation to reinforce and support the reform process in Turkey, in particular in relation to the continued fulfilment of the Copenhagen political criteria. The second pillar relates to the specific conditions for the conduct of accession negotiations with Turkey. The third pillar entails a substantially strengthened political and cultural dialogue bringing people together from EU Member States and Turkey. Help and support in building up Turkish civil society must be seen as a key factor in any Turkey accession; |
| --- | --- |

5.

the Commission has put forward a three-pillar strategy. The first pillar concerns cooperation to reinforce and support the reform process in Turkey, in particular in relation to the continued fulfilment of the Copenhagen political criteria. The second pillar relates to the specific conditions for the conduct of accession negotiations with Turkey. The third pillar entails a substantially strengthened political and cultural dialogue bringing people together from EU Member States and Turkey. Help and support in building up Turkish civil society must be seen as a key factor in any Turkey accession;

| 6. | the Committee of the Regions will be focusing on those areas that fall within local and regional authorities' remit, and its active involvement must centre on practical issues that can be resolved through genuine cooperation between local and regional partners in the EU and Turkey. In that regard, it will be useful to draw on experience of twinning and capacity-building projects at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

6.

the Committee of the Regions will be focusing on those areas that fall within local and regional authorities' remit, and its active involvement must centre on practical issues that can be resolved through genuine cooperation between local and regional partners in the EU and Turkey. In that regard, it will be useful to draw on experience of twinning and capacity-building projects at local and regional level;

adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session of 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 6 July)

1.   Views of the Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.1 | stresses that Turkey will be subject to the same accession criteria as the other candidate countries and welcomes the reforms undertaken by the Turkish authorities over the past few years, which have helped Turkey towards meeting the Copenhagen criteria sufficiently to allow the opening of EU accession negotiations; |
| --- | --- |

1.1

stresses that Turkey will be subject to the same accession criteria as the other candidate countries and welcomes the reforms undertaken by the Turkish authorities over the past few years, which have helped Turkey towards meeting the Copenhagen criteria sufficiently to allow the opening of EU accession negotiations;

| 1.2 | acknowledges that over the past few years, and especially since the 2002 elections, Turkey has carried out more reforms than in the decades that went before. The Turkish Parliament has introduced a range of reforms — including a package relating to public administration — and has also adopted a large number of laws, decrees and ordinances to put the reforms into practice; notes however, that some of these laws have been vetoed by the president and, as a result, have not yet entered into force; |
| --- | --- |

1.2

acknowledges that over the past few years, and especially since the 2002 elections, Turkey has carried out more reforms than in the decades that went before. The Turkish Parliament has introduced a range of reforms — including a package relating to public administration — and has also adopted a large number of laws, decrees and ordinances to put the reforms into practice; notes however, that some of these laws have been vetoed by the president and, as a result, have not yet entered into force;

| 1.3 | acknowledges that Turkey has made substantial progress in its political reforms, not least by adopting far-reaching constitutional and legislative changes that have revamped the political and legal systems; |
| --- | --- |

1.3

acknowledges that Turkey has made substantial progress in its political reforms, not least by adopting far-reaching constitutional and legislative changes that have revamped the political and legal systems;

| 1.4 | draws attention to the fact that further legislation is still to be adopted; |
| --- | --- |

1.4

draws attention to the fact that further legislation is still to be adopted;

| 1.5 | stresses that steps must be taken to ensure that the planned legislation does in fact enter into force and, above all, is appropriately implemented, and that effective action is taken against human rights abuses. The Republic of Cyprus must be officially recognised before negotiations begin; |
| --- | --- |

1.5

stresses that steps must be taken to ensure that the planned legislation does in fact enter into force and, above all, is appropriately implemented, and that effective action is taken against human rights abuses. The Republic of Cyprus must be officially recognised before negotiations begin;

| 1.6 | draws attention to the fact that Turkey is a country with major regional disparities. This presents an additional challenge to assure any development designed to secure benefits right across the country; |
| --- | --- |

1.6

draws attention to the fact that Turkey is a country with major regional disparities. This presents an additional challenge to assure any development designed to secure benefits right across the country;

| 1.7 | considers that the reform package for public administration should be adopted as quickly as possible following appropriate consultation with local and regional authority organisations and civil society; |
| --- | --- |

1.7

considers that the reform package for public administration should be adopted as quickly as possible following appropriate consultation with local and regional authority organisations and civil society;

| 1.8 | wishes to make a constructive contribution to implementing the three pillars of the Commission's strategy, particularly the third one, i.e. a substantially strengthened political and cultural dialogue bringing people together from EU Member States and Turkey. Civil society and regional and local authorities should play an important role in this dialogue, which should be facilitated by the Commission with concrete actions in order to make the dialogue effective; |
| --- | --- |

1.8

wishes to make a constructive contribution to implementing the three pillars of the Commission's strategy, particularly the third one, i.e. a substantially strengthened political and cultural dialogue bringing people together from EU Member States and Turkey. Civil society and regional and local authorities should play an important role in this dialogue, which should be facilitated by the Commission with concrete actions in order to make the dialogue effective;

| 1.9 | welcomes civil society's increased involvement in civic life, and underscores the need to support the further development of civil society, including the right to freedom of assembly; |
| --- | --- |

1.9

welcomes civil society's increased involvement in civic life, and underscores the need to support the further development of civil society, including the right to freedom of assembly;

| 1.10 | considers that enhanced cooperation and exchange of information and best practice at local and regional level fosters democracy and social and economic development; |
| --- | --- |

1.10

considers that enhanced cooperation and exchange of information and best practice at local and regional level fosters democracy and social and economic development;

| 1.11 | draws attention to the following areas in which local and regional authorities can usefully help Turkey as it prepares for accession:






  a) | upgrading and organising public administration, especially regional and local; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.11

draws attention to the following areas in which local and regional authorities can usefully help Turkey as it prepares for accession:

a)

upgrading and organising public administration, especially regional and local;

| b) | administrative management of public services; |
| --- | --- |

b)

administrative management of public services;

| c) | regional and spatial planning; |
| --- | --- |

c)

regional and spatial planning;

| d) | urban planning; |
| --- | --- |

d)

urban planning;

| e) | agriculture, fisheries and rural development; |
| --- | --- |

e)

agriculture, fisheries and rural development;

| f) | environment, resource management and civil protection; |
| --- | --- |

f)

environment, resource management and civil protection;

| g) | the sub-regional dimension of transport and energy; |
| --- | --- |

g)

the sub-regional dimension of transport and energy;

| h) | policies promoting SMEs; |
| --- | --- |

h)

policies promoting SMEs;

| i) | policies promoting employment; |
| --- | --- |

i)

policies promoting employment;

| j) | policies promoting equal rights and to combat discrimination on the grounds of gender or ethnic origin; |
| --- | --- |

j)

policies promoting equal rights and to combat discrimination on the grounds of gender or ethnic origin;

| k) | cultural and sporting initiatives; |
| --- | --- |

k)

cultural and sporting initiatives;

| l) | policies for safeguarding and fostering cultural heritage; |
| --- | --- |

l)

policies for safeguarding and fostering cultural heritage;

| m) | policies to help bring people closer together; |
| --- | --- |

m)

policies to help bring people closer together;

| n) | education and training; |
| --- | --- |

n)

education and training;

| o) | health and social care; |
| --- | --- |

o)

health and social care;

| p) | managing immigration flows, reception and integration policy; |
| --- | --- |

p)

managing immigration flows, reception and integration policy;

| q) | housing; |
| --- | --- |

q)

housing;

| r) | security and safety measures; |
| --- | --- |

r)

security and safety measures;

| s) | public tendering procedures; |
| --- | --- |

s)

public tendering procedures;

| t) | local democracy and civil participation; |
| --- | --- |

t)

local democracy and civil participation;

| 1.12 | notes that strengthening local and regional development is vital to fostering economic and social progress in all areas of Turkey and, in this context, considers that the devolution of state powers to regional and local government should be encouraged and requested; |
| --- | --- |

1.12

notes that strengthening local and regional development is vital to fostering economic and social progress in all areas of Turkey and, in this context, considers that the devolution of state powers to regional and local government should be encouraged and requested;

| 1.13 | underscores the need to involve the regional and local level at an early stage in the accession process, and to give high priority to the environment as one of the main areas of the EU acquis of importance for the regional and local level; notes that some progress has been made on the environment, and administrative capacity has been strengthened, but that further progress has to be made, not least in securing better coordination among the administrations concerned; |
| --- | --- |

1.13

underscores the need to involve the regional and local level at an early stage in the accession process, and to give high priority to the environment as one of the main areas of the EU acquis of importance for the regional and local level; notes that some progress has been made on the environment, and administrative capacity has been strengthened, but that further progress has to be made, not least in securing better coordination among the administrations concerned;

| 1.14 | considers that local and regional authorities implement a large part of EU legislation and thus will have a key role to play in any Turkey accession. Through close cooperation on specific projects, the EU Member States' local and regional authorities can help carry through reforms and implement the EU acquis at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

1.14

considers that local and regional authorities implement a large part of EU legislation and thus will have a key role to play in any Turkey accession. Through close cooperation on specific projects, the EU Member States' local and regional authorities can help carry through reforms and implement the EU acquis at local and regional level;

| 1.15 | acknowledges the particular challenges arising from Turkey's membership with regard to the future application of the common agricultural policy, of the cohesion policy and of the free movement of workers; |
| --- | --- |

1.15

acknowledges the particular challenges arising from Turkey's membership with regard to the future application of the common agricultural policy, of the cohesion policy and of the free movement of workers;

| 1.16 | endorses the Commission's views on the need for an impact assessment, an implementation plan and budgetary and financial frameworks; |
| --- | --- |

1.16

endorses the Commission's views on the need for an impact assessment, an implementation plan and budgetary and financial frameworks;

| 1.17 | would like, as with previous candidate countries, to see closer dialogue with the Turkish local authorities; |
| --- | --- |

1.17

would like, as with previous candidate countries, to see closer dialogue with the Turkish local authorities;

| 1.18 | stresses the importance of zero tolerance of torture and ill-treatment; the rights and freedoms of all minorities; respect for all religions, especially the issue of equal legal treatment for all religions; zero tolerance of discrimination and violence against women; and compliance with ILO child labour standards; |
| --- | --- |

1.18

stresses the importance of zero tolerance of torture and ill-treatment; the rights and freedoms of all minorities; respect for all religions, especially the issue of equal legal treatment for all religions; zero tolerance of discrimination and violence against women; and compliance with ILO child labour standards;

| 1.19 | underlines the importance of strengthening local and regional-level administrative capacity to ensure that the EU acquis is implemented and enforced effectively: |
| --- | --- |

1.19

underlines the importance of strengthening local and regional-level administrative capacity to ensure that the EU acquis is implemented and enforced effectively:

| 1.20 | considers that the Turkish government has a manifest obligation to recognise all the Member States of the European Union fully and without reservations and to unconditionally respect the human rights and individual freedoms of all European citizens without exception. |
| --- | --- |

1.20

considers that the Turkish government has a manifest obligation to recognise all the Member States of the European Union fully and without reservations and to unconditionally respect the human rights and individual freedoms of all European citizens without exception.

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | asks the Commission to actively involve local and regional authorities in the work of implementing its strategy's three pillars, particularly the third one: i.e. a substantially strengthened political and cultural dialogue bringing people together from EU Member States and Turkey; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

asks the Commission to actively involve local and regional authorities in the work of implementing its strategy's three pillars, particularly the third one: i.e. a substantially strengthened political and cultural dialogue bringing people together from EU Member States and Turkey;

| 2.2 | encourages the Commission to launch an information campaign in close cooperation with local and regional authorities in order to inform EU citizens about relations with Turkey and to support exchange programmes that will help to increase mutual understanding between EU citizens and Turkish society; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

encourages the Commission to launch an information campaign in close cooperation with local and regional authorities in order to inform EU citizens about relations with Turkey and to support exchange programmes that will help to increase mutual understanding between EU citizens and Turkish society;

| 2.3 | encourages the Commission to draw on the experience of EU Member States' local and regional authorities in building up local democracy and developing local and regional administrations; |
| --- | --- |

2.3

encourages the Commission to draw on the experience of EU Member States' local and regional authorities in building up local democracy and developing local and regional administrations;

| 2.4 | recommends that, in its next communication on Turkey — due at the end of 2005 — the Commission should also consider local and regional authorities' role in that country, including a request to establish an independent sub-national level that will be closely integrated into the drafting of strategies defining priorities for local and regional development and into subsequent implementation of EU Structural Fund programmes and other regional development initiatives; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

recommends that, in its next communication on Turkey — due at the end of 2005 — the Commission should also consider local and regional authorities' role in that country, including a request to establish an independent sub-national level that will be closely integrated into the drafting of strategies defining priorities for local and regional development and into subsequent implementation of EU Structural Fund programmes and other regional development initiatives;

| 2.5 | recommends, as with previous candidate countries, the establishment of a joint consultative committee involving its own representatives and representatives of Turkish local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

recommends, as with previous candidate countries, the establishment of a joint consultative committee involving its own representatives and representatives of Turkish local and regional authorities;

| 2.6 | calls on the Turkish government to step up the reform of devolved public administration, in as much as it is a key factor in the economic and social development of the area, with a view to its full, irreversible and sustainable implementation as quickly as possible; |
| --- | --- |

2.6

calls on the Turkish government to step up the reform of devolved public administration, in as much as it is a key factor in the economic and social development of the area, with a view to its full, irreversible and sustainable implementation as quickly as possible;

| 2.7 | recommends that the local and regional authorities be provided with the necessary financial and human resources to implement the reforms, and that particular attention be paid to the economic and social development of Turkey's least-favoured regions; |
| --- | --- |

2.7

recommends that the local and regional authorities be provided with the necessary financial and human resources to implement the reforms, and that particular attention be paid to the economic and social development of Turkey's least-favoured regions;

| 2.8 | considers that the Turkish regions, especially those in the south-east of the country, will be able to draw on the structural and cohesion funds to foster social and economic development; |
| --- | --- |

2.8

considers that the Turkish regions, especially those in the south-east of the country, will be able to draw on the structural and cohesion funds to foster social and economic development;

| 2.9 | hence calls for specific initiatives to be put in place to support local and regional authorities' administrative capacity in the use of structural support; the Turkish government is likewise called upon to set aside the requisite resources for co-financing; |
| --- | --- |

2.9

hence calls for specific initiatives to be put in place to support local and regional authorities' administrative capacity in the use of structural support; the Turkish government is likewise called upon to set aside the requisite resources for co-financing;

| 2.10 | calls for local and regional elected representatives to be given more powers and a broader remit, and for a corresponding increase in the share of public expenditure assigned to local and regional authorities; |
| --- | --- |

2.10

calls for local and regional elected representatives to be given more powers and a broader remit, and for a corresponding increase in the share of public expenditure assigned to local and regional authorities;

| 2.11 | calls for the establishment of a legal framework for regional development policy; |
| --- | --- |

2.11

calls for the establishment of a legal framework for regional development policy;

| 2.12 | asks the Turkish government to take steps to ensure that the country is able to implement EU legislation, including at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

2.12

asks the Turkish government to take steps to ensure that the country is able to implement EU legislation, including at local and regional level;

| 2.13 | asks Turkey to do what is necessary to eliminate the concerns expressed in the Commission recommendation, not least with regard to respect for human rights, the full exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms by all including minorities; |
| --- | --- |

2.13

asks Turkey to do what is necessary to eliminate the concerns expressed in the Commission recommendation, not least with regard to respect for human rights, the full exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms by all including minorities;

| 2.14 | urges the Turkish government to develop and expand the principle of local and regional self-government in accordance with the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and to guarantee full and direct participation of citizens; |
| --- | --- |

2.14

urges the Turkish government to develop and expand the principle of local and regional self-government in accordance with the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and to guarantee full and direct participation of citizens;

| 2.15 | expects the Turkish Government to act on its confirmation to ratify the Protocol on the adaptation of the Ankara Agreement prior to the actual start of the accession negotiations; |
| --- | --- |

2.15

expects the Turkish Government to act on its confirmation to ratify the Protocol on the adaptation of the Ankara Agreement prior to the actual start of the accession negotiations;

| 2.16 | urges Turkey to fully respect international law and the principle of good-neighbourliness; |
| --- | --- |

2.16

urges Turkey to fully respect international law and the principle of good-neighbourliness;

| 2.17 | intends to present its views on Turkey's accession from a local and regional standpoint when the right opportunity arises in the future, and it urges the European Union to consult it whenever the regular reports are drawn up. |
| --- | --- |

2.17

intends to present its views on Turkey's accession from a local and regional standpoint when the right opportunity arises in the future, and it urges the European Union to consult it whenever the regular reports are drawn up.

Brussels, 6 July 2005.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/15

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament — Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process (Romania)

(2006/C 31/04)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament: Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process COM(2004) 657 final — SEC(2004) 1200;

Having regard to the European Commission's decision of 29 November 2004 to consult it in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to its Bureau's decision of 28 September 2004 to instruct the Commission for External Relations to draw up an opinion on the European Commission's strategy on progress in the enlargement process;

Having regard to the presidency conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 (No. 16238/04);

Having regard to the European Parliament resolution on Romania's progress towards accession (COM(2004) 0657 — C6-0151/2004 — 2004/2184(INI));

Having regard to the CoR's political priorities for 2002-2006, in which European enlargement is seen as a unique event, which will ensure peace and stability and strengthen the integration process in Europe as a whole;

Having regard to its resolution of 13 February 2003 on the European Commission's work programme and the Committee of the Regions' priorities for 2003 (CdR 6/2003 fin (1));

Having regard to its opinion on the document Towards the enlarged Union — Strategy Paper and Report of the European Commission on the progress towards accession by each of the candidate countries and on the Report from the Commission to the Council: Explaining Europe's Enlargement (CdR 325/2002 fin (2));

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission on the Action Plans for administrative and judicial capacity, and the monitoring of commitments made by the negotiating countries in the accession negotiations (CdR 244/2002 fin);

Having regard to the Joint Declaration of the Federation of Romanian Local Authorities and the Committee of the Regions, signed in Bucharest with the occasion of the 11th conference of the Committee of the Regions organised in the perspective of the European enlargement (3 October 2001) (3) and the CoR's Essex Seminar on enlargement (5 November 2004) (4);

Having regard to the speech ‘Romania and the EU: common future, common challenges’, given by Mr Olli Rehn, member of the European Commission responsible for enlargement, (Bucharest, 28 February 2005) (5);

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 496/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 26 April 2005 by the Commission for External Relations (rapporteur: Mr Lars Abel, Member of Copenhagen County Council (DK/EPP);

adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 6 July):

1.   Views of the Committee of the Regions

1.1   General comments on the enlargement process

The Committee of the Regions:

| 1.1.1 | welcomes European enlargement which took place on 1 May 2004 with the accession of ten new Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.1

welcomes European enlargement which took place on 1 May 2004 with the accession of ten new Member States;

| 1.1.2 | emphasises the fact that Romanian and Bulgaria are also part of the current enlargement process, even though accession will for various reasons only take place at a later date; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.2

emphasises the fact that Romanian and Bulgaria are also part of the current enlargement process, even though accession will for various reasons only take place at a later date;

| 1.1.3 | welcomes the conclusions and recommendations submitted by the European Commission on 6 October 2004 to the Council and the European Parliament in its regular report and in the strategy paper on Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.3

welcomes the conclusions and recommendations submitted by the European Commission on 6 October 2004 to the Council and the European Parliament in its regular report and in the strategy paper on Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia;

| 1.1.4 | shares the view that Romania and Bulgaria will be capable of meeting commitments arising from EU membership and of fulfilling the Copenhagen political criteria, and also that they have functioning market economies; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.4

shares the view that Romania and Bulgaria will be capable of meeting commitments arising from EU membership and of fulfilling the Copenhagen political criteria, and also that they have functioning market economies;

| 1.1.5 | endorses the signing of the accession treaties with Bulgaria and Romania by the EU foreign ministers on 25 April 2005, thereby enabling these two countries to become members of the EU on 1 January 2007, in so far as they will have fulfilled all conditions for accession as required; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.5

endorses the signing of the accession treaties with Bulgaria and Romania by the EU foreign ministers on 25 April 2005, thereby enabling these two countries to become members of the EU on 1 January 2007, in so far as they will have fulfilled all conditions for accession as required;

| 1.1.6 | points out that the individual readiness of each applicant country for accession has been a basic and proven principle of previous enlargements; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.6

points out that the individual readiness of each applicant country for accession has been a basic and proven principle of previous enlargements;

| 1.1.7 | emphasises the need to intensively monitor the systematic implementation of commitments made by Romania and Bulgaria after the close of negotiations; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.7

emphasises the need to intensively monitor the systematic implementation of commitments made by Romania and Bulgaria after the close of negotiations;

| 1.1.8 | considers it appropriate to lay down, by means of safeguard clauses, measures to respond to serious problems that may arise before accession or during the first three years after accession; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.8

considers it appropriate to lay down, by means of safeguard clauses, measures to respond to serious problems that may arise before accession or during the first three years after accession;

| 1.1.9 | acknowledges the specificity of the safeguard clause agreed with Bulgaria and Romania, which, based on a recommendation of the Commission and with Member States acting unanimously, may postpone the accession for one year; moreover, notes that in the event of problems in the field of justice and home affairs or competition in Romania this decision can also be taken by qualified majority voting; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.9

acknowledges the specificity of the safeguard clause agreed with Bulgaria and Romania, which, based on a recommendation of the Commission and with Member States acting unanimously, may postpone the accession for one year; moreover, notes that in the event of problems in the field of justice and home affairs or competition in Romania this decision can also be taken by qualified majority voting;

| 1.1.10 | stresses that it can support Romanian and Bulgarian local and regional authorities in the pre-accession phase through the intensive involvement of observers affiliated to the CoR after the signing of the accession treaties; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.10

stresses that it can support Romanian and Bulgarian local and regional authorities in the pre-accession phase through the intensive involvement of observers affiliated to the CoR after the signing of the accession treaties;

| 1.1.11 | expresses its willingness to pursue an active information policy in order to secure broad support for Romanian and Bulgarian accession during the ratification process; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.11

expresses its willingness to pursue an active information policy in order to secure broad support for Romanian and Bulgarian accession during the ratification process;

| 1.1.12 | welcomes the participation of Romania and Bulgaria in the drafting of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and very much supports the launching of a campaign within territorial communities to explain and promote the content of the Constitution, parting the spirit of the Community acquis, which could build-up citizens' attachment and knowledge of European values and functioning; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.12

welcomes the participation of Romania and Bulgaria in the drafting of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and very much supports the launching of a campaign within territorial communities to explain and promote the content of the Constitution, parting the spirit of the Community acquis, which could build-up citizens' attachment and knowledge of European values and functioning;

| 1.1.13 | welcomes the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 to open accession negotiations with Croatia and notes that accession negotiations will not be opened until full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has been established; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.13

welcomes the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 to open accession negotiations with Croatia and notes that accession negotiations will not be opened until full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has been established;

| 1.1.14 | welcomes the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 to open accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.14

welcomes the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 to open accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005;

| 1.1.15 | envisages an opportunity for its members to support regional and local authorities in the applicant countries in their preparations for accession by entering into partnerships with them; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.15

envisages an opportunity for its members to support regional and local authorities in the applicant countries in their preparations for accession by entering into partnerships with them;

1.2   Observations on the regular report on Romania's progress towards accession

The Committee of the Regions:

a.   concerning local democracy and devolution process:

| 1.2.1 | acknowledges the positive developments reached by Romania in 2004 in the field of local government through the enhancement of the legal basis, in particular the revision of Constitution by introducing the concept of deconcentration, the revamped strategy on the administration reform, the framework law on decentralisation and the law regarding the prefect institution (6); |
| --- | --- |

1.2.1

acknowledges the positive developments reached by Romania in 2004 in the field of local government through the enhancement of the legal basis, in particular the revision of Constitution by introducing the concept of deconcentration, the revamped strategy on the administration reform, the framework law on decentralisation and the law regarding the prefect institution (6);

| 1.2.2 | welcomes the confirmed general consensus of all political parties for the development of a public administration reform, in particular the views and commitments of local and regional authorities during their constructive participation in the European accession process of Romania; and supports the Romanian government established in December 2004 in continuing the administrative and fiscal decentralisation process and strengthening the local autonomy, according to the regulations laid down in the European Charter on local autonomy officially agreed by Romania in 1997; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.2

welcomes the confirmed general consensus of all political parties for the development of a public administration reform, in particular the views and commitments of local and regional authorities during their constructive participation in the European accession process of Romania; and supports the Romanian government established in December 2004 in continuing the administrative and fiscal decentralisation process and strengthening the local autonomy, according to the regulations laid down in the European Charter on local autonomy officially agreed by Romania in 1997;

| 1.2.3 | takes into consideration the measures foreseen by the new governmental programme (7) regarding the efficiency of governing, while founding full political and financial transparency at local level and the participation of local government in the national decision making process with respect of subsidiarity and proportionality principles; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.3

takes into consideration the measures foreseen by the new governmental programme (7) regarding the efficiency of governing, while founding full political and financial transparency at local level and the participation of local government in the national decision making process with respect of subsidiarity and proportionality principles;

| 1.2.4 | shares the views of the European Commission concerning the mismatching of financial and human resources with the transfer of responsibilities at local level, which can jeopardise an efficient public management; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.4

shares the views of the European Commission concerning the mismatching of financial and human resources with the transfer of responsibilities at local level, which can jeopardise an efficient public management;

| 1.2.5 | emphasises the imperative need of qualified, motivated and independent civil servants at local and county level which must be addressed by earmarking sufficient funds for training programmes and for the transfer of competences through exchanges of good practice with EU Member State local and regional authorities, and by providing effective incentives; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.5

emphasises the imperative need of qualified, motivated and independent civil servants at local and county level which must be addressed by earmarking sufficient funds for training programmes and for the transfer of competences through exchanges of good practice with EU Member State local and regional authorities, and by providing effective incentives;

| 1.2.6 | meanwhile recognises that ensuring human resources for a modern public administration is a long-lasting process, but it represents a strategic measure to be taken to cope with new challenges of European integration and management of structural funds; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.6

meanwhile recognises that ensuring human resources for a modern public administration is a long-lasting process, but it represents a strategic measure to be taken to cope with new challenges of European integration and management of structural funds;

| 1.2.7 | expresses its concerns with regards the scale of political migration before last local elections of 2004 as noticed by several independent observers (8), which it believes may be limited through a direct and transparent allocation of public funds established on objective criteria between different levels of authority and through an enduring practice of local democracy as ‘the only game in town’; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.7

expresses its concerns with regards the scale of political migration before last local elections of 2004 as noticed by several independent observers (8), which it believes may be limited through a direct and transparent allocation of public funds established on objective criteria between different levels of authority and through an enduring practice of local democracy as ‘the only game in town’;

| 1.2.8 | underlines that corruption could still be a source of concern at national and local level, which could jeopardise local democracy and the management of public and European funds and therefore calls for its close monitoring by the European institutions; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.8

underlines that corruption could still be a source of concern at national and local level, which could jeopardise local democracy and the management of public and European funds and therefore calls for its close monitoring by the European institutions;

| 1.2.9 | strongly supports the implementation of the up-dated anticorruption strategy recently launched by the new Romanian government, which should be accompanied by an appropriate remuneration for judges; acknowledge the specific measures taken to decrease the number of corruption-generating situations in the months since the new Government was sworn in indicating the commitment of Romania to treat this issue as a priority; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.9

strongly supports the implementation of the up-dated anticorruption strategy recently launched by the new Romanian government, which should be accompanied by an appropriate remuneration for judges; acknowledge the specific measures taken to decrease the number of corruption-generating situations in the months since the new Government was sworn in indicating the commitment of Romania to treat this issue as a priority;

| 1.2.10 | strongly urges foreign companies and public authorities who do business in Romania and who are targeted by corrupt officials to act as corruption sensors by declining to pay bribes and by informing the relevant authorities thereby contributing to fight corruption; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.10

strongly urges foreign companies and public authorities who do business in Romania and who are targeted by corrupt officials to act as corruption sensors by declining to pay bribes and by informing the relevant authorities thereby contributing to fight corruption;

| 1.2.11 | endorses an active participation of local government in the legislative process through an early and effective consultation in the drafting of laws affecting interests and responsibilities of territorial authorities; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.11

endorses an active participation of local government in the legislative process through an early and effective consultation in the drafting of laws affecting interests and responsibilities of territorial authorities;

| 1.2.12 | supports Romanian local authorities in developing participation of citizens and young people in the communities' social and political life and in the launching of public campaigns for promotion of a modern public administration; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.12

supports Romanian local authorities in developing participation of citizens and young people in the communities' social and political life and in the launching of public campaigns for promotion of a modern public administration;

b.   concerning economic developments:

| 1.2.13 | acknowledges Romania's fulfilment of the economic criterion of being a market economy which, accompanied with vigorous implementation of structural reforms, will have the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within EU; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.13

acknowledges Romania's fulfilment of the economic criterion of being a market economy which, accompanied with vigorous implementation of structural reforms, will have the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within EU;

| 1.2.14 | notes the achievements to be reached by Romania in the field of competition, especially by making the legislative and institutional framework work effectively, and welcomes last measures taken by the government in this respect (9) and the ongoing activities ensuring a fully satisfactory administrative capacity; however, welcomes the structural reforms, i.e. the revised National Restructuring Strategy and the Individual Business Plans which mean that no State Aid is granted and paid to the steel industry from 1 January 2005 to the end of the restructuring period (10), but stresses that the social consequences which may have a direct effect on the territorial communities should be taken into consideration as well; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.14

notes the achievements to be reached by Romania in the field of competition, especially by making the legislative and institutional framework work effectively, and welcomes last measures taken by the government in this respect (9) and the ongoing activities ensuring a fully satisfactory administrative capacity; however, welcomes the structural reforms, i.e. the revised National Restructuring Strategy and the Individual Business Plans which mean that no State Aid is granted and paid to the steel industry from 1 January 2005 to the end of the restructuring period (10), but stresses that the social consequences which may have a direct effect on the territorial communities should be taken into consideration as well;

| 1.2.15 | is aware of the need of progress in the functioning of the judiciary and public administration to create a better business environment; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.15

is aware of the need of progress in the functioning of the judiciary and public administration to create a better business environment;

c.   concerning the implementation of the ‘acquis communautaire’:

| 1.2.16 | welcomes the progress made in preparing for the implementation of structural policies and adoption of legislation which creates mechanisms and instruments for a proper use of structural funds; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.16

welcomes the progress made in preparing for the implementation of structural policies and adoption of legislation which creates mechanisms and instruments for a proper use of structural funds;

| 1.2.17 | notes that further efforts are needed to strengthen local and regional governance with a view to ensuring proper implementation of the acquis in the fields they have acquired remit and competences, specifically on public procurement, transports, infrastructure, roads, environment, social policies, child protection and protection of minorities, health, education, culture and transborder cooperation; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.17

notes that further efforts are needed to strengthen local and regional governance with a view to ensuring proper implementation of the acquis in the fields they have acquired remit and competences, specifically on public procurement, transports, infrastructure, roads, environment, social policies, child protection and protection of minorities, health, education, culture and transborder cooperation;

| 1.2.18 | endorses the strengthening of administrative capacity at regional and local levels in the field of environment and a better coordination between them and other relevant authorities, to be able to implement the European legislation in key sectors such as: water and waste management, air quality, noise, nature protection, industrial pollution, chemicals etc.; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.18

endorses the strengthening of administrative capacity at regional and local levels in the field of environment and a better coordination between them and other relevant authorities, to be able to implement the European legislation in key sectors such as: water and waste management, air quality, noise, nature protection, industrial pollution, chemicals etc.;

| 1.2.19 | acknowledges the rather positive advancements in the policy and the implementation of the Roma Strategy adopted in 2001 and calls for more co-ordination between local and central level and efficient actions at county level in fields like formation and education, while taking into account cultural and social roots; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.19

acknowledges the rather positive advancements in the policy and the implementation of the Roma Strategy adopted in 2001 and calls for more co-ordination between local and central level and efficient actions at county level in fields like formation and education, while taking into account cultural and social roots;

| 1.2.20 | points out that further concrete improvements are required at local, county and regional level to develop mechanisms for project identification, management, monitoring and evaluation and in particular capacities for co-financing, in order to reach the required level of absorption of EU funding by 2007; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.20

points out that further concrete improvements are required at local, county and regional level to develop mechanisms for project identification, management, monitoring and evaluation and in particular capacities for co-financing, in order to reach the required level of absorption of EU funding by 2007;

| 1.2.21 | emphasises that for the preparation to Structural funds local authorities should make best use of the EU pre-accession financial aid; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.21

emphasises that for the preparation to Structural funds local authorities should make best use of the EU pre-accession financial aid;

| 1.2.22 | welcomes the existing National Development Plan 2004-2006, as a good first basis for the plan required under the Structural Funds and calls for a deeper analysis for the drafting of the 2007-2013 NDP, in line with the Romania's conception for cohesion policy and European perspectives in this field; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.22

welcomes the existing National Development Plan 2004-2006, as a good first basis for the plan required under the Structural Funds and calls for a deeper analysis for the drafting of the 2007-2013 NDP, in line with the Romania's conception for cohesion policy and European perspectives in this field;

| 1.2.23 | urges for a special attention to be paid to the consultation and partnership principles, especially a closer and active involvement of the local, county and regional authorities, as well as social and non-governmental partners in the drafting of the National Development Plan 2007-2013, and the operational programmes, and the subsequent implementation; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.23

urges for a special attention to be paid to the consultation and partnership principles, especially a closer and active involvement of the local, county and regional authorities, as well as social and non-governmental partners in the drafting of the National Development Plan 2007-2013, and the operational programmes, and the subsequent implementation;

| 1.2.24 | as consequence, calls for a better ownership and consensus to be developed between counties within existing regional structures and for a concrete participation of local elected politicians to make possible the implementation of EU programmes, the drafting of the future NDP 2007-2013 and following control and use of the Structural funds; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.24

as consequence, calls for a better ownership and consensus to be developed between counties within existing regional structures and for a concrete participation of local elected politicians to make possible the implementation of EU programmes, the drafting of the future NDP 2007-2013 and following control and use of the Structural funds;

| 1.2.25 | urges for a solid construction in the establishment of the regional policy in Romania, where local government is not only invited to participate but also committed, according to the interests of territorial communities. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.25

urges for a solid construction in the establishment of the regional policy in Romania, where local government is not only invited to participate but also committed, according to the interests of territorial communities.

2.   Recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions:

| 2.1 | welcomes the conclusion of accession negotiations and the signing of the accession treaty between Romania and the European Union on 25 of April 2005, and recommends that all EU Member States ratify this treaty in due time to enable the EU to welcome Romania as a full member as from 1 January 2007; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

welcomes the conclusion of accession negotiations and the signing of the accession treaty between Romania and the European Union on 25 of April 2005, and recommends that all EU Member States ratify this treaty in due time to enable the EU to welcome Romania as a full member as from 1 January 2007;

| 2.2 | recommends, in the period preceding the full accession, a discussion on regional policy responsibilities in Romania and the endeavours to strengthen the position of local and regional authorities so that, by 2007, Romania will demonstrate effective local administrative structures able to meet the demands and challenges of the membership in the EU; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

recommends, in the period preceding the full accession, a discussion on regional policy responsibilities in Romania and the endeavours to strengthen the position of local and regional authorities so that, by 2007, Romania will demonstrate effective local administrative structures able to meet the demands and challenges of the membership in the EU;

| 2.3 | therefore, supports the launching of a constructive and result oriented debate in Romania focusing on devolution and regionalisation process with the participation of local and central government and the EU concerned bodies, aiming to improve existing territorial structures and decision making process to efficiently develop regional policies and implementation of Structural funds after 2007; |
| --- | --- |

2.3

therefore, supports the launching of a constructive and result oriented debate in Romania focusing on devolution and regionalisation process with the participation of local and central government and the EU concerned bodies, aiming to improve existing territorial structures and decision making process to efficiently develop regional policies and implementation of Structural funds after 2007;

| 2.4 | looks forward to welcoming the 15 members representing regional and local bodies in Romania as observers in the CoR, and regrets that it has not been possible to establish a Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) with Romania in due time; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

looks forward to welcoming the 15 members representing regional and local bodies in Romania as observers in the CoR, and regrets that it has not been possible to establish a Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) with Romania in due time;

| 2.5 | emphasises that promoting regional trans-European cooperation between Member States and accession countries is a basis for an effective deployment of the Structural Funds and of the European integration as a whole; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

emphasises that promoting regional trans-European cooperation between Member States and accession countries is a basis for an effective deployment of the Structural Funds and of the European integration as a whole;

| 2.6 | recommends the organisation as soon as possible of an external event in Romania, whose main themes would be the involvement of Romanian local and regional government in the work of the CoR, the decentralisation process and the reform of public administration. This event would serve as a response to the invitation received from Romanian local government associations and would be a concrete step to ensure CoR regular support to the Romanian local and regional authorities in both the further progress of the national decentralisation process and the involvement of the local and regional level in Romania's further approximation to the EU acquis. |
| --- | --- |

2.6

recommends the organisation as soon as possible of an external event in Romania, whose main themes would be the involvement of Romanian local and regional government in the work of the CoR, the decentralisation process and the reform of public administration. This event would serve as a response to the invitation received from Romanian local government associations and would be a concrete step to ensure CoR regular support to the Romanian local and regional authorities in both the further progress of the national decentralisation process and the involvement of the local and regional level in Romania's further approximation to the EU acquis.

Brussels, 6 July 2005.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 128, 29.5.2003, p. 53

1

(2)  OJ C 128, 29.5.2003, p. 56

2

(3)  CdR 5/2002 EN-LG/LA/fp.

3

(4)  COR Essex Seminar (5 November 2004), Lars Abel, The enlargement of the EU to Romania: The evolution of decentralisation.

4

The enlargement of the EU to Romania: The evolution of decentralisation.

(5)  Speech given at the Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, 28 February 2005.

5

(6)  The Constitution of Romania of 1991 revised in 2003, the framework-law no. 339/2004 on decentralisation, the law no. 340/2004 on the institution of prefect.

6

(7)  Romanian Government, Government Programme 2005-2008, December 2004.

7

Government Programme 2005-2008

(8)  Besides the EC report 2004, see also the last report of the Congress of local and regional authorities of Europe on the local and regional elections in Romania, held on 6 June 2004, which estimates an increase of the local elected politicians for the ex-ruling social democrat party from 27 % in 2000 to about 80 % in 2004, CG/Bur (11) 25 Strasbourg, 16 July 2004 .

8

(9)  Order of the President of the Competition Council NO 527/2004 (OJ No. 64/19.01.2005), No. 528/2004 (OJ No. 82/25.01.2005) and the adopted Guide for a more pro-active approach in the enforcement of competition rules No. 36/22.02.2005.

9

(10)  A synthesis of the Restructuring Strategy was published in the Official Gazette 127 of 9 February 2005.

10

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/19

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament: Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process

(2006/C 31/05)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament: Strategy Paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process (COM(2004) 657 final — SEC(2004) 1199, 1200);

Having regard to the European Commission's decision of 29 November 2004 to consult it in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to its Bureau's decision of 28 September 2004 to instruct the Commission for External Relations to draw up an opinion on the European Commission's strategy on progress in the enlargement process;

Having regard to the presidency conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 (No. 16238/04);

Having regard to the European Parliament resolution on Bulgaria's progress towards accession (COM(2004) 0657-I6-150/2004 — 2004/2183(INI));

Having regard to the CoR's political priorities for 2002-2006, in which European enlargement is seen as a unique event, which will ensure peace and stability and strengthen the integration process in Europe as a whole;

Having regard to its resolution of 13 February 2003 on the European Commission's work programme and the Committee of the Regions' priorities for 2003 (CdR 6/2003 fin (1));

Having regard to its opinion on the document Towards the enlarged Union — Strategy Paper and Report of the European Commission on the progress towards accession by each of the candidate countries and on the Report from the Commission to the Council: Explaining Europe's enlargement (CdR 325/2002 fin (2));

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission on the Action Plans for administrative and judicial capacity, and the monitoring of commitments made by the negotiating countries in the accession negotiations (CdR 244/2002 fin);

Having regard to the recommendation of its EU-Bulgaria JCC on Strengthening regional and local administrative capacities in the Republic of Bulgaria of 2 April 2004 (CdR 33/2004 fin);

Having regard to the declaration of cooperation signed with the National Association of Municipalities in the Republic of Bulgaria on 12 December 2001;

Having regard to the cooperation agreement between the National Association of Municipalities in the Republic of Bulgaria and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria signed on 11 December 2001;

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 497/2004 rev. 1) adopted on 26 April 2005 by the Commission for External Relations (rapporteur: Tilman Tögel (DE/PES), Member of the Saxony-Anhalt Landtag);

adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 6 July):

1.   Views of the Committee of the Regions

1.1   General comments on the enlargement process

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.1.1 | welcomes European enlargement which took place on 1 May 2004 with the accession of ten new Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.1

welcomes European enlargement which took place on 1 May 2004 with the accession of ten new Member States;

| 1.1.2 | emphasises the fact that Bulgaria and Romania are also part of the current enlargement process, even though accession will for various reasons only take place at a later date; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.2

emphasises the fact that Bulgaria and Romania are also part of the current enlargement process, even though accession will for various reasons only take place at a later date;

| 1.1.3 | welcomes the conclusions and recommendations submitted by the European Commission on 6 October 2004 to the Council and the European Parliament in its regular report and in the strategy paper on Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.3

welcomes the conclusions and recommendations submitted by the European Commission on 6 October 2004 to the Council and the European Parliament in its regular report and in the strategy paper on Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia;

| 1.1.4 | shares the view that Bulgaria and Romania will be capable of meeting commitments arising from EU membership and of fulfilling the Copenhagen political criteria, and also that they have functioning market economies; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.4

shares the view that Bulgaria and Romania will be capable of meeting commitments arising from EU membership and of fulfilling the Copenhagen political criteria, and also that they have functioning market economies;

| 1.1.5 | endorses the signing of the accession treaties with Bulgaria and Romania by the EU foreign ministers on 25 April 2005, thereby enabling these two countries to become members of the EU on 1 January 2007, provided that they have met all the conditions of accession by that date; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.5

endorses the signing of the accession treaties with Bulgaria and Romania by the EU foreign ministers on 25 April 2005, thereby enabling these two countries to become members of the EU on 1 January 2007, provided that they have met all the conditions of accession by that date;

| 1.1.6 | points out that the individual readiness of each applicant country for accession has been a basic and proven principle of previous enlargements; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.6

points out that the individual readiness of each applicant country for accession has been a basic and proven principle of previous enlargements;

| 1.1.7 | emphasises the need to intensively monitor the systematic implementation of commitments made by Bulgaria and Romania after the close of negotiations; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.7

emphasises the need to intensively monitor the systematic implementation of commitments made by Bulgaria and Romania after the close of negotiations;

| 1.1.8 | points out that the accession of Bulgaria and Romania can be postponed by a year if the requisite reforms, especially in the fields of justice, home affairs, administration and competition law, have not been completed; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.8

points out that the accession of Bulgaria and Romania can be postponed by a year if the requisite reforms, especially in the fields of justice, home affairs, administration and competition law, have not been completed;

| 1.1.9 | stresses that it can support Bulgarian and Romanian local and regional authorities in the pre-accession phase through intensive involvement of observers from the countries affiliated to it after the signing of the accession treaties; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.9

stresses that it can support Bulgarian and Romanian local and regional authorities in the pre-accession phase through intensive involvement of observers from the countries affiliated to it after the signing of the accession treaties;

| 1.1.10 | expresses its willingness to pursue an active information policy in order to secure broad support for Bulgarian and Romanian accession during the ratification process; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.10

expresses its willingness to pursue an active information policy in order to secure broad support for Bulgarian and Romanian accession during the ratification process;

| 1.1.11 | notes that this information policy should also include the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, given that this is an integral part of the Community acquis which will have to be ratified by Bulgaria and Romania in the course of accession, and considers that an information campaign should be launched at local and regional levels in both countries to explain the constitution to the public, in order to bring home to them what the values of the European Union are and how it works; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.11

notes that this information policy should also include the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, given that this is an integral part of the Community acquis which will have to be ratified by Bulgaria and Romania in the course of accession, and considers that an information campaign should be launched at local and regional levels in both countries to explain the constitution to the public, in order to bring home to them what the values of the European Union are and how it works;

| 1.1.12 | welcomes the presidency conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 on opening accession negotiations with Croatia, and notes that the commencement of accession negotiations has been postponed until such time as full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has been confirmed; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.12

welcomes the presidency conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 on opening accession negotiations with Croatia, and notes that the commencement of accession negotiations has been postponed until such time as full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has been confirmed;

| 1.1.13 | welcomes the presidency conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 on opening accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005, and stresses the need for these negotiations to be conducted without any preconceived views as to their outcome; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.13

welcomes the presidency conclusions of the European Council of 16 and 17 December 2004 on opening accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005, and stresses the need for these negotiations to be conducted without any preconceived views as to their outcome;

| 1.1.14 | envisages an opportunity for its members to support regional and local authorities in the applicant countries in their preparations for accession by entering into partnerships with them; |
| --- | --- |

1.1.14

envisages an opportunity for its members to support regional and local authorities in the applicant countries in their preparations for accession by entering into partnerships with them;

| 1.2 | Observations on the regular report on Bulgaria's progress on the road to accession SEC(2004)1199 |
| --- | --- |

1.2

Observations on the regular report on Bulgaria's progress on the road to accession SEC(2004)1199

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.2.1 | acknowledges Bulgaria's economic achievements in terms of overall economic stability, structural reform and economic growth, but is also aware of continuing problems with unemployment, which is still too high; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.1

acknowledges Bulgaria's economic achievements in terms of overall economic stability, structural reform and economic growth, but is also aware of continuing problems with unemployment, which is still too high;

| 1.2.2 | trusts that Bulgaria will continue its efforts to prepare for accession in the remaining period and, in this connection, will attach particular importance to making progress in the fields of justice, home affairs and administration as called for by the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.2

trusts that Bulgaria will continue its efforts to prepare for accession in the remaining period and, in this connection, will attach particular importance to making progress in the fields of justice, home affairs and administration as called for by the Commission;

| 1.2.3 | points out that the European Union is providing significant financial support in the form of pre-accession aid, which must also be used for capacity-building at local level, partly in order to support and speed up implementation of European cohesion policy; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.3

points out that the European Union is providing significant financial support in the form of pre-accession aid, which must also be used for capacity-building at local level, partly in order to support and speed up implementation of European cohesion policy;

| 1.2.4 | notes that, as things stand, conditions for regionalisation have improved considerably; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.4

notes that, as things stand, conditions for regionalisation have improved considerably;

| 1.2.5 | welcomes the adoption of the regional development act, which has laid the foundations for regional policy planning, and a more effective territorial structure, which has been achieved by dividing the country into NUTS 1 regions for statistical purposes; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.5

welcomes the adoption of the regional development act, which has laid the foundations for regional policy planning, and a more effective territorial structure, which has been achieved by dividing the country into NUTS 1 regions for statistical purposes;

| 1.2.6 | welcomes the current efforts by the government and parliament to reform public administration, and acknowledges the contribution this makes to more effective regional policy; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.6

welcomes the current efforts by the government and parliament to reform public administration, and acknowledges the contribution this makes to more effective regional policy;

| 1.2.7 | explicitly supports the ongoing reforms of public administration and the concomitant reforms of municipal administration, particularly the measures introduced through the amendment of the municipal property act to give municipalities greater responsibilities of their own, to boost their capacity, and to enhance their institutional and therefore their financial autonomy; |
| --- | --- |

1.2.7

explicitly supports the ongoing reforms of public administration and the concomitant reforms of municipal administration, particularly the measures introduced through the amendment of the municipal property act to give municipalities greater responsibilities of their own, to boost their capacity, and to enhance their institutional and therefore their financial autonomy;

| 1.2.8 | acknowledges that building up the capacities of local and regional authorities is a long-term process, which must regularly be supported by disseminating information, holding hearings and running tailor-made training programmes. |
| --- | --- |

1.2.8

acknowledges that building up the capacities of local and regional authorities is a long-term process, which must regularly be supported by disseminating information, holding hearings and running tailor-made training programmes.

2.   Recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | welcomes the conclusion of accession negotiations and the signing of the accession treaty between Bulgaria and the European Union, and recommends that all EU Member States ratify this treaty in good time so as to enable the EU to welcome Bulgaria as a full member on 1 January 2007; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

welcomes the conclusion of accession negotiations and the signing of the accession treaty between Bulgaria and the European Union, and recommends that all EU Member States ratify this treaty in good time so as to enable the EU to welcome Bulgaria as a full member on 1 January 2007;

| 2.2 | calls on Bulgaria to continue making productive efforts to support this reform process by amending the state property act accordingly, in order to reflect the subsidiarity principle even more closely; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

calls on Bulgaria to continue making productive efforts to support this reform process by amending the state property act accordingly, in order to reflect the subsidiarity principle even more closely;

| 2.3 | recommends that further steps be taken in the devolution process, and also notes that the transfer of powers from central to local-government or self-governing bodies should be seen not only as a transfer of rights and obligations but also as a transfer of facilities, funds and human resources; |
| --- | --- |

2.3

recommends that further steps be taken in the devolution process, and also notes that the transfer of powers from central to local-government or self-governing bodies should be seen not only as a transfer of rights and obligations but also as a transfer of facilities, funds and human resources;

| 2.4 | recommends that the discussion also be continued in the transition period on regional policy responsibilities in the Republic of Bulgaria and the endeavours to strengthen the position of local and regional authorities so that, by the time of accession, Bulgaria will be equipped with effective local administrative structures which are able to meet the demands of the single market; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

recommends that the discussion also be continued in the transition period on regional policy responsibilities in the Republic of Bulgaria and the endeavours to strengthen the position of local and regional authorities so that, by the time of accession, Bulgaria will be equipped with effective local administrative structures which are able to meet the demands of the single market;

| 2.5 | notes that strengthening the role and powers of local and regional authorities, for example in property allocation and administration, is essential for constructive cooperation between central and local authorities, thereby giving local authorities a more propitious point of departure from which to implement EU measures and to make use of Structural Funds; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

notes that strengthening the role and powers of local and regional authorities, for example in property allocation and administration, is essential for constructive cooperation between central and local authorities, thereby giving local authorities a more propitious point of departure from which to implement EU measures and to make use of Structural Funds;

| 2.6 | once again draws attention to the need to broaden local and regional authorities' decision-making powers in line with the subsidiarity principle and the principle of solidarity between central government and local and regional authorities, and also horizontally between regions and municipalities; |
| --- | --- |

2.6

once again draws attention to the need to broaden local and regional authorities' decision-making powers in line with the subsidiarity principle and the principle of solidarity between central government and local and regional authorities, and also horizontally between regions and municipalities;

| 2.7 | notes that the local authorities are much more called upon to create the requisite institutional framework for deployment of structural policy instruments; this especially applies to the setting up of administrative agencies or to implementation of the requisite institutional and/or organisational changes to ensure that local authorities are better prepared to make use of the Structural Funds; |
| --- | --- |

2.7

notes that the local authorities are much more called upon to create the requisite institutional framework for deployment of structural policy instruments; this especially applies to the setting up of administrative agencies or to implementation of the requisite institutional and/or organisational changes to ensure that local authorities are better prepared to make use of the Structural Funds;

| 2.8 | points out that with a view to the establishment of efficient regional and local self-government additional legal and organisational measures need to be taken to promote the appropriate use of local resources, earmarking sufficient funds for training programmes and for the transfer of competences through exchanges of good practice with EU Member State local and regional authorities and providing for effective incentives, and, moreover, given that local authorities' financial and economic autonomy is a basic cornerstone of self-government, recommends that particular attention be paid in this context to the safeguarding and improved management of network resources, facilities and services; |
| --- | --- |

2.8

points out that with a view to the establishment of efficient regional and local self-government additional legal and organisational measures need to be taken to promote the appropriate use of local resources, earmarking sufficient funds for training programmes and for the transfer of competences through exchanges of good practice with EU Member State local and regional authorities and providing for effective incentives, and, moreover, given that local authorities' financial and economic autonomy is a basic cornerstone of self-government, recommends that particular attention be paid in this context to the safeguarding and improved management of network resources, facilities and services;

| 2.9 | points out that, in their legislative activities, local and regional authorities and municipalities take care to ensure that EU rules already implemented under Bulgarian law at local and regional level are enforced, insofar as these rules fall within the remit of the authorities and municipalities concerned; this most definitely applies to EU rules in areas such as public procurement, the environment, competition and social policy; |
| --- | --- |

2.9

points out that, in their legislative activities, local and regional authorities and municipalities take care to ensure that EU rules already implemented under Bulgarian law at local and regional level are enforced, insofar as these rules fall within the remit of the authorities and municipalities concerned; this most definitely applies to EU rules in areas such as public procurement, the environment, competition and social policy;

| 2.10 | voices its concern that the problem of integrating the Roma population is still unresolved and that municipalities bear most of the responsibility for finding a long-term solution, and calls on local and regional authorities to work harder at making jobs in local administrative structures available to members of this population group, in keeping with the principle of equal opportunity; in doing so, it is important to avoid secondary discrimination within such structures (members of the Roma population helping one another out); |
| --- | --- |

2.10

voices its concern that the problem of integrating the Roma population is still unresolved and that municipalities bear most of the responsibility for finding a long-term solution, and calls on local and regional authorities to work harder at making jobs in local administrative structures available to members of this population group, in keeping with the principle of equal opportunity; in doing so, it is important to avoid secondary discrimination within such structures (members of the Roma population helping one another out);

| 2.11 | points out that self-government instruments should be used to speed up integration of the Roma population, with support for measures within the Roma communities to ensure that they are able to take over responsibilities in areas such as security and welfare; |
| --- | --- |

2.11

points out that self-government instruments should be used to speed up integration of the Roma population, with support for measures within the Roma communities to ensure that they are able to take over responsibilities in areas such as security and welfare;

| 2.12 | calls for the drafting and implementation of long-term programmes at municipal level to eliminate the problem of separate residential areas (ghettos), involving the release of land on which appropriate new housing for members of the Roma population group can be constructed with their involvement by means of public-private partnerships, and recommends greater EU commitment to such projects; |
| --- | --- |

2.12

calls for the drafting and implementation of long-term programmes at municipal level to eliminate the problem of separate residential areas (ghettos), involving the release of land on which appropriate new housing for members of the Roma population group can be constructed with their involvement by means of public-private partnerships, and recommends greater EU commitment to such projects;

| 2.13 | points out that the situation with regard to integration of mentally handicapped persons is far from satisfactory, and calls on municipal bodies to look into this problem and do what they can within their powers to try and find appropriate solutions; |
| --- | --- |

2.13

points out that the situation with regard to integration of mentally handicapped persons is far from satisfactory, and calls on municipal bodies to look into this problem and do what they can within their powers to try and find appropriate solutions;

| 2.14 | notes that, in the context of the ambitious schedule for the submission of its National Development Plan, Bulgaria has committed itself to giving local and regional authorities particular responsibility for establishing appropriate local and regional development plans; as well as helping to draw up a fitting National Development Plan, this will ensure that there is scope for appropriate involvement of local and regional authorities as equal partners in the implementation of the Structural Funds; |
| --- | --- |

2.14

notes that, in the context of the ambitious schedule for the submission of its National Development Plan, Bulgaria has committed itself to giving local and regional authorities particular responsibility for establishing appropriate local and regional development plans; as well as helping to draw up a fitting National Development Plan, this will ensure that there is scope for appropriate involvement of local and regional authorities as equal partners in the implementation of the Structural Funds;

| 2.15 | also notes that special attention must be paid to the application of the partnership principle, i.e. to the closer involvement in this process of the regional, social and non-governmental partners concerned; |
| --- | --- |

2.15

also notes that special attention must be paid to the application of the partnership principle, i.e. to the closer involvement in this process of the regional, social and non-governmental partners concerned;

| 2.16 | recommends that aid from the pre-accession funds be made available for the development of administrative structures and capacities, and suggests that, when making this funding available, due account should be taken of the importance of local and regional authorities in implementing Structural Fund programmes and other regional development initiatives; |
| --- | --- |

2.16

recommends that aid from the pre-accession funds be made available for the development of administrative structures and capacities, and suggests that, when making this funding available, due account should be taken of the importance of local and regional authorities in implementing Structural Fund programmes and other regional development initiatives;

| 2.17 | emphasises that the constructive exchange of experience under the existing partnership agreements between Bulgaria and the EU Member States provides a basis for the effective deployment of the Structural Funds at regional level; |
| --- | --- |

2.17

emphasises that the constructive exchange of experience under the existing partnership agreements between Bulgaria and the EU Member States provides a basis for the effective deployment of the Structural Funds at regional level;

| 2.18 | also notes that existing direct partnership agreements between individual regions in the Member States and in Bulgaria provide a vehicle not only for exchanging information and experience, but also for direct cooperation, or the provision of human and material resources to help Bulgarian local and regional authorities; there should be stronger support for such a vehicle, which should be used to help achieve the recommendations put forward here; |
| --- | --- |

2.18

also notes that existing direct partnership agreements between individual regions in the Member States and in Bulgaria provide a vehicle not only for exchanging information and experience, but also for direct cooperation, or the provision of human and material resources to help Bulgarian local and regional authorities; there should be stronger support for such a vehicle, which should be used to help achieve the recommendations put forward here;

| 2.19 | points out that continued success in the fight against corruption is vital in order to boost the trustworthiness of local and regional authorities in the public eye, in the eyes of Bulgaria's EU partners and in the eyes of investors and the business community; |
| --- | --- |

2.19

points out that continued success in the fight against corruption is vital in order to boost the trustworthiness of local and regional authorities in the public eye, in the eyes of Bulgaria's EU partners and in the eyes of investors and the business community;

| 2.20 | in view of increasingly frequent reports of criminal proceedings involving local and regional politicians, recommends vigorous application of measures to eliminate the causes of corruption; this will require measures to improve financial administration and auditing, bearing in mind that, while separation of these two activities is very important, it is not the only option available. |
| --- | --- |

2.20

in view of increasingly frequent reports of criminal proceedings involving local and regional politicians, recommends vigorous application of measures to eliminate the causes of corruption; this will require measures to improve financial administration and auditing, bearing in mind that, while separation of these two activities is very important, it is not the only option available.

Brussels, 6 July 2005.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 128, 29.5.2003, p. 53

1

(2)  OJ C 128, 29.5.2003, p. 56

2

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/23

---

Own-initiative opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Draft Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports

(2006/C 31/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the decision of its Bureau of 22 February 2005, under the fifth paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to instruct its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy to draw up an own-initiative opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the draft guidelines of the European Commission on financing of airports and start up aid to airlines departing from regional airports;

Having regard to its outlook opinion of 2 July 2003 on The capacity of regional airports (CdR 393/2002 fin) (1);

Having regard to its opinion on the Commission report on Better Lawmaking 2002 and the Commission Communication on Updating and simplifying the Community acquis (CdR 62/2003 fin) (2);

Having regard to its own initiative opinion on Low cost airlines and territorial development (CdR 63/2004 fin) (3);

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 76/2005 rev. 1) adopted on 29 April 2005 by its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (Rapporteur: Cllr Gordon Keymer CBE, Leader of Tandridge District Council (UK/EPP);

Whereas:

| 1) | the continued vitality of regional airports has a clear and significant impact on regional development and territorial cohesion: they facilitate region-to-region connection; support citizens' mobility; encourage economic development and employment growth; promote tourism; and promote the regeneration of peripheral and less-developed regions in particular. |
| --- | --- |

1)

the continued vitality of regional airports has a clear and significant impact on regional development and territorial cohesion: they facilitate region-to-region connection; support citizens' mobility; encourage economic development and employment growth; promote tourism; and promote the regeneration of peripheral and less-developed regions in particular.

| 2) | the attempt by the European Commission to tackle the current problem of uncertainty and confusion on the issue of state aids in the aviation sector is welcome. |
| --- | --- |

2)

the attempt by the European Commission to tackle the current problem of uncertainty and confusion on the issue of state aids in the aviation sector is welcome.

| 3) | the guidelines will have significant effect on the ability of public authorities to give aid to regional airports having the objective of promoting territorial cohesion of the EU. Given the importance of this aspect, and that the ‘guidelines’ appear to have the effect of a formal regulation, the Council and Parliament should be consulted. |
| --- | --- |

3)

the guidelines will have significant effect on the ability of public authorities to give aid to regional airports having the objective of promoting territorial cohesion of the EU. Given the importance of this aspect, and that the ‘guidelines’ appear to have the effect of a formal regulation, the Council and Parliament should be consulted.

| 4) | there is an ongoing legal challenge in the Ryanair/Charleroi case, leading to concern that the guidelines could be contradicted by the outcome of this case causing further confusion and lack of clarity. It is not clear whether the Commission seeks to limit state aid or simply render it more transparent. The use of Article 19(2) Regulation 659/1999 does not appear appropriate to enforce these guidelines and the Commission needs to justify and give precedents for its use in this case. |
| --- | --- |

4)

there is an ongoing legal challenge in the Ryanair/Charleroi case, leading to concern that the guidelines could be contradicted by the outcome of this case causing further confusion and lack of clarity. It is not clear whether the Commission seeks to limit state aid or simply render it more transparent. The use of Article 19(2) Regulation 659/1999 does not appear appropriate to enforce these guidelines and the Commission needs to justify and give precedents for its use in this case.

| 5) | there is only one reference in the guidelines to the Market Economy Investor Principle (MEIP). This principle is intended to judge the actions of public authorities against the likely decision that would have been taken by a ‘rational’ private investor. On this basis, only public funding in excess of what a private operator might have invested could be deemed state aid, and even then public service obligations might justify that additional investment (e.g. to link an island with the mainland, even if that route is operated at a loss). |
| --- | --- |

5)

there is only one reference in the guidelines to the Market Economy Investor Principle (MEIP). This principle is intended to judge the actions of public authorities against the likely decision that would have been taken by a ‘rational’ private investor. On this basis, only public funding in excess of what a private operator might have invested could be deemed state aid, and even then public service obligations might justify that additional investment (e.g. to link an island with the mainland, even if that route is operated at a loss).

| 6) | the time limit for start-up aid to new routes is set at 3 years, or 5 years in the case of small or peripheral airports. This is not justified in the guidelines and is of a shorter duration than most business plans and regional economic development plans. However, no-one would advocate subventions for an unlimited period. A reasonable compromise would seem to be to provide for an automatic review. Similarly, setting the maximum intensity of state aid at 50 % appears to be fairly arbitrary, and higher levels might be warranted in some cases. |
| --- | --- |

6)

the time limit for start-up aid to new routes is set at 3 years, or 5 years in the case of small or peripheral airports. This is not justified in the guidelines and is of a shorter duration than most business plans and regional economic development plans. However, no-one would advocate subventions for an unlimited period. A reasonable compromise would seem to be to provide for an automatic review. Similarly, setting the maximum intensity of state aid at 50 % appears to be fairly arbitrary, and higher levels might be warranted in some cases.

| 7) | the draft guidelines allow the first entrant on a new route to exclude any potential competitors on that route for five years, irrespective of whether subsequent entrants could offer a better, more frequent or lower cost service. |
| --- | --- |

7)

the draft guidelines allow the first entrant on a new route to exclude any potential competitors on that route for five years, irrespective of whether subsequent entrants could offer a better, more frequent or lower cost service.

| 8) | the prohibition on state aid for new routes where a similar route exists from another airport within the same ‘economic attraction zone’ or population centre, would seem designed to protect existing operators and airports (notably national airlines and major hub airports) from competition by lower-cost airlines operating out of smaller airports within the region. |
| --- | --- |

8)

the prohibition on state aid for new routes where a similar route exists from another airport within the same ‘economic attraction zone’ or population centre, would seem designed to protect existing operators and airports (notably national airlines and major hub airports) from competition by lower-cost airlines operating out of smaller airports within the region.

| 9) | small airports have limited administrative capacity. The imposition of the full panoply of EU notification procedures on these airports will impose a bureaucratic burden out of all proportion to the impact on the internal market. It should be possible to pursue the de minimis principle by which aid under a certain value, or routes operating under a certain volume threshold need not be reported. There are some regional schemes (e.g. Scotland) where a single notification could be submitted on behalf of all of the airports within the scheme. |
| --- | --- |

9)

small airports have limited administrative capacity. The imposition of the full panoply of EU notification procedures on these airports will impose a bureaucratic burden out of all proportion to the impact on the internal market. It should be possible to pursue the de minimis principle by which aid under a certain value, or routes operating under a certain volume threshold need not be reported. There are some regional schemes (e.g. Scotland) where a single notification could be submitted on behalf of all of the airports within the scheme.

| 10) | in summary, the guidelines must be as flexible as possible and be able to deal with state aid on its merits and on a case by case basis if regional airports and regional airlines are to help create a competitive and cohesive European Union, free of excessive red tape. |
| --- | --- |

10)

in summary, the guidelines must be as flexible as possible and be able to deal with state aid on its merits and on a case by case basis if regional airports and regional airlines are to help create a competitive and cohesive European Union, free of excessive red tape.

| 11) | the guidelines do not constitute a breach of the subsidiarity principle, although there is concern that in some respects the freedom of local and regional authorities to promote regional airports is diminished. |
| --- | --- |

11)

the guidelines do not constitute a breach of the subsidiarity principle, although there is concern that in some respects the freedom of local and regional authorities to promote regional airports is diminished.

adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session of 6-7 July 2005 (meeting of 7 July):

The Committee of the Regions' Recommendations

The Committee of the Regions

| 1. | requests that the views of the Council and European Parliament be sought by the Commission before a decision is taken and that an impact assessment be undertaken; |
| --- | --- |

1.

requests that the views of the Council and European Parliament be sought by the Commission before a decision is taken and that an impact assessment be undertaken;

| 2. | proposes that the Commission should suspend drafting its guidelines pending outcome of the appeal in the Ryanair/Charleroi case in the Court of Justice in order to avoid possible contradiction between the new guidelines and the legal judgement that is awaited; recommends that the guidelines be reviewed two years after entry into force; |
| --- | --- |

2.

proposes that the Commission should suspend drafting its guidelines pending outcome of the appeal in the Ryanair/Charleroi case in the Court of Justice in order to avoid possible contradiction between the new guidelines and the legal judgement that is awaited; recommends that the guidelines be reviewed two years after entry into force;

| 3. | advocates that only aid given by a public authority (based on the ‘single till’ principle) in excess of that which would have been given by a private investor should be regarded as non-permissible state aid (Market Economy Investor Principle); similarly, proposes that public airports should be able to incur early year losses in the same way as private airports; |
| --- | --- |

3.

advocates that only aid given by a public authority (based on the ‘single till’ principle) in excess of that which would have been given by a private investor should be regarded as non-permissible state aid (Market Economy Investor Principle); similarly, proposes that public airports should be able to incur early year losses in the same way as private airports;

| 4. | proposes that there should be an automatic review of state aid to new routes after the 3/5 year limit has elapsed, with the possibility of an extension (again time-limited) with the possibility of further extensions, in all instances to be judged on a case-by-case basis; |
| --- | --- |

4.

proposes that there should be an automatic review of state aid to new routes after the 3/5 year limit has elapsed, with the possibility of an extension (again time-limited) with the possibility of further extensions, in all instances to be judged on a case-by-case basis;

| 5. | rejects the proposal that the first entrant on a new route can in effect ‘freeze’ the route by excluding potential competitors for up to five years; |
| --- | --- |

5.

rejects the proposal that the first entrant on a new route can in effect ‘freeze’ the route by excluding potential competitors for up to five years;

| 6. | rejects the prohibition on state aid for new routes where a similar route exists from another airport (e.g. a major hub airport) within the same ‘economic attraction zone’; proposes that the concept of ‘economic attraction zone’ be clarified; |
| --- | --- |

6.

rejects the prohibition on state aid for new routes where a similar route exists from another airport (e.g. a major hub airport) within the same ‘economic attraction zone’; proposes that the concept of ‘economic attraction zone’ be clarified;

| 7. | proposes that Category C and D airports be excluded from the notification requirements; if only Category D airports are excluded then it should include airports with up to 2 million passengers per year. Point 92(c) of the guidelines should make explicit reference to the particular territorial cohesion needs of Category C and D airports in island regions; |
| --- | --- |

7.

proposes that Category C and D airports be excluded from the notification requirements; if only Category D airports are excluded then it should include airports with up to 2 million passengers per year. Point 92(c) of the guidelines should make explicit reference to the particular territorial cohesion needs of Category C and D airports in island regions;

| 8. | recommends a general application of the principles of de minimis and of ‘silent approval’ throughout the guidelines, including the practice of single notification for regional schemes covering several airports. |
| --- | --- |

8.

recommends a general application of the principles of de minimis and of ‘silent approval’ throughout the guidelines, including the practice of single notification for regional schemes covering several airports.

Brussels, 7 July 2005

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 256 of 24.10.2003 p. 47.

1

(2)  OJ C 73 of 23.3.2004, p. 38.

2

(3)  OJ C 318 of 22.12.2004, p. 7.

3

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/25

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Revision of the guidelines for regional State aids

(2006/C 31/07)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the decision of the European Parliament of 21 April 2005 to consult it on the ‘Revision of the guidelines for regional State aids’, under the article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its President of 19 May 2005 to instruct its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the non-paper consultation document from the European Commission DG Competition on the review of the Guidelines for regional aid;

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission — Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (COM (2004) 107 final);

Having regard to the Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund, COM(2004) 492 final — 2004/0163 (AVC) and the other proposals for regulations of the European Commission concerning the Cohesion Fund, COM(2004) 494 final — 2004/0166 (AVC) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), COM(2004) 495 final — 2004/0167 (COD);

Having regard to its opinion on The Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (CdR 120/2004 fin) (1);

Having regard to its opinion on Building our common Future Policy challenges and Budgetary means of the Enlarged Union 2007-2013 (CdR 162/2004 fin);

Having regard to the conclusions of the Barcelona and Gothenburg European Councils, in which the Member States agree on the compromise to reduce the level of state aids in the European Union, orientating them to subjects of common interest, including economic and social cohesion;

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 77/2005 rev. 1) adopted on 29 April 2005 by its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (rapporteur: Mr Vicente Alvarez Areces, President of the Principality of Asturias (ES/PES));

Whereas:

| 1) | Article 158 of the EC Treaty defines the cohesion objective as follows: ‘In order to promote its overall harmonious development, the Community shall develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic and social cohesion’. Article III-220 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe adds the territorial dimension to this objective; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Article 158 of the EC Treaty defines the cohesion objective as follows: ‘In order to promote its overall harmonious development, the Community shall develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic and social cohesion’. Article III-220 of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe adds the territorial dimension to this objective;

| 2) | although the EC Treaty generally sees state aid as distorting competition (2) regional aid is justified in the case of certain regions where its specific objective is to develop these regions (3); |
| --- | --- |

2)

although the EC Treaty generally sees state aid as distorting competition (2) regional aid is justified in the case of certain regions where its specific objective is to develop these regions (3);

| 3) | the existence of a regulatory framework for regional state aid can be instrumental in the redistribution of income and wealth within the EU as part of the European economic and social project and thus build a stronger foundation for sustained economic growth; |
| --- | --- |

3)

the existence of a regulatory framework for regional state aid can be instrumental in the redistribution of income and wealth within the EU as part of the European economic and social project and thus build a stronger foundation for sustained economic growth;

| 4) | regional aid is one of the factors influencing investment location, and the phenomenon of relocation is emerging in the European internal market and globally; assistance from public authorities through state aid should be examined from two perspectives: in a European context and with reference to the phenomenon of globalisation; |
| --- | --- |

4)

regional aid is one of the factors influencing investment location, and the phenomenon of relocation is emerging in the European internal market and globally; assistance from public authorities through state aid should be examined from two perspectives: in a European context and with reference to the phenomenon of globalisation;

| 5) | regional aid can be a useful instrument in achieving the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy, in contributing to the balanced development of industrial policy throughout the EU and achieving sustainable growth with the creation of high-quality jobs; |
| --- | --- |

5)

regional aid can be a useful instrument in achieving the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy, in contributing to the balanced development of industrial policy throughout the EU and achieving sustainable growth with the creation of high-quality jobs;

adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session of 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 7 July):

I.   The Committee of the Regions' views

1.   General comments

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.1 | believes that, as regards compliance with the economic, social and territorial cohesion objectives laid down in Article 158 of the EC Treaty, state regional aid is an instrument that can be used by public authorities to develop their economic and business policy. This recognised capacity of public authorities should be coordinated so as to avoid increasing the imbalances between countries and regions; |
| --- | --- |

1.1

believes that, as regards compliance with the economic, social and territorial cohesion objectives laid down in Article 158 of the EC Treaty, state regional aid is an instrument that can be used by public authorities to develop their economic and business policy. This recognised capacity of public authorities should be coordinated so as to avoid increasing the imbalances between countries and regions;

| 1.2 | considers that better targeted state aid should have three clear objectives:






  a. | to offset market failures while at the same time not distorting competition; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.2

considers that better targeted state aid should have three clear objectives:

a.

to offset market failures while at the same time not distorting competition;

| b. | to help reduce imbalances between areas; |
| --- | --- |

b.

to help reduce imbalances between areas;

| c. | to boost the competitiveness of businesses and areas. |
| --- | --- |

c.

to boost the competitiveness of businesses and areas.

While regional aid has proved effective for the first and second of the above objectives, as shown by the studies available to the European Commission, the third objective might require more selective aid, such as horizontal aid (R+D, environment, training, employment, SMEs, etc). However, all these kinds of aid should be coordinated in terms of their aims and operation, and should be geared towards achieving the cohesion objectives throughout the EU;

| 1.3 | believes that all aid granted for a certain area should form part of strategic regional development plans in which those projects that clearly promote regional development are prioritised. This aid, together with other economic and business-related factors, has an influence on the location of companies and the improvement of regional competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

1.3

believes that all aid granted for a certain area should form part of strategic regional development plans in which those projects that clearly promote regional development are prioritised. This aid, together with other economic and business-related factors, has an influence on the location of companies and the improvement of regional competitiveness;

| 1.4 | takes the view that cohesion policy has obtained positive results in recent years, and that the guidelines on state regional aid, along with the guidelines on multi-sectoral aid for major investment projects, have helped meet the objectives of European regional policy. Therefore, the European Commission's role in monitoring the aid granted by state authorities is very important for less prosperous regions; |
| --- | --- |

1.4

takes the view that cohesion policy has obtained positive results in recent years, and that the guidelines on state regional aid, along with the guidelines on multi-sectoral aid for major investment projects, have helped meet the objectives of European regional policy. Therefore, the European Commission's role in monitoring the aid granted by state authorities is very important for less prosperous regions;

| 1.5 | considers that, in order to achieve balanced development between the different areas of the EU, it should be noted that European regions can be divided into two groups according to the two main problems they face:






  — | regions that have particular difficulties achieving economic development and the convergence objective at European level; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.5

considers that, in order to achieve balanced development between the different areas of the EU, it should be noted that European regions can be divided into two groups according to the two main problems they face:

—

regions that have particular difficulties achieving economic development and the convergence objective at European level;

| — | regions with greater income and wealth than the above regions, that need to increase their competitive ability both in relation to more competitive regions of Europe and on a global level. |
| --- | --- |

—

regions with greater income and wealth than the above regions, that need to increase their competitive ability both in relation to more competitive regions of Europe and on a global level.

a)   Assessment of state aid in recent years

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.6 | takes note that various studies have shown that, in recent years, the volume of aid has tended to fall in less developed regions, while more competitive regions are increasing support to their businesses, through the development of different state aid schemes on the basis of the various derogations contained in the EC Treaty. This has had undesired effects, such as a notable drop in the effectiveness of regional aid, and an increase in the overall volume of public expenditure on state aid at Community level. |
| --- | --- |

1.6

takes note that various studies have shown that, in recent years, the volume of aid has tended to fall in less developed regions, while more competitive regions are increasing support to their businesses, through the development of different state aid schemes on the basis of the various derogations contained in the EC Treaty. This has had undesired effects, such as a notable drop in the effectiveness of regional aid, and an increase in the overall volume of public expenditure on state aid at Community level.

b)   Rules

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.7 | supports the general principles adopted by the Commission in the reform of the regional state aid guidelines, namely:






  — | concentration on the poorest regions (in an EU25); |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.7

supports the general principles adopted by the Commission in the reform of the regional state aid guidelines, namely:

—

concentration on the poorest regions (in an EU25);

| — | competitiveness of all regions, in line with the revitalised Lisbon Strategy; |
| --- | --- |

—

competitiveness of all regions, in line with the revitalised Lisbon Strategy;

| — | continuity, with a smooth transition from the current to the new regime; |
| --- | --- |

—

continuity, with a smooth transition from the current to the new regime;

But would like to include another principle, that of:

| — | complementarity with the future Structural Fund programmes; |
| --- | --- |

—

complementarity with the future Structural Fund programmes;

| 1.8 | believes that the regional aid guidelines provide a framework of rules for coordinating other rules on horizontal and sectoral aid, and serve as a point of reference in response to the various questions often raised by the application of rules on state aid. Revision of other state aid instruments must be carried out with a view to helping achieve the cohesion objective and contributing to a lower overall level of state aid at Community level, as called for in the conclusions of the Stockholm and Barcelona European Councils; |
| --- | --- |

1.8

believes that the regional aid guidelines provide a framework of rules for coordinating other rules on horizontal and sectoral aid, and serve as a point of reference in response to the various questions often raised by the application of rules on state aid. Revision of other state aid instruments must be carried out with a view to helping achieve the cohesion objective and contributing to a lower overall level of state aid at Community level, as called for in the conclusions of the Stockholm and Barcelona European Councils;

| 1.9 | considers that the Commission's proposal to incorporate the new regional aid guidelines within a regulation on exemption from notification could serve to clarify and simplify rules on state aid as desired; recommends, however, that the new rules should clearly set out the criteria, requirements and limits applicable to fundable investments; |
| --- | --- |

1.9

considers that the Commission's proposal to incorporate the new regional aid guidelines within a regulation on exemption from notification could serve to clarify and simplify rules on state aid as desired; recommends, however, that the new rules should clearly set out the criteria, requirements and limits applicable to fundable investments;

| 1.10 | believes that the proposal to incorporate the EU guidelines on multi-sectoral aid for major investment projects into the guidelines on regional aid could help simplify the applicable rules. |
| --- | --- |

1.10

believes that the proposal to incorporate the EU guidelines on multi-sectoral aid for major investment projects into the guidelines on regional aid could help simplify the applicable rules.

c)   New thresholds provided for by the Commission proposal

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.11 | draws attention to the Commission's proposal for maximum aid thresholds, based on the commitment made by Member States at the European Councils of Stockholm and Barcelona; believes, however, that the proposal for the general reduction of maximum aid thresholds set out by the Commission in its consultative documents may not be compatible — particularly in some regions — with the ambitious objectives of the Lisbon Strategy and the efforts required in terms of cohesion, due to the effects of enlargement; considers that the goal of reducing the overall level of aid could be reached in a way that coincides more closely with the European political project, by reorienting aid towards more selective horizontal cohesion criteria, as established by the European Councils; |
| --- | --- |

1.11

draws attention to the Commission's proposal for maximum aid thresholds, based on the commitment made by Member States at the European Councils of Stockholm and Barcelona; believes, however, that the proposal for the general reduction of maximum aid thresholds set out by the Commission in its consultative documents may not be compatible — particularly in some regions — with the ambitious objectives of the Lisbon Strategy and the efforts required in terms of cohesion, due to the effects of enlargement; considers that the goal of reducing the overall level of aid could be reached in a way that coincides more closely with the European political project, by reorienting aid towards more selective horizontal cohesion criteria, as established by the European Councils;

| 1.12 | believes that the reduction of maximum aid thresholds should be graded, taking account of various criteria affecting regional economic development; |
| --- | --- |

1.12

believes that the reduction of maximum aid thresholds should be graded, taking account of various criteria affecting regional economic development;

| 1.13 | considers that the Commission should provide transitional measures for state regional aid, consistent with the regions' new economic situation and the new objectives of the European cohesion policy. Thus, those regions in transition from one status to another would experience a gradual reduction in aid that would help to ease their loss of entitlement to use state aid as an instrument of regional development policy; |
| --- | --- |

1.13

considers that the Commission should provide transitional measures for state regional aid, consistent with the regions' new economic situation and the new objectives of the European cohesion policy. Thus, those regions in transition from one status to another would experience a gradual reduction in aid that would help to ease their loss of entitlement to use state aid as an instrument of regional development policy;

| 1.14 | considers that economic, social and territorial cohesion throughout the EU can only be achieved if different situations are dealt with in different ways. In this context, regional aid could help to compensate for unfavourable situations suffered by certain areas of Europe. |
| --- | --- |

1.14

considers that economic, social and territorial cohesion throughout the EU can only be achieved if different situations are dealt with in different ways. In this context, regional aid could help to compensate for unfavourable situations suffered by certain areas of Europe.

Indicators:

| 1.15 | highlights the fact that the Commission is maintaining the classification of regions given in Article 87(3)(a) TEC, based on gross domestic product as a way of harmonising criteria and maps with the Structural Funds allocation criteria; |
| --- | --- |

1.15

highlights the fact that the Commission is maintaining the classification of regions given in Article 87(3)(a) TEC, based on gross domestic product as a way of harmonising criteria and maps with the Structural Funds allocation criteria;

| 1.16 | believes that unassisted regions should be classified according to their competitiveness. In order to determine their level of competitiveness, indicators other than the traditionally used GDP could be applied. If this is not more in keeping with the literal wording of Article 87 of the EC Treaty and with the aims of European cohesion policy, it is suggested that the regional employment rate might also be included as a reference indicator. It should be borne in mind, in this regard, that the indicator set as an objective under the Lisbon agreements is the employment rate. However, the Commission could consider the application of other indicators, such as the unemployment rate, population ageing and R&D capacity; |
| --- | --- |

1.16

believes that unassisted regions should be classified according to their competitiveness. In order to determine their level of competitiveness, indicators other than the traditionally used GDP could be applied. If this is not more in keeping with the literal wording of Article 87 of the EC Treaty and with the aims of European cohesion policy, it is suggested that the regional employment rate might also be included as a reference indicator. It should be borne in mind, in this regard, that the indicator set as an objective under the Lisbon agreements is the employment rate. However, the Commission could consider the application of other indicators, such as the unemployment rate, population ageing and R&D capacity;

Net/gross grant:

| 1.17 | believes that the Commission's proposal to base maximum aid percentages in terms of gross grant (unlike the previous period in which the different taxation systems were taken into account via the net grant equivalent (NGE) formula) will, rather than reducing the overall volume of aid as the Commission states, increase the differences between aid that can be received by companies, taking account not of cohesion criteria but the taxation systems in different countries. Here, it should be noted that tax burdens vary greatly between the EU 25 countries; |
| --- | --- |

1.17

believes that the Commission's proposal to base maximum aid percentages in terms of gross grant (unlike the previous period in which the different taxation systems were taken into account via the net grant equivalent (NGE) formula) will, rather than reducing the overall volume of aid as the Commission states, increase the differences between aid that can be received by companies, taking account not of cohesion criteria but the taxation systems in different countries. Here, it should be noted that tax burdens vary greatly between the EU 25 countries;

| 1.18 | considers that simplification is not in itself sufficient reason for eliminating the NGE calculation. This calculation is obtained by applying a formula, frequently used during the current programming period, which does not significantly complicate aid management. Moreover, the NGE formula should be used in order to calculate the real impact of state aid on regional development. |
| --- | --- |

1.18

considers that simplification is not in itself sufficient reason for eliminating the NGE calculation. This calculation is obtained by applying a formula, frequently used during the current programming period, which does not significantly complicate aid management. Moreover, the NGE formula should be used in order to calculate the real impact of state aid on regional development.

2.   Areas that could be covered by the exception under Article 87(3)(a) TEC

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | notes that the Commission is proposing to reduce maximum aid ceilings and differentiate according to three per capita GDP categories, with bonuses for small and medium-sized enterprises; proposes that this provision be revised so that the overall reduction of state aid be achieved by gearing aid towards more selective (horizontal and cohesion-related) criteria rather than by lowering the maximum aid ceilings; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

notes that the Commission is proposing to reduce maximum aid ceilings and differentiate according to three per capita GDP categories, with bonuses for small and medium-sized enterprises; proposes that this provision be revised so that the overall reduction of state aid be achieved by gearing aid towards more selective (horizontal and cohesion-related) criteria rather than by lowering the maximum aid ceilings;

| 2.2 | proposes giving particular consideration to these various situations requiring special attention; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

proposes giving particular consideration to these various situations requiring special attention;

| 2.3 | congratulates the Commission on the treatment granted to the outermost regions, in line with the provisions of the Constitutional Treaty — inclusion in Article 87(3)(a); |
| --- | --- |

2.3

congratulates the Commission on the treatment granted to the outermost regions, in line with the provisions of the Constitutional Treaty — inclusion in Article 87(3)(a);

| 2.4 | notes, however, that the Commission has not given specific consideration to the situation of regions such as island and upland regions, regions with low population density, rural or border regions or those affected by regional change, whose structural conditions hamper their development; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

notes, however, that the Commission has not given specific consideration to the situation of regions such as island and upland regions, regions with low population density, rural or border regions or those affected by regional change, whose structural conditions hamper their development;

| 2.5 | points out that the regions suffering from the statistical effects of enlargement be included under Article 87(3)(a) for the duration of the programming period (4); recalls that the Convergence objective of the Commission's new cohesion policy is aimed at less developed States and regions, including regions affected by the statistical effects of enlargement; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

points out that the regions suffering from the statistical effects of enlargement be included under Article 87(3)(a) for the duration of the programming period (4); recalls that the Convergence objective of the Commission's new cohesion policy is aimed at less developed States and regions, including regions affected by the statistical effects of enlargement;

| 2.6 | believes that the threshold of 75 % of per capita GDP should be waived, in relation to state aid, for regions suffering from the statistical effect, in the same way as Article 5 of the draft regulation does with regard to the general provisions of the Structural Funds; This would produce an exact match between the convergence objective, as set out in the Commission's legislative proposals, and the map of aid for regional purposes, in which the ‘statistical effect’ regions would only be distinguished from other convergence objective regions by the lower intensity of aid, in keeping with the smaller Structural Funds allocations they would receive; |
| --- | --- |

2.6

believes that the threshold of 75 % of per capita GDP should be waived, in relation to state aid, for regions suffering from the statistical effect, in the same way as Article 5 of the draft regulation does with regard to the general provisions of the Structural Funds; This would produce an exact match between the convergence objective, as set out in the Commission's legislative proposals, and the map of aid for regional purposes, in which the ‘statistical effect’ regions would only be distinguished from other convergence objective regions by the lower intensity of aid, in keeping with the smaller Structural Funds allocations they would receive;

| 2.7 | otherwise, these regions would be further penalised, since the effects of inclusion among regions classified under Article 87(3)(c) or (a) are not, under the present rules governing state aid, restricted only to the aid percentage ceiling, as indicated in point 2.12 below. It would also entail problems of integration into the design of the Structural Funds' convergence objective intervention methods, by including regions with aid regimes covered by different paragraphs of Treaty Article 87. |
| --- | --- |

2.7

otherwise, these regions would be further penalised, since the effects of inclusion among regions classified under Article 87(3)(c) or (a) are not, under the present rules governing state aid, restricted only to the aid percentage ceiling, as indicated in point 2.12 below. It would also entail problems of integration into the design of the Structural Funds' convergence objective intervention methods, by including regions with aid regimes covered by different paragraphs of Treaty Article 87.

a)   Bonuses for certain regions:

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.8 | believes that, bonuses should also be considered for other regions suffering from natural, geographic or demographic handicaps:






  — | rural areas; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.8

believes that, bonuses should also be considered for other regions suffering from natural, geographic or demographic handicaps:

—

rural areas;

| — | areas affected by industrial transition; |
| --- | --- |

—

areas affected by industrial transition;

| — | regions which suffer from severe or permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as:






  — | the northernmost regions with very low population density; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

regions which suffer from severe or permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as:

—

the northernmost regions with very low population density;

| — | island regions; |
| --- | --- |

—

island regions;

| — | border regions; |
| --- | --- |

—

border regions;

| — | upland regions. |
| --- | --- |

—

upland regions.

b)   Operating aid:

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.9 | points out that the current regional aid guidelines state that ‘In exceptional cases, such aid may not be enough to trigger a process of regional development, if the structural handicaps of the region concerned are too great. Only in such cases may regional aid be supplemented by operating aid’ (5); |
| --- | --- |

2.9

points out that the current regional aid guidelines state that ‘In exceptional cases, such aid may not be enough to trigger a process of regional development, if the structural handicaps of the region concerned are too great. Only in such cases may regional aid be supplemented by operating aid’ (5);

| 2.10 | recalls that the circumstances that must be evaluated in order to determine whether structural handicaps are ‘too great’ are referred to in Article III-220 of the Constitutional Treaty; |
| --- | --- |

2.10

recalls that the circumstances that must be evaluated in order to determine whether structural handicaps are ‘too great’ are referred to in Article III-220 of the Constitutional Treaty;

| 2.11 | notes that the proposal for new regional aid guidelines exempts the outermost regions and regions with low population density from the general prohibition on operating aid. However, no mention is made of other clear structural handicaps, such as those suffered by island, border or upland regions. In the case of regions with permanent handicaps, it would make sense not to demand that operating aid be degressive and temporary. |
| --- | --- |

2.11

notes that the proposal for new regional aid guidelines exempts the outermost regions and regions with low population density from the general prohibition on operating aid. However, no mention is made of other clear structural handicaps, such as those suffered by island, border or upland regions. In the case of regions with permanent handicaps, it would make sense not to demand that operating aid be degressive and temporary.

c)   Other consequences for regions no longer classified under Article 87(3)(a)

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.12 | stresses the fact that, by no longer classifying regions under Article 87(3)(a), not only will aid percentages be reduced, but percentage bonuses will also be lost in various horizontal or sectoral frameworks, and exemptions from certain prohibitions or limitations will be lost, such as for operating aid, aid to companies in difficulty, ad hoc aid, etc.; |
| --- | --- |

2.12

stresses the fact that, by no longer classifying regions under Article 87(3)(a), not only will aid percentages be reduced, but percentage bonuses will also be lost in various horizontal or sectoral frameworks, and exemptions from certain prohibitions or limitations will be lost, such as for operating aid, aid to companies in difficulty, ad hoc aid, etc.;

| 2.13 | calls on the Commission to examine whether regions with natural, structural or demographic handicaps that are no longer to be classified under Article 87(3)(a) could benefit from the more favourable treatment granted to such regions. |
| --- | --- |

2.13

calls on the Commission to examine whether regions with natural, structural or demographic handicaps that are no longer to be classified under Article 87(3)(a) could benefit from the more favourable treatment granted to such regions.

3.   Areas that could be covered by the exception under Article 87(3)(c) TEC

The Committee of the Regions

| 3.1 | welcomes the fact that the Commission is willing to adjust the percentage of the population living in the regions coming under Article 87(3)(c) by including all those regions no longer covered by Article 87(3)(a); believes, however, that the regions suffering from the statistical effect of enlargement should, to all intents and purposes, be covered by Article 87(3)(a) and should therefore not be included in this section; |
| --- | --- |

3.1

welcomes the fact that the Commission is willing to adjust the percentage of the population living in the regions coming under Article 87(3)(c) by including all those regions no longer covered by Article 87(3)(a); believes, however, that the regions suffering from the statistical effect of enlargement should, to all intents and purposes, be covered by Article 87(3)(a) and should therefore not be included in this section;

| 3.2 | reiterates its calls that, as stated in the CoR Opinion on the Third report on cohesion, ‘the regions affected by natural effect’ (regions no longer covered by Article 87(3)(a) due to economic growth) should ‘have a transition from Article 87(3)(a) to Article 87(3)(c) over the course of the aid period’. In terms of grading and level of aid, this transition should resemble the one provided for regions suffering from the statistical effect; |
| --- | --- |

3.2

reiterates its calls that, as stated in the CoR Opinion on the Third report on cohesion, ‘the regions affected by natural effect’ (regions no longer covered by Article 87(3)(a) due to economic growth) should ‘have a transition from Article 87(3)(a) to Article 87(3)(c) over the course of the aid period’. In terms of grading and level of aid, this transition should resemble the one provided for regions suffering from the statistical effect;

| 3.3 | considers that, among the regions covered by the exception in Article 87(3)(c) (regions previously covered under Article 87(3)(a)), the following specific cases should be considered:






  — | regions no longer covered by Article 87(3)(a) for economic reasons, once the transitional period mentioned in point 3.2 has ended; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.3

considers that, among the regions covered by the exception in Article 87(3)(c) (regions previously covered under Article 87(3)(a)), the following specific cases should be considered:

—

regions no longer covered by Article 87(3)(a) for economic reasons, once the transitional period mentioned in point 3.2 has ended;

| — | regions that, in addition to no longer being covered under Article 87(3)(a), are:






  — | areas with low population density; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

regions that, in addition to no longer being covered under Article 87(3)(a), are:

—

areas with low population density;

| — | island, border or upland areas; |
| --- | --- |

—

island, border or upland areas;

| — | rural areas and areas affected by industrial transition; |
| --- | --- |

—

rural areas and areas affected by industrial transition;

| 3.4 | considers that these regions should benefit from bonuses over the maximum threshold for general aid; |
| --- | --- |

3.4

considers that these regions should benefit from bonuses over the maximum threshold for general aid;

| 3.5 | also requests that territories suffering serious economic crisis be temporarily eligible under Article 87(3)(c); this would apply to situations related to major restructuring measures (such as a large company closing down, with a large number of job losses); |
| --- | --- |

3.5

also requests that territories suffering serious economic crisis be temporarily eligible under Article 87(3)(c); this would apply to situations related to major restructuring measures (such as a large company closing down, with a large number of job losses);

| 3.6 | also requests that regions suffering some of the handicaps listed above, with a GDP per capita of no more than 100 %, or with an abnormally low employment rate, be temporarily eligible under Article 87(3)(c). The Commission should periodically review economic regional indicators, in order to assess the eligibility of regions receiving aid under RAGs, taking into account the economic growth and the unemployment rate; |
| --- | --- |

3.6

also requests that regions suffering some of the handicaps listed above, with a GDP per capita of no more than 100 %, or with an abnormally low employment rate, be temporarily eligible under Article 87(3)(c). The Commission should periodically review economic regional indicators, in order to assess the eligibility of regions receiving aid under RAGs, taking into account the economic growth and the unemployment rate;

| 3.7 | asks that both regions with low population density and islands not covered by Article 87(3)(a) be included as regions eligible under Article 87(3)(c), and that operating aid to transport be allowed that is not temporary or degressive; |
| --- | --- |

3.7

asks that both regions with low population density and islands not covered by Article 87(3)(a) be included as regions eligible under Article 87(3)(c), and that operating aid to transport be allowed that is not temporary or degressive;

| 3.8 | considers that the different problems in each region should be evaluated in line with various criteria so as to measure the region's competitive and economic development potential, and that state aid should be granted in a flexible manner in accordance with these criteria. |
| --- | --- |

3.8

considers that the different problems in each region should be evaluated in line with various criteria so as to measure the region's competitive and economic development potential, and that state aid should be granted in a flexible manner in accordance with these criteria.

4.   Areas covered by the regional competitiveness and employment objective

The Committee of the Regions

| 4.1 | welcomes the Commission's decision to take a thematic approach rather than one based on selected geographical areas, in order to achieve consistency between competition policy and regional policy and the objectives of Lisbon and Gothenburg; |
| --- | --- |

4.1

welcomes the Commission's decision to take a thematic approach rather than one based on selected geographical areas, in order to achieve consistency between competition policy and regional policy and the objectives of Lisbon and Gothenburg;

| 4.2 | with regard to the provision under which regions excluded from Article 87(3)(a) and (c) can be eligible for horizontal aid, in line with the objectives set out at the last European Councils, warns that economic situations and territorial differences may need to be taken into account in order to meet the regional policy objectives; |
| --- | --- |

4.2

with regard to the provision under which regions excluded from Article 87(3)(a) and (c) can be eligible for horizontal aid, in line with the objectives set out at the last European Councils, warns that economic situations and territorial differences may need to be taken into account in order to meet the regional policy objectives;

| 4.3 | proposes, therefore, that regions be classified according to their level of competitiveness, so that the horizontal aid can be received in a graded manner; |
| --- | --- |

4.3

proposes, therefore, that regions be classified according to their level of competitiveness, so that the horizontal aid can be received in a graded manner;

| 4.4 | believes that, to ensure real consistency between competition and regional policies, the criteria for territorial classification of unassisted regions should be covered in the new regional aid guidelines, and that the horizontal frameworks should allow for more favourable treatment of regions with lower levels of competitiveness, based on the classification drawn up in the regional aid guidelines. This more favourable treatment could involve bonuses above the aid thresholds provided for in the horizontal frameworks; |
| --- | --- |

4.4

believes that, to ensure real consistency between competition and regional policies, the criteria for territorial classification of unassisted regions should be covered in the new regional aid guidelines, and that the horizontal frameworks should allow for more favourable treatment of regions with lower levels of competitiveness, based on the classification drawn up in the regional aid guidelines. This more favourable treatment could involve bonuses above the aid thresholds provided for in the horizontal frameworks;

| 4.5 | draws the Commission's attention to the fact that, in its most recent proposal for maximum regional aid thresholds, the only percentage increase considered was for small and medium-sized enterprises in non-eligible regions. This contrasts with the considerable reduction planned for certain eligible areas (especially those affected by the statistical effect and natural effect); |
| --- | --- |

4.5

draws the Commission's attention to the fact that, in its most recent proposal for maximum regional aid thresholds, the only percentage increase considered was for small and medium-sized enterprises in non-eligible regions. This contrasts with the considerable reduction planned for certain eligible areas (especially those affected by the statistical effect and natural effect);

| 4.6 | believes that the cohesion policy objectives defined in the Treaty require different treatment in line with the various situations and problems that actually exist; calls on the Commission to define the different treatment required for each region, according to its level of development and competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

4.6

believes that the cohesion policy objectives defined in the Treaty require different treatment in line with the various situations and problems that actually exist; calls on the Commission to define the different treatment required for each region, according to its level of development and competitiveness;

| 4.7 | highlights the case of unassisted regions which share a land border with another, assisted region; requests that in such cases, as well as drawing up maximum differential aid percentages between neighbouring regions, other parameters be taken into account that compare regions' economic and competitive capacities. This would prevent situations that are unjustifiable in terms of the European cohesion policy; |
| --- | --- |

4.7

highlights the case of unassisted regions which share a land border with another, assisted region; requests that in such cases, as well as drawing up maximum differential aid percentages between neighbouring regions, other parameters be taken into account that compare regions' economic and competitive capacities. This would prevent situations that are unjustifiable in terms of the European cohesion policy;

| 4.8 | calls for ceilings to be established for volumes of overall state aid, according to the level of regional competitiveness. This figure could be determined in relation to per capita GDP or to the population. |
| --- | --- |

4.8

calls for ceilings to be established for volumes of overall state aid, according to the level of regional competitiveness. This figure could be determined in relation to per capita GDP or to the population.

5.   Regional aid and horizontal frameworks

The Committee of the Regions

| 5.1 | requests that, in order to meet the strategic objectives set at the Lisbon and Gothenburg summits, horizontal aid (R+D, environment, employment, training, SMEs, etc.) should be deployed particularly in regions with a lower level of economic development or competitiveness; to this end, particular emphasis should be given to coordinating the various rules regulating regional and horizontal aid; |
| --- | --- |

5.1

requests that, in order to meet the strategic objectives set at the Lisbon and Gothenburg summits, horizontal aid (R+D, environment, employment, training, SMEs, etc.) should be deployed particularly in regions with a lower level of economic development or competitiveness; to this end, particular emphasis should be given to coordinating the various rules regulating regional and horizontal aid;

| 5.2 | requests that for both assisted and unassisted regions, bonuses over the aid thresholds provided for in the various horizontal aid frameworks should be considered, both graded and in line with the various regional situations, putting special emphasis on and enabling greater flexibility for centres of technological innovation; |
| --- | --- |

5.2

requests that for both assisted and unassisted regions, bonuses over the aid thresholds provided for in the various horizontal aid frameworks should be considered, both graded and in line with the various regional situations, putting special emphasis on and enabling greater flexibility for centres of technological innovation;

| 5.3 | considers that de minimis aid, low-level aid, or aid with limited effects on Community trade cannot alone counteract low development levels in a particular region; on the contrary, this type of aid can be used to a higher degree in countries or regions with a greater financial capacity and, therefore, higher wealth indicators; |
| --- | --- |

5.3

considers that de minimis aid, low-level aid, or aid with limited effects on Community trade cannot alone counteract low development levels in a particular region; on the contrary, this type of aid can be used to a higher degree in countries or regions with a greater financial capacity and, therefore, higher wealth indicators;

| 5.4 | proposes, therefore, that the European Commission analyse and take into consideration the impact of this type of aid on regional development. |
| --- | --- |

5.4

proposes, therefore, that the European Commission analyse and take into consideration the impact of this type of aid on regional development.

6.   Sectoral aid and regional development

The Committee of the Regions

| 6.1 | highlights the fact that aid granted in some sectors particularly affects the economic development of regions; this applies to aid in the transport sector, for example; draws attention to aid to low-cost airlines or maritime transport, which can boost the development of regions with greater economic problems, often caused by geographical barriers; |
| --- | --- |

6.1

highlights the fact that aid granted in some sectors particularly affects the economic development of regions; this applies to aid in the transport sector, for example; draws attention to aid to low-cost airlines or maritime transport, which can boost the development of regions with greater economic problems, often caused by geographical barriers;

| 6.2 | proposes making special efforts in this field in order to effectively coordinate all aid that impacts on regional development, so as to ensure favourable treatment of sectoral aid granted in less developed, less competitive regions; |
| --- | --- |

6.2

proposes making special efforts in this field in order to effectively coordinate all aid that impacts on regional development, so as to ensure favourable treatment of sectoral aid granted in less developed, less competitive regions;

| 6.3 | welcomes the European Commission's efforts to develop the regulatory framework of state aids for services of general economic interest. It would also be desirable for less prosperous regions and regions which suffer from severe or permanent natural or geographic handicaps to have a more favourable framework for the development of their services of general economic interest and indeed a clear and comprehensive framework to distinguish those services that must be deemed economically significant from those that are not; |
| --- | --- |

6.3

welcomes the European Commission's efforts to develop the regulatory framework of state aids for services of general economic interest. It would also be desirable for less prosperous regions and regions which suffer from severe or permanent natural or geographic handicaps to have a more favourable framework for the development of their services of general economic interest and indeed a clear and comprehensive framework to distinguish those services that must be deemed economically significant from those that are not;

| 6.4 | believes that the exemption from notification of compensation for public services should be extended to include services of general interest that represent essential tasks of public authorities, especially provision of social housing, public hospitals, education and general social services. The Commission should raise the notification thresholds, and notification should be ex post. This formal procedure would thus have no negative impact on the provision of essential services, which otherwise might be blocked. |
| --- | --- |

6.4

believes that the exemption from notification of compensation for public services should be extended to include services of general interest that represent essential tasks of public authorities, especially provision of social housing, public hospitals, education and general social services. The Commission should raise the notification thresholds, and notification should be ex post. This formal procedure would thus have no negative impact on the provision of essential services, which otherwise might be blocked.

7.   Types of aid

The Committee of the Regions

| 7.1 | recalls that regional aid is granted as direct aid to investment or investment-linked employment aid. However, other means of support have also proved particularly useful in boosting entrepreneurship and promoting productive investment to improve the economic climate; this applies to equity participation in enterprises, regional risk-capital funds, business incubators, guarantees, affordable industrial land (particularly in regions where it is very expensive), etc.; |
| --- | --- |

7.1

recalls that regional aid is granted as direct aid to investment or investment-linked employment aid. However, other means of support have also proved particularly useful in boosting entrepreneurship and promoting productive investment to improve the economic climate; this applies to equity participation in enterprises, regional risk-capital funds, business incubators, guarantees, affordable industrial land (particularly in regions where it is very expensive), etc.;

| 7.2 | urges the Commission to consider adding new forms of support to regional aid, which would optimise the use of public funds and have a more limited effect on competition. |
| --- | --- |

7.2

urges the Commission to consider adding new forms of support to regional aid, which would optimise the use of public funds and have a more limited effect on competition.

8.   Aid and relocation

The Committee of the Regions

| 8.1 | is pleased to note that the proposal for the new Community Structural Fund Regulations introduces a requirement to maintain investments for seven years, with Community aid forfeited if the recipient company relocates to another area before this period expires. However, exceptions could be made in accordance with the technological characteristics of different sectors. |
| --- | --- |

8.1

is pleased to note that the proposal for the new Community Structural Fund Regulations introduces a requirement to maintain investments for seven years, with Community aid forfeited if the recipient company relocates to another area before this period expires. However, exceptions could be made in accordance with the technological characteristics of different sectors.

9.   Definition of initial investment

The Committee of the Regions

| 9.1 | believes that it is as important to consolidate companies already set up in an area as it is to attract new companies. Thus, unfavourable treatment should not be given to companies already established in a particular area and investing in expansion and consolidation, as opposed to companies with similar investment projects that are setting up in the same area. Also, if support is only given for initial start-up, businesses might be encouraged to relocate; |
| --- | --- |

9.1

believes that it is as important to consolidate companies already set up in an area as it is to attract new companies. Thus, unfavourable treatment should not be given to companies already established in a particular area and investing in expansion and consolidation, as opposed to companies with similar investment projects that are setting up in the same area. Also, if support is only given for initial start-up, businesses might be encouraged to relocate;

| 9.2 | considers that land purchase and development costs vary greatly from one region to another, depending on the physical features of the terrain therefore, rather than prohibiting the funding of land-related costs, it would be better to limit it as a proportion as the planned investment total, in regions where land purchase, development, etc. are a significant factor; |
| --- | --- |

9.2

considers that land purchase and development costs vary greatly from one region to another, depending on the physical features of the terrain therefore, rather than prohibiting the funding of land-related costs, it would be better to limit it as a proportion as the planned investment total, in regions where land purchase, development, etc. are a significant factor;

| 9.3 | also proposes introducing systems or percentages for intangible investment in order to limit the maximum amount of funding in relation to the total investment. |
| --- | --- |

9.3

also proposes introducing systems or percentages for intangible investment in order to limit the maximum amount of funding in relation to the total investment.

II.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions calls for:

| 1. | the reform of regional aid in order to reduce its overall amount, as established by the Stockholm and Barcelona Councils and redirect it in line with the cohesion objectives, taking account of different regional situations and the priorities set out by the EU. The overall volume of regional aid could be reduced by fairer means than just cutting maximum thresholds across the board; |
| --- | --- |

1.

the reform of regional aid in order to reduce its overall amount, as established by the Stockholm and Barcelona Councils and redirect it in line with the cohesion objectives, taking account of different regional situations and the priorities set out by the EU. The overall volume of regional aid could be reduced by fairer means than just cutting maximum thresholds across the board;

| 2. | the net grant equivalent concept to be maintained for the calculation of regional aid; |
| --- | --- |

2.

the net grant equivalent concept to be maintained for the calculation of regional aid;

| 3. | transitional periods to be considered for regions moving from classification under Article 87(3)(a) to Article 87(3)(c). In these cases, aid should be graded in such a way as to prevent these regions from paying for enlargement (regions affected by the statistical effect and natural effect). Also, regions falling under Article 87(3)(c) and those losing this status should be given better treatment, while taking into account the maximum population limit for receiving regional aid; |
| --- | --- |

3.

transitional periods to be considered for regions moving from classification under Article 87(3)(a) to Article 87(3)(c). In these cases, aid should be graded in such a way as to prevent these regions from paying for enlargement (regions affected by the statistical effect and natural effect). Also, regions falling under Article 87(3)(c) and those losing this status should be given better treatment, while taking into account the maximum population limit for receiving regional aid;

| 4. | the drawing up of objective criteria and sound legal arguments to classify regions and grade regional aid in line with the cohesion objectives; |
| --- | --- |

4.

the drawing up of objective criteria and sound legal arguments to classify regions and grade regional aid in line with the cohesion objectives;

| 5. | classification criteria to be laid down in order to take account of the specific features of each region, independent of geographical location. This classification should be adapted to take account of the progress made by each region over time; |
| --- | --- |

5.

classification criteria to be laid down in order to take account of the specific features of each region, independent of geographical location. This classification should be adapted to take account of the progress made by each region over time;

| 6. | percentage bonuses to be given consideration for regions with natural, demographic or structural handicaps, whether classified under Article 87(3)(a) or 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty; |
| --- | --- |

6.

percentage bonuses to be given consideration for regions with natural, demographic or structural handicaps, whether classified under Article 87(3)(a) or 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty;

| 7. | the inclusion of bonuses to be given consideration in the horizontal frameworks for regions according to their levels of development and competitiveness (assisted and unassisted regions); |
| --- | --- |

7.

the inclusion of bonuses to be given consideration in the horizontal frameworks for regions according to their levels of development and competitiveness (assisted and unassisted regions);

| 8. | the coordination of regional aid guidelines with horizontal aid and the priority objectives of the Lisbon agenda; |
| --- | --- |

8.

the coordination of regional aid guidelines with horizontal aid and the priority objectives of the Lisbon agenda;

| 9. | the inclusion of coherent criteria in the regional aid guidelines relating to aid for sectors that play a key role in regional development; |
| --- | --- |

9.

the inclusion of coherent criteria in the regional aid guidelines relating to aid for sectors that play a key role in regional development;

| 10. | examination and analysis by the European Commission of the diversity of regional situations existing in Europe, so that its proposals can be adjusted to meet equitable criteria; |
| --- | --- |

10.

examination and analysis by the European Commission of the diversity of regional situations existing in Europe, so that its proposals can be adjusted to meet equitable criteria;

| 11. | aid for which a region is eligible to form part of strategic regional development plans; |
| --- | --- |

11.

aid for which a region is eligible to form part of strategic regional development plans;

| 12. | other indicators to be considered in order to assess the regional economic situation, such as the employment rate, particularly in the case of unassisted regions; |
| --- | --- |

12.

other indicators to be considered in order to assess the regional economic situation, such as the employment rate, particularly in the case of unassisted regions;

| 13. | the use of other forms of business aid that are easier to manage and cost less in terms of public funds; |
| --- | --- |

13.

the use of other forms of business aid that are easier to manage and cost less in terms of public funds;

| 14. | the establishment of higher thresholds for the notification of services of general economic interest: this notification should be ex post, distinguishing those rights which are enshrined in national constitutions and are not economic services; |
| --- | --- |

14.

the establishment of higher thresholds for the notification of services of general economic interest: this notification should be ex post, distinguishing those rights which are enshrined in national constitutions and are not economic services;

| 15. | special consideration to be given to new forms of business support (risk capital, guarantees, equity participation, tax relief, etc.). |
| --- | --- |

15.

special consideration to be given to new forms of business support (risk capital, guarantees, equity participation, tax relief, etc.).

Brussels, 7 July 2005

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 318 du 22.12.2004, p. 1

1

(2)  Article 87 of the EC Treaty

2

(3)  Guidelines on national regional aid (98/C74/06), OJ C 74 of 10.3.98.

3

(4)  As stated in the CoR Opinion on the Third report on economic and social cohesion (CdR 120/2004)

4

(5)  Guidelines on national regional aid (98/C74/06), paragraph 5 of the Introduction.

5

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/32

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda

(2006/C 31/08)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda (COM(2005) 33 final);

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

Having regard to the decision of its President of 20 January 2005 to instruct its Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the draft Constitutional Treaty and in particular Articles III-117 and III-209 to III-219;

Having regard to the White Paper on European governance adopted in 2001 (COM(2001) 428 final);

Having regard to the Report from the High-level Group on The future of social policy in an enlarged European Union (Employment and Social Affairs DG — May 2004);

Having regard to the report entitled Jobs, jobs, jobs — Creating more employment in Europe (drawn up by the Employment Taskforce chaired by Wim Kok — November 2003);

Having regard to the publication entitled The Economic Costs of Non-Lisbon. A survey of the literature on the economic impact of Lisbon-type reforms (European Economy, Occasional Papers no. 16, March 2005);

Having regard to its opinion of 23 February 2005 on the Proposal for a Regulation on the European Social Fund and the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community programme for employment and social solidarity — PROGRESS (CdR 240/2004 fin);

Having regard to its opinion of 23 February 2005 on the Communication from the Commission on The Social Dimension of Globalisation — the EU's policy contribution on extending the benefits to all (CdR 328/2004 fin);

Having regard to its opinion of 29 September 2004 on the Communication from the Commission on increasing the employment of older workers and delaying the exit from the labour market (CdR 151/2004 fin) (1);

Having regard to its opinion of 22 April 2004 on the Joint Report on Social Inclusion summarising the results of the examination of the National Action Plans for Social Inclusion (2003-2005) (CdR 21/2004 fin) (2);

Having regard to its Resolution of 24 February 2005 on Revitalising the Lisbon Strategy (CdR 518/2004 fin);

Having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 80/2005 rev.1) adopted on 3 May 2005 by its Commission for Economic and Social Policy (Rapporteur: Ms Linetta Serri, Member of Armungia Municipal Council (IT-PES));

adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session, held on 6 and 7 July 2005 (meeting of 6 July).

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.1 | warmly welcomes the commitment to implement a new Social Agenda for 2005-2010, fully endorses its objectives and supports the strategies and the range of individual instruments set out to implement them, which are succinctly described in the slogan ‘A social Europe in the global economy: jobs and opportunities for all’; |
| --- | --- |

1.1

warmly welcomes the commitment to implement a new Social Agenda for 2005-2010, fully endorses its objectives and supports the strategies and the range of individual instruments set out to implement them, which are succinctly described in the slogan ‘A social Europe in the global economy: jobs and opportunities for all’;

| 1.2 | particularly appreciates the fact that, despite Europe's slower rate of growth and the unsatisfactory results that the Lisbon Strategy has produced so far, the same Lisbon objectives promoting the social dimension of economic growth are again being put forward in the sphere of social policy and that the European social model, defined in the 2002 Barcelona European Council as being based on ‘good economic performance, a high level of social protection and education and social dialogue’ is being relaunched; |
| --- | --- |

1.2

particularly appreciates the fact that, despite Europe's slower rate of growth and the unsatisfactory results that the Lisbon Strategy has produced so far, the same Lisbon objectives promoting the social dimension of economic growth are again being put forward in the sphere of social policy and that the European social model, defined in the 2002 Barcelona European Council as being based on ‘good economic performance, a high level of social protection and education and social dialogue’ is being relaunched;

| 1.3 | endorses the principles upon which the Social Agenda is founded: the integrated approach, the promotion of quality jobs, the modernisation of social protection systems and, lastly, an approach based on the ‘cost of the lack of social policy’ principle; |
| --- | --- |

1.3

endorses the principles upon which the Social Agenda is founded: the integrated approach, the promotion of quality jobs, the modernisation of social protection systems and, lastly, an approach based on the ‘cost of the lack of social policy’ principle;

| 1.4 | points out, however, that the objectives set out are, at times, too general and that the wording with regard to the implementing instruments and deadlines needs to be more precise; |
| --- | --- |

1.4

points out, however, that the objectives set out are, at times, too general and that the wording with regard to the implementing instruments and deadlines needs to be more precise;

| 1.5 | agrees that the ‘cost of the lack of social policy’ principle has to be taken into account as social policies can contribute towards the achievement of both social and economic objectives. They are not only a means of reducing social exclusion but can effectively help to achieve better economic results, for example, by increasing the economy's potential to adapt to changes on the global stage. In practice, non-existent or inadequate social policies may thus have an adverse impact on potential economic growth; |
| --- | --- |

1.5

agrees that the ‘cost of the lack of social policy’ principle has to be taken into account as social policies can contribute towards the achievement of both social and economic objectives. They are not only a means of reducing social exclusion but can effectively help to achieve better economic results, for example, by increasing the economy's potential to adapt to changes on the global stage. In practice, non-existent or inadequate social policies may thus have an adverse impact on potential economic growth;

| 1.6 | notwithstanding the overall positive opinion expressed above, deplores the fact that the role and responsibilities of local and regional authorities are not explicitly mentioned in the Social Agenda, particularly since in most European countries, the working definition and implementation of social policies fall within their remit; |
| --- | --- |

1.6

notwithstanding the overall positive opinion expressed above, deplores the fact that the role and responsibilities of local and regional authorities are not explicitly mentioned in the Social Agenda, particularly since in most European countries, the working definition and implementation of social policies fall within their remit;

| 1.7 | believes, therefore, that in line with the subsidiarity principle enshrined in the draft European Constitution and the recommendations set out in the 2001 White Paper on European governance (Working paper on Ongoing and systematic policy dialogue with local-government associations), the active involvement and subsequent action of local and regional authorities will be one of the preconditions for the successful implementation of the Social Agenda's objectives; |
| --- | --- |

1.7

believes, therefore, that in line with the subsidiarity principle enshrined in the draft European Constitution and the recommendations set out in the 2001 White Paper on European governance (Working paper on Ongoing and systematic policy dialogue with local-government associations), the active involvement and subsequent action of local and regional authorities will be one of the preconditions for the successful implementation of the Social Agenda's objectives;

| 1.8 | hopes that through the involvement of grassroots authorities, current gaps and disparities between the different Member States will be reduced and that the best qualities of the European social model will be promoted. It is hoped however that, in the case of the latter, best practices are followed, rather than levelling down to the Member States lagging furthest behind in the area of social policies.
  The strategies, objectives, instruments and proposals of the Commission |
| --- | --- |

1.8

hopes that through the involvement of grassroots authorities, current gaps and disparities between the different Member States will be reduced and that the best qualities of the European social model will be promoted. It is hoped however that, in the case of the latter, best practices are followed, rather than levelling down to the Member States lagging furthest behind in the area of social policies.

The strategies, objectives, instruments and proposals of the Commission

2.   Recommendations of the Committee of the Regions

Increasing confidence

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | is aware that these are times of great disquiet for the citizens of Europe (factors such as a slower rate of growth, reduction in purchasing power, an ageing population, the current perception that the European Union does not play a primary role on the global stage, difficulties affecting social protection systems, persistent poverty belts and economic and social exclusion, give rise to fear and defensive behaviour, and, furthermore, fuel long-standing and emerging forms of ‘local egoism’); thus agrees with the idea that boosting confidence must be a key element of European social strategy; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

is aware that these are times of great disquiet for the citizens of Europe (factors such as a slower rate of growth, reduction in purchasing power, an ageing population, the current perception that the European Union does not play a primary role on the global stage, difficulties affecting social protection systems, persistent poverty belts and economic and social exclusion, give rise to fear and defensive behaviour, and, furthermore, fuel long-standing and emerging forms of ‘local egoism’); thus agrees with the idea that boosting confidence must be a key element of European social strategy;

| 2.2 | believes that firm action should be taken to disseminate accurate information so that the fears of both the older and more recent Member States are allayed; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

believes that firm action should be taken to disseminate accurate information so that the fears of both the older and more recent Member States are allayed;

| 2.3 | stresses the need, however, for substantial objectives and the immediate delivery of perceptible improvements to living and working conditions to go hand in hand with the commitment towards better communication. These objectives should be adapted to the different circumstances and priorities of the various Member States, and local and regional authorities must be strongly involved in them. |
| --- | --- |

2.3

stresses the need, however, for substantial objectives and the immediate delivery of perceptible improvements to living and working conditions to go hand in hand with the commitment towards better communication. These objectives should be adapted to the different circumstances and priorities of the various Member States, and local and regional authorities must be strongly involved in them.

3.   The instruments

The Committee of the Regions

| 3.1 | believes that the range of instruments set out (legislation, social dialogue and financial instruments) should be vigorously deployed in order to counter the widespread loss of confidence; |
| --- | --- |

3.1

believes that the range of instruments set out (legislation, social dialogue and financial instruments) should be vigorously deployed in order to counter the widespread loss of confidence;

| 3.2 | notes the step forward taken by adding a general social clause (Article III-117) to the draft Constitutional Treaty, under which the social dimension will have to be taken into consideration in all Community policies; |
| --- | --- |

3.2

notes the step forward taken by adding a general social clause (Article III-117) to the draft Constitutional Treaty, under which the social dimension will have to be taken into consideration in all Community policies;

| 3.3 | welcomes the complementarity between the Social Agenda, the Lisbon strategy and the sustainable development strategy which must interact with all the Community policies. If the instrument for impact assessment developed by the Commission were to reflect the subsidiarity principle, in accordance with the draft Constitutional Treaty, this integrated approach could bring about practical progress with regard to social and employment policies; |
| --- | --- |

3.3

welcomes the complementarity between the Social Agenda, the Lisbon strategy and the sustainable development strategy which must interact with all the Community policies. If the instrument for impact assessment developed by the Commission were to reflect the subsidiarity principle, in accordance with the draft Constitutional Treaty, this integrated approach could bring about practical progress with regard to social and employment policies;

| 3.4 | calls on the Commission to implement the open method of coordination in conjunction with the current purely intergovernmental methodology: this should be done by involving local and regional authorities, who will be the main actors involved in the management of the Agenda's financial instruments, especially concerning the ‘Convergence’ and ‘Regional competitiveness and employment’ objectives; |
| --- | --- |

3.4

calls on the Commission to implement the open method of coordination in conjunction with the current purely intergovernmental methodology: this should be done by involving local and regional authorities, who will be the main actors involved in the management of the Agenda's financial instruments, especially concerning the ‘Convergence’ and ‘Regional competitiveness and employment’ objectives;

| 3.5 | considers that it is imperative to make decisive progress towards the application throughout the Union of the Community acquis, and emphasises that the legislation of the Member States must progressively incorporate European principles and minimum standards in order to reduce the gaps and imbalances between them; |
| --- | --- |

3.5

considers that it is imperative to make decisive progress towards the application throughout the Union of the Community acquis, and emphasises that the legislation of the Member States must progressively incorporate European principles and minimum standards in order to reduce the gaps and imbalances between them;

| 3.6 | believes that, a year after the accession of new Member States, it would be appropriate for the Commission to review the restriction which limits the access of workers from the new Member States to the labour market in the former EU-15. In particular, it would be useful to assess the structural impact of this restriction on the status of labour relations; |
| --- | --- |

3.6

believes that, a year after the accession of new Member States, it would be appropriate for the Commission to review the restriction which limits the access of workers from the new Member States to the labour market in the former EU-15. In particular, it would be useful to assess the structural impact of this restriction on the status of labour relations;

| 3.7 | believes that the restriction limiting the access of workers from new Member States to the labour market in the former EU-15 and the current debate on the Commission's proposal for a Directive on services in the internal market highlight the need to revise Directive 96/71 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services. |
| --- | --- |

3.7

believes that the restriction limiting the access of workers from new Member States to the labour market in the former EU-15 and the current debate on the Commission's proposal for a Directive on services in the internal market highlight the need to revise Directive 96/71 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services.

4.   Three conditions to succeed in increasing confidence

The Committee of the Regions

| 4.1 | recognises the importance of a new intergenerational approach which aims to provide greater and better prospects for young people. An increase in confidence and the relaunch of the Lisbon strategy objectives would necessarily depend on the central role of young people; in this context, it draws attention to its opinion (EDUC 37, 2004) on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council creating the ‘YOUTH IN ACTION’ programme for the period 2007-2013; |
| --- | --- |

4.1

recognises the importance of a new intergenerational approach which aims to provide greater and better prospects for young people. An increase in confidence and the relaunch of the Lisbon strategy objectives would necessarily depend on the central role of young people; in this context, it draws attention to its opinion (EDUC 37, 2004) on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council creating the ‘YOUTH IN ACTION’ programme for the period 2007-2013;

| 4.2 | calls for a detailed discussion, during 2005, of the Green Paper on the intergenerational dimension; |
| --- | --- |

4.2

calls for a detailed discussion, during 2005, of the Green Paper on the intergenerational dimension;

| 4.3 | believes that the intense debate on the ageing population and the reform of pension schemes must be accompanied by an in-depth assessment and consideration of the currently deteriorating conditions facing young people with respect to income security and employment and professional prospects. Without neglecting the persistent problems of older citizens, due attention should be given, through an integrated approach, to groups at risk of social exclusion; |
| --- | --- |

4.3

believes that the intense debate on the ageing population and the reform of pension schemes must be accompanied by an in-depth assessment and consideration of the currently deteriorating conditions facing young people with respect to income security and employment and professional prospects. Without neglecting the persistent problems of older citizens, due attention should be given, through an integrated approach, to groups at risk of social exclusion;

| 4.4 | warmly welcomes the idea of an intergenerational partnership that would build on the experience of older people and ensure that they remain within the economically active population, while ensuring that younger people have the opportunity to join them; therefore calls upon the Commission to introduce trials, dissemination of good practice and specific initiatives with a view to encouraging interaction between generations; |
| --- | --- |

4.4

warmly welcomes the idea of an intergenerational partnership that would build on the experience of older people and ensure that they remain within the economically active population, while ensuring that younger people have the opportunity to join them; therefore calls upon the Commission to introduce trials, dissemination of good practice and specific initiatives with a view to encouraging interaction between generations;

| 4.5 | in line with the Commission Communication, attaches great importance to the idea of a partnership at all levels, viewing this as a crucial instrument for building the social capital that seems to have been diminished due to weak economic growth and compounded by the delay in implementing the Lisbon objectives, first among which is the provision of decent working conditions for all European citizens; |
| --- | --- |

4.5

in line with the Commission Communication, attaches great importance to the idea of a partnership at all levels, viewing this as a crucial instrument for building the social capital that seems to have been diminished due to weak economic growth and compounded by the delay in implementing the Lisbon objectives, first among which is the provision of decent working conditions for all European citizens;

| 4.6 | emphasises the need for specific action to be taken in areas where, for historical or socioeconomic reasons, the practice of partnership is less rooted in tradition or experience; |
| --- | --- |

4.6

emphasises the need for specific action to be taken in areas where, for historical or socioeconomic reasons, the practice of partnership is less rooted in tradition or experience;

| 4.7 | fully agrees on the importance of the EU's external dimension. Europe can and must take an active role on the international scene, particularly to press for decent working conditions for all and to ensure fair trade rules, as well as to protect and uphold the European social model in a globalised economy and its principles regarding human dignity, social justice and solidarity; |
| --- | --- |

4.7

fully agrees on the importance of the EU's external dimension. Europe can and must take an active role on the international scene, particularly to press for decent working conditions for all and to ensure fair trade rules, as well as to protect and uphold the European social model in a globalised economy and its principles regarding human dignity, social justice and solidarity;

| 4.8 | believes that there are at least two other preconditions for increasing citizen confidence: i) a citizenry with a high level of awareness of the European opportunities available to them; ii) a citizenry holding the necessary tools to take advantage of these opportunities, such as language skills; urges the European Commission to place emphasis on these conditions, as well as on the others. |
| --- | --- |

4.8

believes that there are at least two other preconditions for increasing citizen confidence: i) a citizenry with a high level of awareness of the European opportunities available to them; ii) a citizenry holding the necessary tools to take advantage of these opportunities, such as language skills; urges the European Commission to place emphasis on these conditions, as well as on the others.

5.   The two priority areas: moving towards full employment

The Committee of the Regions

| 5.1 | fully agrees with the strategy to maintain the objectives of employment and the quantity and quality of employment at the core of the Social Agenda. In accordance with the four priorities set out in the Kok Report, employment remains the key means to combat social exclusion and to foster sustained and ongoing economic growth; |
| --- | --- |

5.1

fully agrees with the strategy to maintain the objectives of employment and the quantity and quality of employment at the core of the Social Agenda. In accordance with the four priorities set out in the Kok Report, employment remains the key means to combat social exclusion and to foster sustained and ongoing economic growth;

| 5.2 | supports the drafting of a Green Paper on the development of labour law. The widespread increase of new forms of work dictates that the legal instruments of labour law be updated; |
| --- | --- |

5.2

supports the drafting of a Green Paper on the development of labour law. The widespread increase of new forms of work dictates that the legal instruments of labour law be updated;

| 5.3 | believes that action in this area is necessary to ensure that the flexibility of employment, which is indispensable for modernising the labour market and for competitiveness, does not adversely affect workers' safety or result in an increased risk of social exclusion; |
| --- | --- |

5.3

believes that action in this area is necessary to ensure that the flexibility of employment, which is indispensable for modernising the labour market and for competitiveness, does not adversely affect workers' safety or result in an increased risk of social exclusion;

| 5.4 | considers therefore that social dialogue remains a fundamental instrument and should be carried forward and reinforced in all ways in order to promote, facilitate and manage reforms while ensuring that they are socially just; |
| --- | --- |

5.4

considers therefore that social dialogue remains a fundamental instrument and should be carried forward and reinforced in all ways in order to promote, facilitate and manage reforms while ensuring that they are socially just;

| 5.5 | appreciates the Commission's intention to propose a new strategy on health and safety at work, which, through prevention initiatives, aims to ensure the health and safety of workers; |
| --- | --- |

5.5

appreciates the Commission's intention to propose a new strategy on health and safety at work, which, through prevention initiatives, aims to ensure the health and safety of workers;

| 5.6 | looks forward to the prospect of a European labour market; hopes, nevertheless, that it will not be restricted to pushing ahead with workers' mobility between the Member States but will rather serve to extend the rules and regulations governing the dynamics of the labour market, which successfully combine maximum guarantees with maximum efficiency and productivity; |
| --- | --- |

5.6

looks forward to the prospect of a European labour market; hopes, nevertheless, that it will not be restricted to pushing ahead with workers' mobility between the Member States but will rather serve to extend the rules and regulations governing the dynamics of the labour market, which successfully combine maximum guarantees with maximum efficiency and productivity;

| 5.7 | considers, in this context, that trans-national collective bargaining can be useful; |
| --- | --- |

5.7

considers, in this context, that trans-national collective bargaining can be useful;

| 5.8 | similarly, welcomes the promotion of corporate social responsibility; |
| --- | --- |

5.8

similarly, welcomes the promotion of corporate social responsibility;

| 5.9 | similarly, welcomes the promotion of better and more effective coordination of social security schemes. |
| --- | --- |

5.9

similarly, welcomes the promotion of better and more effective coordination of social security schemes.

6.   Towards a more cohesive society

The Committee of the Regions

| 6.1 | acknowledges that modernising social protection, including its financial sustainability, is a key component of the mid-term review of the Lisbon strategy; reiterates, however, that such ‘modernisation’ must ensure a more cohesive society and equal opportunities for all; |
| --- | --- |

6.1

acknowledges that modernising social protection, including its financial sustainability, is a key component of the mid-term review of the Lisbon strategy; reiterates, however, that such ‘modernisation’ must ensure a more cohesive society and equal opportunities for all;

| 6.2 | in the light of the above, believes that local and regional authorities should be called upon to play a central role in the modernisation process and that the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) should be extended to subnational regions and communes; |
| --- | --- |

6.2

in the light of the above, believes that local and regional authorities should be called upon to play a central role in the modernisation process and that the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) should be extended to subnational regions and communes;

| 6.3 | agrees with the proposals to rationalise the OMC through a single list of objectives that are common to the three areas of social inclusion, pensions and health; |
| --- | --- |

6.3

agrees with the proposals to rationalise the OMC through a single list of objectives that are common to the three areas of social inclusion, pensions and health;

| 6.4 | fully welcomes the objective to combat poverty and promote social inclusion; |
| --- | --- |

6.4

fully welcomes the objective to combat poverty and promote social inclusion;

| 6.5 | believes that a Community initiative to provide all citizens with minimum income schemes is highly important and calls on the Commission to develop specific actions in order to compare and contrast the various national and regional experiences and thus promote the dissemination of good practice and the comparative analysis of related regulations; |
| --- | --- |

6.5

believes that a Community initiative to provide all citizens with minimum income schemes is highly important and calls on the Commission to develop specific actions in order to compare and contrast the various national and regional experiences and thus promote the dissemination of good practice and the comparative analysis of related regulations;

| 6.6 | welcomes the idea of a European year of combating poverty and social exclusion (2010); nevertheless, expresses concern that similar initiatives (such as the other ‘European year’ events, outlined in the Commission Communication, to be held between now and 2010) may become merely celebratory, whereas they should, on the contrary, go hand in hand with a reinforcement of the specific actions to be promoted; |
| --- | --- |

6.6

welcomes the idea of a European year of combating poverty and social exclusion (2010); nevertheless, expresses concern that similar initiatives (such as the other ‘European year’ events, outlined in the Commission Communication, to be held between now and 2010) may become merely celebratory, whereas they should, on the contrary, go hand in hand with a reinforcement of the specific actions to be promoted;

| 6.7 | fully welcomes the objectives of combating discrimination and promoting minority rights, not least by means of legislative initiatives; |
| --- | --- |

6.7

fully welcomes the objectives of combating discrimination and promoting minority rights, not least by means of legislative initiatives;

| 6.8 | supports the proposal for a European gender institute. Other existing instruments should, however, be improved in order to contribute more effectively to the evaluation of the experiences and the implementation of good practices developed in the various Member States; |
| --- | --- |

6.8

supports the proposal for a European gender institute. Other existing instruments should, however, be improved in order to contribute more effectively to the evaluation of the experiences and the implementation of good practices developed in the various Member States;

| 6.9 | points to the need for the objective of combating discrimination to be better articulated by setting out specific actions and measures to use for different situations: the objective of equal opportunities for men and women carries historical connotations and presents specific issues that cannot be reduced to the more general aspects of minority rights, which, moreover, affect the various Member States differently; |
| --- | --- |

6.9

points to the need for the objective of combating discrimination to be better articulated by setting out specific actions and measures to use for different situations: the objective of equal opportunities for men and women carries historical connotations and presents specific issues that cannot be reduced to the more general aspects of minority rights, which, moreover, affect the various Member States differently;

| 6.10 | welcomes the commitment to drawn up a specific Communication on social services of general interest (SSIGs) and, above all, hopes that this initiative will help to overcome the legal uncertainties of the current framework. It recalls the prominent role played by local and regional authorities in the SSIG sector and the need to give them adequate support in order that they may continue to ensure universal access. To achieve the desired mobility of people within the EU, all Member States must make significant, coordinated progress in this sector. In this connection, it appreciates the Commission's intention to grant, under certain conditions, an exemption from notification regarding state aid for some social service areas such as hospitals and social housing. |
| --- | --- |

6.10

welcomes the commitment to drawn up a specific Communication on social services of general interest (SSIGs) and, above all, hopes that this initiative will help to overcome the legal uncertainties of the current framework. It recalls the prominent role played by local and regional authorities in the SSIG sector and the need to give them adequate support in order that they may continue to ensure universal access. To achieve the desired mobility of people within the EU, all Member States must make significant, coordinated progress in this sector. In this connection, it appreciates the Commission's intention to grant, under certain conditions, an exemption from notification regarding state aid for some social service areas such as hospitals and social housing.

7.   Conclusions

The Committee of the Regions

urges the Commission to take adequate account of the effective role and responsibilities of local and regional authorities in the various areas covered by the Social Agenda, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle enshrined in the Constitutional Treaty, and reiterates that this is the best way to create a people's Europe that is also based on the principles of cohesion and solidarity, and is engaged in the process of making the EU the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world.

Brussels, 6 July 2005

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 43, 18.2.2005, p. 7.

1

(2)  OJ C 121, 30.4.2004, p. 32.

2

---

| 7.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/36

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration

(2006/C 31/09)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Commission's Green Paper on an EU approach to managing economic migration (COM(2004) 811 final),

Having regard to the Commission's decision to consult the CoR on the subject under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to the decision of its President of 22 February to instruct the Commission for Economic and Social Policy to draw up an opinion on the subject,

Having regard to the Conclusions of the Tampere (1999), Nice and Lisbon (2000) and Seville (2002) European Councils,

Having regard to its Opinion on the Amended Proposal for a Council Directive on the right to family reunification (CdR 243/2002 fin) (1),

Having regard to its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission on a common policy on illegal immigration (COM(2001) 672 final) and on the Communication from the Commission on an open method of coordination for the Community immigration policy (COM(2001) 387 final) of 16 May 2002 (CdR 93/2002 fin) (2),

Having regard to its opinions on a Community immigration policy and a common asylum procedure (CdR 90/2001 fin) (3) and on the Proposal for a Council Directive laying down minimum standards on the reception of applicants for asylum in Member States (CdR 214/2001 fin) (4),

Having regard to its Opinion on the Proposal for a Council Directive concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents (CdR 213/2001 fin) (5),

Having regard to its Opinions on the Proposal for a Council Directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment and self-employed economic activities (CdR 386/2001 rev. 1) and on the Proposal for a Council Directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of studies, vocational training or voluntary service (COM(2002) 548 final) (CdR 2/2003 fin) (6),

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission on integrating migration issues in the European Union's relations with third countries (COM(2002) 703 final),

Having regard to its opinion on the Commission Report requested by the Stockholm European Council: Increasing labour force participation and promoting active ageing (COM(2002) 9 final) (CdR 94/2002 fin) (7),

Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on Immigration, integration and the role of civil society organisations (CES 365/2002 fin) (8),

Having regard to Article 13 of the EC Treaty, and to Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation and Council Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin,

Having regard to the Council of Europe report of July 2000 on Diversity and Cohesion: new challenges for the integration of immigrants and minorities,

Having regard to the Commission Staff Working Paper on the Extended impact assessment on the Communication on immigration, integration and employment (COM(2003) 336 final) SEC(2003) 694,

Having regard to its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on immigration, integration and employment (CdR223/2003 fin) (9),

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: Assessment of the Tampere programme and future orientations (COM(2004) 401 final),

Having regard to the UN Convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families,

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 82/2005 rev. 1), adopted on 3 May 2005 by the Commission for Economic and Social Policy (rapporteur: Mr Alvaro Ancisi, Member of the municipal council of Ravenna (IT-EPP),

Whereas

| 1) | widespread economic migration is not in itself a solution to the demographic problems of the ageing population and the falling birth rate, nor is it the only possible answer to the needs of the labour market. Notwithstanding the need to absorb the potential labour force of the EU whilst facilitating the immigration of highly-skilled workers in particular sectors, more sustained immigration flows are increasingly required to meet the needs of the European labour market and to ensure the economic competitiveness of European businesses; |
| --- | --- |

1)

widespread economic migration is not in itself a solution to the demographic problems of the ageing population and the falling birth rate, nor is it the only possible answer to the needs of the labour market. Notwithstanding the need to absorb the potential labour force of the EU whilst facilitating the immigration of highly-skilled workers in particular sectors, more sustained immigration flows are increasingly required to meet the needs of the European labour market and to ensure the economic competitiveness of European businesses;

| 2) | one of the key points of the Hague programme — the new EU agenda for developing immigration and asylum policies, adopted in 2004 — is legal migration and the fight against illegal employment; and although responsibility for determining the level of legal immigration lies with the individual Member States, the Commission is invited to present a policy plan on legal migration by the end of 2005; |
| --- | --- |

2)

one of the key points of the Hague programme — the new EU agenda for developing immigration and asylum policies, adopted in 2004 — is legal migration and the fight against illegal employment; and although responsibility for determining the level of legal immigration lies with the individual Member States, the Commission is invited to present a policy plan on legal migration by the end of 2005;

| 3) | the aim of this Green Paper is to launch a pre-legislative consultation process involving the EU institutions, the Member States and civil society on the most appropriate forms of Community rules for admitting economic migrants and on the added value of adopting a Community approach; |
| --- | --- |

3)

the aim of this Green Paper is to launch a pre-legislative consultation process involving the EU institutions, the Member States and civil society on the most appropriate forms of Community rules for admitting economic migrants and on the added value of adopting a Community approach;

| 4) | the new Constitutional Treaty further extends the EU's competences (Article III-267) and provides for the EU to develop a common immigration policy aimed at ensuring the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in Member States and measures to combat illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings, and for EU law to lay down conditions of entry and residence, and standards on the issue by Member States of visas and residence permits; |
| --- | --- |

4)

the new Constitutional Treaty further extends the EU's competences (Article III-267) and provides for the EU to develop a common immigration policy aimed at ensuring the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in Member States and measures to combat illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings, and for EU law to lay down conditions of entry and residence, and standards on the issue by Member States of visas and residence permits;

| 5) | the new Constitutional Treaty also provides for European laws or framework laws to establish ‘measures to provide incentives and support for the action of Member States with a view to promoting the integration of third-country nationals residing legally in their territories’ (Article III-267(4)). In this context harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States is excluded. The CoR underlines the fact that responsibility for arrangements in respect of access by third-country nationals to the labour market lies with the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

5)

the new Constitutional Treaty also provides for European laws or framework laws to establish ‘measures to provide incentives and support for the action of Member States with a view to promoting the integration of third-country nationals residing legally in their territories’ (Article III-267(4)). In this context harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States is excluded. The CoR underlines the fact that responsibility for arrangements in respect of access by third-country nationals to the labour market lies with the Member States;

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 60th plenary session, held on 6-7 July 2005 (meeting of 7 July):

1.   The Committee of the Regions' comments

The Committee of the Regions

With regard to the following key issues raised in the Green Paper:

The degree of harmonisation that future Community legislation should aim at

| 1.1 | notes that the aim in developing a migration policy is, inter alia, to provide a short- and medium-term economic response to Europe's demographic decline and to create an area of freedom, security and justice for all citizens; this is a priority objective for the Committee of the Regions; |
| --- | --- |

1.1

notes that the aim in developing a migration policy is, inter alia, to provide a short- and medium-term economic response to Europe's demographic decline and to create an area of freedom, security and justice for all citizens; this is a priority objective for the Committee of the Regions;

| 1.2 | points out that there is a clear link between the difficulty for migrants to use legal channels for economic migration, the lack of coordination between Member States' policies in that field and the levels of illegal migration; |
| --- | --- |

1.2

points out that there is a clear link between the difficulty for migrants to use legal channels for economic migration, the lack of coordination between Member States' policies in that field and the levels of illegal migration;

| 1.3 | stresses that the interdependence of economic, employment and social policy is a feature of the European social model, which seeks to promote better-quality jobs, modernisation of economic structures and greater social cohesion; |
| --- | --- |

1.3

stresses that the interdependence of economic, employment and social policy is a feature of the European social model, which seeks to promote better-quality jobs, modernisation of economic structures and greater social cohesion;

| 1.4 | notes, however, that while, in some European regions, the population is falling and there is a labour shortage, in other regions the rising population is putting pressure on local services and housing; |
| --- | --- |

1.4

notes, however, that while, in some European regions, the population is falling and there is a labour shortage, in other regions the rising population is putting pressure on local services and housing;

| 1.5 | considers that any future Community legislation should establish a comprehensive legal framework covering all immigrants into the EU, although initially it could begin by taking a sectoral approach, focusing on specific groups of migrant workers such as seasonal workers, workers with particular skills, workers transferred within a company, or service providers;

  supports, therefore, the option proposed by the Commission in its Green Paper concerning the creation of a common framework of minimum standards governing the admission of non-EU nationals wishing to take up paid employment or to work on a self-employed basis;

  regrets that the proposal for a directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment and self-employed economic activities, which the CoR welcomed in its Opinion 386/2001 of 13 March 2002 (10), has not been endorsed by the Council; |
| --- | --- |

1.5

considers that any future Community legislation should establish a comprehensive legal framework covering all immigrants into the EU, although initially it could begin by taking a sectoral approach, focusing on specific groups of migrant workers such as seasonal workers, workers with particular skills, workers transferred within a company, or service providers;

supports, therefore, the option proposed by the Commission in its Green Paper concerning the creation of a common framework of minimum standards governing the admission of non-EU nationals wishing to take up paid employment or to work on a self-employed basis;

regrets that the proposal for a directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment and self-employed economic activities, which the CoR welcomed in its Opinion 386/2001 of 13 March 2002 (10), has not been endorsed by the Council;

| 1.6 | also considers that common fast-track procedures could be adopted by agreement between a number of Member States where there are skills gaps; any Member State carrying out such procedures should have the obligation to inform, and coordinate them in advance with, the remaining EU Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.6

also considers that common fast-track procedures could be adopted by agreement between a number of Member States where there are skills gaps; any Member State carrying out such procedures should have the obligation to inform, and coordinate them in advance with, the remaining EU Member States;

Admission procedures for migrant workers; work and residence permits

| 1.7 | reiterates the importance of a visa and residence and work-permit policy which facilitates the entry of migrant workers; suggests, therefore, that individual Member States provide a single national application procedure leading to a combined title, encompassing both residence and work permit within one administrative act, in order to simplify and harmonise the diverging rules currently applicable in Member States; |
| --- | --- |

1.7

reiterates the importance of a visa and residence and work-permit policy which facilitates the entry of migrant workers; suggests, therefore, that individual Member States provide a single national application procedure leading to a combined title, encompassing both residence and work permit within one administrative act, in order to simplify and harmonise the diverging rules currently applicable in Member States;

| 1.8 | reiterates the points already made regarding the principle of encouraging the mobility of migrants who are long-term residents and already part of the Community labour market (CdR 337/2004 rev. 1); |
| --- | --- |

1.8

reiterates the points already made regarding the principle of encouraging the mobility of migrants who are long-term residents and already part of the Community labour market (CdR 337/2004 rev. 1);

| 1.9 | given that Council Directive 2003/109/EC gives mobility rights to long-term immigrants as of 2006, considers it important also to explore the possibility of adopting minimum common rules facilitating the mobility within the EU of workers who have not lived in a Member State for a long period of time, as soon as free movement of workers is introduced for the Member States that joined the EU in 2004, e.g. by issuing job-seeker residence permits which would enable job-seekers to find and apply for vacant posts. Moreover, it would be a good idea to introduce basic training in third countries of origin, as this can be a decisive factor in some sectors, and adopt minimum common rules for certifying skills possessed or acquired in the country of entry into the EU; |
| --- | --- |

1.9

given that Council Directive 2003/109/EC gives mobility rights to long-term immigrants as of 2006, considers it important also to explore the possibility of adopting minimum common rules facilitating the mobility within the EU of workers who have not lived in a Member State for a long period of time, as soon as free movement of workers is introduced for the Member States that joined the EU in 2004, e.g. by issuing job-seeker residence permits which would enable job-seekers to find and apply for vacant posts. Moreover, it would be a good idea to introduce basic training in third countries of origin, as this can be a decisive factor in some sectors, and adopt minimum common rules for certifying skills possessed or acquired in the country of entry into the EU;

| 1.10 | believes that the admission of individual workers should in principle be conditional upon specific job vacancies.
  However, in certain specific labour market sectors where it is more difficult to disseminate information in the country of origin about specific job vacancies, Community legislation for legal admission of migrants could include a temporary residence permit for seeking work, which would be valid for a limited period of time and managed by each Member State.
  Any future legislation should also address possibilities for changing the place/sector of work, stipulating maximum unemployment periods applying up until the expiry of the job-seeker permit, after which a migrant worker would have to return to their country of origin. However, such a stringent requirement would result in many immigrants continuing to resort to smuggling mafias. Therefore, there should be some flexibility which on the one hand provides migrants with hope and leads them away from the mafias, and on the other hand provides Member States with the flexibility to admit third-country nationals based on foreseeable labour needs. Any future legislation concerning maximum unemployment periods before a migrant worker would have to return to their country of origin must take into consideration the degree of integration of the worker, e.g. presence of family members, schooling of children, period of residence, number of years employed prior to the unemployed period, amongst other considerations; |
| --- | --- |

1.10

believes that the admission of individual workers should in principle be conditional upon specific job vacancies.

However, in certain specific labour market sectors where it is more difficult to disseminate information in the country of origin about specific job vacancies, Community legislation for legal admission of migrants could include a temporary residence permit for seeking work, which would be valid for a limited period of time and managed by each Member State.

Any future legislation should also address possibilities for changing the place/sector of work, stipulating maximum unemployment periods applying up until the expiry of the job-seeker permit, after which a migrant worker would have to return to their country of origin. However, such a stringent requirement would result in many immigrants continuing to resort to smuggling mafias. Therefore, there should be some flexibility which on the one hand provides migrants with hope and leads them away from the mafias, and on the other hand provides Member States with the flexibility to admit third-country nationals based on foreseeable labour needs. Any future legislation concerning maximum unemployment periods before a migrant worker would have to return to their country of origin must take into consideration the degree of integration of the worker, e.g. presence of family members, schooling of children, period of residence, number of years employed prior to the unemployed period, amongst other considerations;

| 1.11 | notes that entry systems which are more flexible than ‘individual assessment’, such as green cards, intended to respond to variable and long-term labour requirements, can be addressed by Community legislation only if an information system for publishing and consulting job offers at European level is adopted and if minimum common selection rules are laid down for the admission of migrant workers; |
| --- | --- |

1.11

notes that entry systems which are more flexible than ‘individual assessment’, such as green cards, intended to respond to variable and long-term labour requirements, can be addressed by Community legislation only if an information system for publishing and consulting job offers at European level is adopted and if minimum common selection rules are laid down for the admission of migrant workers;

| 1.12 | believes that, under the subsidiarity principle, the question of whether to combine work and residence permits should not be regulated at European level but should be left to the individual Member States to decide. |
| --- | --- |

1.12

believes that, under the subsidiarity principle, the question of whether to combine work and residence permits should not be regulated at European level but should be left to the individual Member States to decide.

Rights, accompanying measures and cooperation with third countries

| 1.13 | notes that appropriate Community legislation needs to be introduced to guarantee third-country citizens who are migrant workers fundamental civil and social rights; |
| --- | --- |

1.13

notes that appropriate Community legislation needs to be introduced to guarantee third-country citizens who are migrant workers fundamental civil and social rights;

| 1.14 | reiterates previous comments on the need to limit the brain drain from third countries and to help these countries keep migration to a level which is sustainable and beneficial for both host and home countries (CdR 223/2003): strategies designed to reduce poverty, improve living and working conditions, create jobs and develop training in migrants' countries of origin help in the long term to normalise migration flows; |
| --- | --- |

1.14

reiterates previous comments on the need to limit the brain drain from third countries and to help these countries keep migration to a level which is sustainable and beneficial for both host and home countries (CdR 223/2003): strategies designed to reduce poverty, improve living and working conditions, create jobs and develop training in migrants' countries of origin help in the long term to normalise migration flows;

| 1.15 | considers that, within the framework of cooperation measures, measures to promote vocational and other training and recruitment in countries of origin should be supported, and that it would be beneficial to plan specific bilateral or multilateral agreements with bordering or nearby countries or countries most exposed to immigration flows, in order to establish admission preferences; |
| --- | --- |

1.15

considers that, within the framework of cooperation measures, measures to promote vocational and other training and recruitment in countries of origin should be supported, and that it would be beneficial to plan specific bilateral or multilateral agreements with bordering or nearby countries or countries most exposed to immigration flows, in order to establish admission preferences;

A key role for local and regional authorities

| 1.16 | stresses the fundamental regional and local dimension of economic migration, considering its impact on local labour markets and services provided by local and regional authorities (social services, education, housing etc.); therefore, consideration should be given to these authorities when assigning Community funds for the integration of immigrants; |
| --- | --- |

1.16

stresses the fundamental regional and local dimension of economic migration, considering its impact on local labour markets and services provided by local and regional authorities (social services, education, housing etc.); therefore, consideration should be given to these authorities when assigning Community funds for the integration of immigrants;

| 1.17 | stresses the essential role of local authorities in ensuring security and social cohesion, which are fundamental aspects of an economic migration policy; |
| --- | --- |

1.17

stresses the essential role of local authorities in ensuring security and social cohesion, which are fundamental aspects of an economic migration policy;

| 1.18 | points out, therefore, that, when the kinds and volumes of immigrant labour to be admitted are established, procedures must be laid down which take into account the proposals of local and regional authorities as well as national requirements; |
| --- | --- |

1.18

points out, therefore, that, when the kinds and volumes of immigrant labour to be admitted are established, procedures must be laid down which take into account the proposals of local and regional authorities as well as national requirements;

| 1.19 | considers that local and regional authorities could play an essential role in the social integration and cultural and language education of immigrant workers, in helping them to acquire skills and in certifying these, and in cooperation processes with third countries to provide training for workers hoping to emigrate from those countries. |
| --- | --- |

1.19

considers that local and regional authorities could play an essential role in the social integration and cultural and language education of immigrant workers, in helping them to acquire skills and in certifying these, and in cooperation processes with third countries to provide training for workers hoping to emigrate from those countries.

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | while taking into account the provisions of the future Constitutional Treaty, stresses the close connection between immigration policy and employment policy (Title VIII, Article 137 (3) TEC) and therefore considers that it should mandatorily be consulted on the legislation developed from the Green Paper; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

while taking into account the provisions of the future Constitutional Treaty, stresses the close connection between immigration policy and employment policy (Title VIII, Article 137 (3) TEC) and therefore considers that it should mandatorily be consulted on the legislation developed from the Green Paper;

| 2.2 | urges all EU Member States to ratify the UN Convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

urges all EU Member States to ratify the UN Convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families;

| 2.3 | considers that issues related to immigration and the labour market can be addressed most effectively at European level but that, at the same time, it must be ensured that (i) entry and residence conditions do not conflict with Member States' rights to regulate the volume of admissions and (ii) these rights do not have an adverse impact on other states. Conditions which are too restrictive would prevent Member States from admitting the number of immigrants they wish to and that could have serious repercussions on their economic competitiveness or that of their regions. It therefore recommends measures to ensure that any future legislation on admission criteria is compatible with the various national, regional and local situations; |
| --- | --- |

2.3

considers that issues related to immigration and the labour market can be addressed most effectively at European level but that, at the same time, it must be ensured that (i) entry and residence conditions do not conflict with Member States' rights to regulate the volume of admissions and (ii) these rights do not have an adverse impact on other states. Conditions which are too restrictive would prevent Member States from admitting the number of immigrants they wish to and that could have serious repercussions on their economic competitiveness or that of their regions. It therefore recommends measures to ensure that any future legislation on admission criteria is compatible with the various national, regional and local situations;

| 2.4 | while noting that common rules can bring added value, in view of the transnational considerations and the effect that one Member State's policy has on another Member State, recommends that evidence should be provided of the added value of any future European legislation before it is adopted and that areas be identified which do not have transnational implications and can therefore be regulated more effectively at Member-State level; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

while noting that common rules can bring added value, in view of the transnational considerations and the effect that one Member State's policy has on another Member State, recommends that evidence should be provided of the added value of any future European legislation before it is adopted and that areas be identified which do not have transnational implications and can therefore be regulated more effectively at Member-State level;

| 2.5 | given that the Green Paper (pre-legislative consultation) does not specify the kind of legislative instrument that might be adopted, considers that it should be a directive, as this would provide national-policy guidelines but leave each Member State free to decide on certain matters and to cater for specific regional and local characteristics. Furthermore, it would establish guidelines for conditions of entry and residency, in order to avoid one state's immigration policy impinging on that of another. The use of a directive could ensure that Member States have enough flexibility, inter alia to cater for specific local and regional characteristics; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

given that the Green Paper (pre-legislative consultation) does not specify the kind of legislative instrument that might be adopted, considers that it should be a directive, as this would provide national-policy guidelines but leave each Member State free to decide on certain matters and to cater for specific regional and local characteristics. Furthermore, it would establish guidelines for conditions of entry and residency, in order to avoid one state's immigration policy impinging on that of another. The use of a directive could ensure that Member States have enough flexibility, inter alia to cater for specific local and regional characteristics;

| 2.6 | also considers that the option of a regulatory instrument to define social and civil rights could be explored; |
| --- | --- |

2.6

also considers that the option of a regulatory instrument to define social and civil rights could be explored;

| 2.7 | recommends that the pre-legislative consultation process should be extensive and involve regional and local authorities, given that the Commission itself sees them as major stakeholders in immigration policy; |
| --- | --- |

2.7

recommends that the pre-legislative consultation process should be extensive and involve regional and local authorities, given that the Commission itself sees them as major stakeholders in immigration policy;

| 2.8 | given the vague reference to the need to take regional and local considerations into account (page 8 of the Green Paper), calls upon the Commission to give greater recognition in the future legislation to the role of regional and local authorities in identifying areas of the labour market which are in need of migrant workers.
  Moreover, it reiterates the need for a programme promoting the exchange of best practice in migration policy and suggests that the European Union support the establishment of regional contact points for companies interested in the migrant workforce, in order to respond to the fall in available labour and promote economic development.
  It considers that a specific assessment of the regional and local dimensions of economic migration policy and of the economic and social impact of the proposed measures, as well as of the financial support needed, would be useful.
  The CoR itself should set in motion the measures necessary for an impact assessment (studies, surveys, hearings, conferences, questionnaires) with a view to better regulation and coordination of immigration and integration policies; |
| --- | --- |

2.8

given the vague reference to the need to take regional and local considerations into account (page 8 of the Green Paper), calls upon the Commission to give greater recognition in the future legislation to the role of regional and local authorities in identifying areas of the labour market which are in need of migrant workers.

Moreover, it reiterates the need for a programme promoting the exchange of best practice in migration policy and suggests that the European Union support the establishment of regional contact points for companies interested in the migrant workforce, in order to respond to the fall in available labour and promote economic development.

It considers that a specific assessment of the regional and local dimensions of economic migration policy and of the economic and social impact of the proposed measures, as well as of the financial support needed, would be useful.

The CoR itself should set in motion the measures necessary for an impact assessment (studies, surveys, hearings, conferences, questionnaires) with a view to better regulation and coordination of immigration and integration policies;

| 2.9 | having noted the Commission's insistence that any future measures should minimise the administrative burden for Member States and third countries and its failure to make any direct reference to the question of cost, whereas many measures do clearly entail cost, deems necessary an assessment of the administrative and financial constraints that such measures may impose on regional and local authorities. These kinds of programmes are costly and so their impact needs to be assessed. They will have to be funded by central government and the EU, without prejudice to local authorities' power to decide on their content and to implement them. |
| --- | --- |

2.9

having noted the Commission's insistence that any future measures should minimise the administrative burden for Member States and third countries and its failure to make any direct reference to the question of cost, whereas many measures do clearly entail cost, deems necessary an assessment of the administrative and financial constraints that such measures may impose on regional and local authorities. These kinds of programmes are costly and so their impact needs to be assessed. They will have to be funded by central government and the EU, without prejudice to local authorities' power to decide on their content and to implement them.

Brussels, 7 July 2005

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---

(1)  OJ C 73 of 26.3.2003, p. 16

1

(2)  OJ C 278 of 14.11.2002, p. 44

2

(3)  OJ C 19 of 22.1.2002, p. 20

3

(4)  OJ C 107 of 3.5.2002, p. 85

4

(5)  OJ C 19 of 22.1.2002, p. 18

5

(6)  OJ C 244 of 10.10.2003, p. 5

6

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

7

(8)  OJ C 125 of 27.5.2002, p. 112

8

(9)  OJ C 109 of 30.4.2004, p. 46

9

(10)  OJ C 192 of 12.08.2002, p. 20

10

---