ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 424/73

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate for direct payments provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2014’

COM(2014) 175 final — 2014/0097 COD

2014/C 424/12

On 2 April 2014, the European Parliament and on 22 April 2014 the Council respectively decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43(2) of the TFEU, on the:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate for direct payments provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2014

COM(2014) 175 final — 2014/0097 COD.

Since the Committee has already set out its views on the content of the proposal in question in its opinion CES2942-2013_00_00_TRA_AC, adopted on 22 May 2013 (1), it decided, at its 499th plenary session of 4 and 5 June 2014 (meeting of 4 June), by 132 votes to 2 with 6 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

Brussels, 4 June 2014. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Henri MALOSSE

(1) EESC opinion NAT/602 on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate to direct payments provided for in Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2013, 2013/C 271/27, page 143 of 19 September 2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 230/126

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down Union procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Union’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (codification)

COM(2014) 341 final — 2014/0174 (COD)

(2015/C 230/27)

On 15 September 2014 the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down Union procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Union’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (codification)

COM(2014) 341 final — 2014/0174 (COD).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 503rd plenary session of 10 and 11 December 2014 (meeting of 10 December), by 150 votes to 3 with 1 abstention, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 268/45

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (recast)’

(COM(2015) 48 final — 2015/0027 (COD))

(2015/C 268/08)

On 12 February 2015 and 4 March 2015 respectively, the European Parliament and the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (recast)

(COM(2015) 48 final — 2015/0027 (COD)).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 506th plenary session of 18 and 19 March 2015 (meeting of 18 March), by 165 votes to one with six abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
3.6.

The EESC considers that the legislative process at European level must be examined first in order to improve the quality of legislation. There are many initiatives that aim to improve the legislative process, but the stakeholders in this process do not agree on how this should be done. The EESC refers to the Commission guidelines in its ‘Better Law-making’ programme (19 May 2015) and the Interinstitutional Agreement (December 2015/16, April 2016), the Brok-Bresso report (February 2016), the Hübner report (March 2016), the Giegold report (end May 2016) and in particular to the Small Business Act (February 2011). It also draws attention to the proposals of Member States’ governments and parliaments, to initiatives such as European Movement International (EMI) and the Union of European Federalists (UEF), as well as to the contributions of research institutes and think tanks.
3.1.1.

Notification obligations with regard to intergovernmental agreements: — the Member State is obliged to inform the Commission of its intent to enter into negotiations with a third country in order to conclude new intergovernmental agreements on gas supply or amend existing ones; — the Commission should be kept informed of progress in preparations for the agreement once notice of the negotiations is given; — Commission services may provide Member State with advice on how to avoid incompatibility of the intergovernmental agreement with Union law or Union policy positions adopted in Council or European Council conclusions where Member State gives Commission notice of negotiations; — the Member State is obliged to notify the Commission about draft intergovernmental agreements or amendments to them, with all accompanying documents, as soon as the parties have reached agreement on all of their main elements, so that the Commission can carry out an ex-ante evaluation; — the Member State is obliged to notify the Commission regarding intergovernmental agreements or amendments, with all accompanying documents, upon ratification; — the Member State is obliged to notify the Commission about all existing intergovernmental agreements or amendments, with all accompanying documents; — agreements between undertakings are not covered by notification obligations, but may be submitted on a voluntary basis; — the Commission is obliged to share information and documents it has received with other Member States, in accordance with data confidentiality provisions.
1.3.

The EESC asks the European Commission to check and if necessary delete Article 7(2), and also to change, along the lines suggested in this opinion, Articles 9(1), 31, 32, 34 to 36, and 38(4). The exception for at-sea transhipment proposed in Articles 52 to 59 should also be carefully reassessed and possibly removed if the general obligation of in-port transhipment is to prevail.
4.2

The Committee is impressed by the competency that ENISA has developed over the years and we believe that it could contribute even more to Europe’s cybersecurity resilience and security. The operational mandate of ENISA should be strengthened to more effectively increase cyberattack threat awareness and response across the Union. A review of the mandate is timely, given how the cybersecurity environment has changed since ENISA was established. Building on the NIS Directive, perhaps the operational role of ENISA could be expanded to increase the value it can deliver to the EU, Member States, citizens and companies, by leveraging its competencies and synergies with the work of other EU and MS institutions, agencies and bodies, like CERT-EU, the European Cybercrime Centre and the European Defence Agency. ENISA should also be given more direct responsibility for cybersecurity education and awareness programmes specifically targeted at citizens and SMEs.
1.3.

For vessels catching fish stocks subject to total allowable catches (TACs), it means that they should stop fishing once their quota for that stock is exhausted. Prior to the adoption of the Basic Regulation (2), vessels did not have to stop fishing once their quota for one of these species was exhausted. Instead, they were able to continue fishing for other target species and, as a result, they continued to catch the species for which quotas were already exhausted, even though they could not legally land these catches. These catches in excess of the quota had to be discarded. Once the quota for that stock was exhausted, it would block the opportunities to continue fishing for other stocks. It is, therefore, desirable to account for the fact that some stocks are caught together in mixed fisheries when setting TACs for these stocks. Such an approach should have advantages for both stock conservation and for exploitation of the stocks. This proposal takes this approach.
3.11.

The EESC supports the Commission initiative to extend its monitoring of countries’ performance on all cases of double taxation disputes in cross-border situations on a yearly basis, in order to assess whether the objectives of the directive are met. Existing analysis shows that there are cases that are prevented from entering existing mechanisms, that are not covered by the scope of the Union Arbitration Convention or DTCs, that get held up without the taxpayer being informed about the reasons or that are not resolved at all. At this stage, the EESC does not find the performance at Member State level satisfactory and calls for close Commission scrutiny of the functioning of the directive when implemented and publication of its analysis and results.
3.16.

The private sector role in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda should be evaluated based on its capacity to contribute to the achievement of the development goals for the beneficiary countries and based on the principles of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation. While new funding instruments involving private actors can be an effective tool for generating economic development, employment and public budget revenues, it is important that these instruments submit themselves to the same transparency and evaluation conditions as public funding. The EU and its Member States should fund transparent, independent evaluations enabling stakeholders, including at local level, to assess the cost-effectiveness and impact of private-sector, commercial, development financing activities. The EU and its Member States should agree on a coherent narrative on the role of the private sector in development to make sure that no regions or countries in need are left behind. Innovative development finance mechanisms such as public-private partnerships (PPPs) should be assessed against development and cost effectiveness principles to prevent tied aid and to ensure a regulatory environment that allows governments to organise public services.
6.4

A decentralised and business-friendly model based on the administrative structures of the Member States can succeed only in so far as the national administrative authorities are heeded. In consequence, permanent, flexible institutional structures need to be set up. For this reason, it is proposed to set up a support body or organisation under the guidance of the European Commission and with the involvement of the Customs Policy Group, with a view to: — assisting with legislative implementation issues — in part through a comprehensive guide to application of the UCC and organisation of the other texts, — managing the IT infrastructure; also encapsulating the European Customs Training Institute (6), which, on the basis of the EU Customs Competency Framework, will be responsible for: — ensuring a high level of specialisation and promoting professional expertise in the customs sector based on the European Training Curricula, — organising operational action and training programmes focusing specifically on security matters, — putting together a comprehensive guide to applying the UCC and its implementing provisions, and structuring the relevant legislation, — sharing management of electronic systems to ensure accessibility of information and procedures on the single platform in order to make things easier for third-country operators. To this end, the move to a paperless environment should be immediately stepped up, creating a common reference point to simplify procedures, as provided for in the UCC, — possibly deciding to issue guidelines with the aim of responding rapidly and directly to new challenges. With regard to this organisation, the EESC maintains its position and recommends the creation of a European rapid intervention team to support the specialised and important work of customs authorities, particularly those situated on the Union’s external borders.
4.7.

However, it is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council must receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts must have access systematically to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
4.8.

As regards the types of project, the EESC considers it essential to combat the job insecurity of workers in Europe’s defence industry. The purpose of the EU funding is to strengthen the expertise of the defence technological and industrial base. Since the industry’s expertise is dependent on its workers, they need to have long-term, secure terms of employment with the companies that employ them.
3.5.

The EESC believes that the EU-Africa joint strategy must be based on a robust policy of sustainable development based on what is actually happening at grassroots level in Africa; this is a prerequisite for efficient aid to combat poverty equitably, promote healthy growth in the fields of the economy, the environment (devastating climate change) and society, based on work which is decent (long-term jobs), productive, free, able to combat poverty and social exclusion, ethical and dignified. Boosting local production, guaranteeing food security and a decent income for family farms and SMEs and establishing an internal market (property rights and less red tape and corruption) can all help combat poverty. Therefore, common policies must focus particularly on agriculture and food security. They must support sustainable farming models geared towards small-scale land owners who provide jobs by developing specific sectors. Both the EU and the AU have a duty to identify successful farming models and policies and promote them among disadvantaged communities in the same or other countries.
3.1.2.

The key to productivity growth is investment, quality of employment, innovation and knowledge. With less capital investment, less new equipment is provided to workers, and, ceteris paribus , future productivity growth rates and levels are lower. This is especially true in times when labour force growth slows because of demographic changes and declining birth-rates as is the case in Europe. For work to become more productive, investments must be made in education, lifelong learning and training, in improving working conditions, in basic services such as childcare and out-of-school care, in modernised plants, equipment, and productive techniques, in new discoveries and innovations and in transportation, communications, and other infrastructure. Additionally, it must be taken into consideration that large-scale public investment, including social investment, operates on a far longer timescale. Therefore, giving further consideration to planning requirements should help increase public investment. To this end, the EESC reiterates its call to approve the adoption of what is referred to as the ‘golden rule of public investment’ to stimulate public investment.
1.5.

The proposed provision that, for international and national transport services (including urban and suburban services) over distances of less than 100 kilometres as the crow flies, access to the market may only be refused if the service offered would compromise the economic equilibrium of a public service contract could in some cases be difficult to reconcile with the need for a service of general interest that is affordable and of appropriate quality for all. All the market can do, in compliance with the legislation on fair competition, is offer a price determined on the basis of costs. However some Member States do have a fully or partly deregulated market, with reasonably good results. The proposal would in such cases risk a step backwards.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 227/102

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1139 as regards fishing mortality ranges and safeguard levels for certain herring stocks in the Baltic Sea’

(COM(2017) 774 final — 2017/0348 COD)

(2018/C 227/16)

Consultation European Parliament, 15.1.2018 Council of the European Union, 19.1.2018 Legal basis Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment Adopted at plenary 14.2.2018 Plenary session No 532 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 193/1/3

Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 532nd plenary session of 14 and 15 February 2018 (meeting of 14 February), by 193 votes to 1 with 3 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
4.7.

The proposal includes a lengthy analysis of its compatibility with and legality under other EU legislation, including that on General Data Protection (GDPR) just now coming into full force. The limitations of the current system of CN codes which are used to identify cross-border movements of substances and mixtures are also discussed — as they were eight years ago when the previous opinion was written. Given that there are only 18 substances currently listed — and probably no more than 12 that could still be listed — it should be possible to develop appropriate customs codes specifically for use under this Regulation and to ensure that other EU legislation developed for other purposes does not conflict with the basic aims of the safety and security of EU citizens.
1.1.2.

For today’s children, their parents’ hesitancy with regard to vaccines represents one of the greatest dangers to their well-being — the result of long-standing scientific evidence being undermined to promote an anti-vaccination agenda. This wider trend of suspicion of experts and scientific consensus must be tackled through evidence-based communication, increased transparency and awareness-raising if we are to avoid the epidemics of measles that have gripped the EU and the recent fatal cases of diphtheria. Public engagement in research and innovation programmes such as the ‘Science with and for society’ programme is one of the tools the Commission should use to educate on the benefits of vaccination.
5.7.1.

Private-law enforcement In relation to private-law enforcement, the party concerned should have access to prohibitory and eliminatory injunctions and claims for damages. But because of the ‘fear factor’, such remedies are of rather minor importance. Moreover, all associations concerned should be able to apply for prohibitory and eliminatory injunctions. This would guarantee special protection of the party concerned with regard to anonymity, in the event that the unfair trade practice is directed at several undertakings (e.g. a food operator requiring all its suppliers/buyers to contribute to any additional cost). The party or association concerned should be given the option of bringing these claims either before a court or an ombudsman. The ombudsman procedure would have the advantage that the dispute would not have to be conducted in public. A specific ombudsman procedure should be established. The ombudsman should also receive specific decision-making powers. Voluntary proceedings would in many cases not be effective or provide real remedies. In addition to that, the EESC encourages the operators to develop initiatives in order to promote a cultural change and to improve fairness in the supply chain.
2.5.

Because there is the expected loss of EU recognition of ‘organisations’ who are sponsored by the UK, it is logical to assume that there will be negative consequences for the competitiveness and appeal of the EU-27 Member States’ flags that have authorised these recognised organisations to act on their behalf for the purposes of carrying out statutory ship inspections, surveys and certification. Many of the organisations affected have authorisation agreements with the remaining 27 Member States, which would become void following the UK withdrawal.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems (borders and visa) and amending Council Decision 2004/512/EC, Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, Council Decision 2008/633/JHA, Regulation (EU) 2016/399, Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the ETIAS Regulation], Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the Regulation on SIS in the field of border checks] and Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the eu-LISA Regulation]’

(COM(2018) 478 final — 2017/0351 (COD))

and on ‘Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems (police and judicial cooperation, asylum and migration) and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the Eurodac Regulation], Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the Regulation on SIS in the field of law enforcement], Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the ECRIS-TCN Regulation] and Regulation (EU) 2018/XX [the eu-LlSA Regulation]’

(COM(2018) 480 final — 2017/0352 (COD))

(2019/C 62/51)

Referral European Parliament, 10.9.2018 Legal basis Articles 16(2), 74, 77(2)(a) (b) (d) and (e) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship Adopted at plenary 17.10.2018 Plenary session No 538 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 196/2/5

Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal and has already set out its views on the subject in its earlier opinion SOC/573 — Interoperability package (1), adopted on 23 May 2018, it decided, at its 538th plenary session of 17 and 18 October 2018 (meeting of 17 October 2018), by 196 votes to two with five abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text and to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document(s).

Brussels, 17 October 2018. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Luca JAHIER

(1) OJ C 283, 10.8.2018, p. 48
3.8.3.

Volunteering is a very diverse concept. It can be extremely limited in time or it can be quite extensive. It can involve differing degrees of altruism, enthusiasm and most particularly time. Volunteering is undoubtedly a public good and at the same time can serve vital social and economic interests in terms of taking the pressure off the State and ensuring vital tasks get done often in a very local concept. The State then needs to support volunteering as does the EU. While the European Solidarity Corps is only one programme, its focus on effectively full-time volunteering in a transnational context highlights this approach. Thus other types of volunteering may not get the same attention, even with the best will in the world.