No C 83/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 3. 87 
year in the territory of each Member State. It regrets this 
restriction, and the distribution between Member States. It 
recommends setting an appropriate maximum number of 
eligible outbreaks for the Community as a whole, so as to 
be able to channel refunds selectively if necessary. An 
increase in the number of eligible outbreaks and a 
Community-wide allocation system would make it easier to 
control swine fever. 
2.3. Article 5, paragraph 4 of the first proposal 
The Committee recommends that heat treatment of pig 
feed liable to contain pigmeat or pigmeat products (kitchen 
waste) be included in the national plans for controlling 
Done at Brussels, 28 January 1987. 
The Committee welcomes the Proposal to extend the 
plan (2) for the transnational development of the support­
ing infrastructure for innovation and technology transfer 
(the 'SPRINT' Programme) to 31 December 1988 subject to 
the following comments: 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee strongly endorses the aim of the 
SPRINT Programme which is to enhance the competi-
(!) OJ No C 335, 30. 12. 1986, p. 14. 
(2) OJ No C 33, 7. 2. 1983, p. 17. The Committee unanimously, 
with one abstention, approved this plan on 16 December 1982. classical swine fever. In its regular on-the-spot checks, the 
Commission should verify that heat treatment has been 
carried out. The Member States should be urged to include 
heat treatment in their national programmes. 
2.4. Article 1, paragraph 2 of the second proposal 
The Committee recommends amplifying the new Article 
4(a)(1) of Directive 80/1095/EEC to state that, in the case 
of areas close to the frontier, Member States should liaise 
with the appropriate neighbouring States if the area in the 
Member State concerned is to be officially declared 'swine 
fever free' after expiry of the deadline laid down. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
tiveness of industry by encouraging innovation and the 
transfer of technology across boundaries. 
1.2. It feels that the Commission is right in focussing its 
activities on specific product areas with a view to the 
development of new products and the improvement of 
production in all sectors. The mature industries and in 
particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) 
should be included in these activities. The present 
' programme in the Committee's opinion is a wholly justified 
case of Community intervention in an area of proven 
additionality and the programme respects the principle of 
avoiding interference in what the Member States should 
and must do for themselves in their own interest. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision modifying Council Decision 83/624/EEC 
concerning a plan for the transnational development of the supporting infrastructure for 
innovation and technology transfer (*) 
(87/C 83/04) 
On 29 October 1986 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community on the abovementioned 
proposal. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 7 January 1987, in the light of the report 
by Mr de Normann. 
At its 243rd Plenary Session (meeting of 28 January 1987) the Committee adopted the following 
Opinion unanimously. 
30. 3. 87 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 83/5 
1.3. The Committee feels that the SPRINT programme 
is important enough to warrant proposals of a wider nature 
as soon as is practicable — commensurate with the needs, 
not least in view of the campaign to achieve an internal 
market by 1992. 
1.4. The Committee, therefore, considers that the level 
of funding should become more ambitious. It urges the 
Council, however, to avoid any reduction of the proposed 
level of funding, so long as the present format is 
maintained. 
1.5. The Committee warns against spreading the 
available funds too thinly on too many projects. It would 
have preferred to see fewer projects tackled in the requisite 
depth to ensure success. 
1.6. The Committee feels that an intensive campaign 
providing information about Community and national 
programme directly to the end-user, is a key to the success 
of such programmes. More emphasis should be put on this 
aspect in the SPRINT programme. There is a need for the 
fuller dissemination to SMEs of information even on the 
limited programmes which have been achieved to date. The 
Commission should request Member States to review the 
promotion within their own countries of SPRINT initia­
tives to ensure that SMEs are more aware of the assistance 
and information which is now available. 
1.7. The Commission should also initiate a review of the 
actions taken by each Member State to encourage 
innovation and technology transfer amongst SMEs with a 
view to providing a summary of such information to each 
Member State in order to stimulate the fuller adoption of 
the more effective initiatives throughout the Community. 
1.8. It is important that the working groups within the 
SPRINT programme, which have been set up to encourage 
the exchange of information and experience between the 
Member States and the Commission, should include 
representatives exercising relevant responsibility in small 
and medium-sized companies involved in innovation and 
technology transfer. Such firms can be identified through 
the smaller business organizations of Member States. 
Whilst recognizing the role which must be played by 
experts it is vital that the practical experience of 
representatives of SMEs is available to these working 
groups. 
1.9. Finally, the Committee urges the Commission to 
make sure that the management of the proposed pro­
gramme involves effective coordination between all 
relevant Directorates General and, not the least, the Task 
Force for SMEs. 2. Specific comments 
2.1. The Committee draws particular attention to the 
ICONE Programme to dissemintate information on 
technical standards and regulations on a Community-wide 
scale (Action 7). It regards this as one of the key activities 
supporting the creation of an internal market by 1992, and 
it urges the Council to ensure that this activity is adequately 
funded. If funding under this programme should prove 
inadequate the Committee suggests that the Commission 
propose this as a separate, clearly defined activity 
preferably to be funded as a shared-cost project with 
Member State institutions. 
2.2. As far as the financing of the programme is 
concerned this will largely be done by shared-cost contracts 
in which the Commission share will be limited to a 
maximum of 50 %, the total cost of the action proposed 
thus being around 22 000 000 ECU of which half will be 
provided from Member State organizations acting as 
contractors to the Commission. 
2.2.1. The Committee urges the Commission to ensure 
that a number of specific guidelines suggested in its 
Opinion of 21 May 1986 (EC-shared cost research, 
development and demonstration programmes) be observed 
for the current programme. 
2.2.2. However, the Committee recommends that the 
Commission in exceptional circumstances consider fund­
ing in excess of 50 % in particularly important cases which 
otherwise would have no chance of being implemented. 
2.2.3. In the interest of a one-speed Europe the 
Committee invites the Commission to set up adequate 
programmes for developing innovation infrastructure, 
where necessary, to enable Member States with weaker 
infrastructures to participate fully in transnational projects 
under the SPRINT programme. The Committee under­
stands that in the first two years of operation of the current 
programme some 5 % of funding has been so expended, 
but suggests that this level be evaluated and if necessary, 
raised. 
2.2.4. The Committee is pleased that the Commission in 
line with its earlier proposal proposes to launch a 
cooperative network to promote design in recognition of 
the importance of industrial design in new competitive 
products. 
2.2.5. It also supports the action concerning dissemi­
nation of information regarding industrial property and 
innovation which is in keeping with one of the recommend­
ations for action made in the abovementioned Report. 
2.2.6. To enable SMEs to innovate effectively and be 
ready to take risks, there is in the Committee's view a 
No C 83/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 3. 87 
fundamental need for much greater access for SMEs to long 
term patient money with preferential rates of interest for 
these businesses in order to inspire Confidence and certainty 
about the cash flow cost of the investment. It is vital to get 
away from the concept promoted by venture capitalists that 
it must be possible for an investment to be realized within 
four to seven years at a handsome gain if a business is to be 
regarded as successful and worth investment. Without a 
long term view of investment it will not be possible for 
SMEs to take full advantage in practice of innovation and 
technology transfer, which will be the basis of any 
significant recovery of the economies of the Community. 
The Commission should therefore consider the need for 
low cost long term loans (up to 160 000 ECUs) to 
encourage investment by SMEs in the latest technology — 
either by loans through the European Investment Bank 
raised in international capital markets at low rates of 
interest, or through NIC 4 moneys with an interest subsidy, 
channelled through to banks at Member State level. 
2.2.7. The Committee urges the Council to ensure that 
the Commission propose an effective independent evalu­
ation technique which is applicable to all existing and 
proposed areas of expenditure in the SPRINT programme. 
The Commission should be asked to use these techniques to 
determine the value to the Community obtained from the 
expenditure. 2.2.7.1. The Committee feels that such techniques must 
be established concurrently with the current programmes 
so that they may be built into the wider SPRINT II 
successor programme envisaged by the Commission. 
2.2.7.2. As an example the Committee suggests that 
known awareness evaluation techniques be applied to a 
cross section of Member State SMEs to establish the 
effectiveness of actions to disseminate information taken 
under this programme. 
2.2.7.3. In this respect the Committee welcomes the 
Commission proposal to carry out in each Member State an 
interim assessment of the actions taken so far under the 
Plan. 
2.2.8. The Committee commends the initiative of the 
Commission in preparing leaflets on the individual 
programmes of SPRINT in three languages together with a 
point of contact in the Commission for further inform­
ation. 
2.2.8.1. The Committee would like to see this mecha­
nism extended so that the Commission leaflets are 
distributed by appropriate organizations in each Member 
State and thereby reach the audience for which they are 
designed. 
Done at Brussels, 28 January 1987. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting the European Community Action 
Scheme for the Mobility of University Students (Erasmus) 
(87/C 83/05) 
On 22 December 1986 the Council, acting in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty setting up 
the European Economic Community, asked the Economic and Social Committee for an Opinion on 
the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs was instructed to prepare the 
Committee's work on the matter. The Section adopted its Opinion on 15 January 1987 after 
hearing a report by Mr Pearson.