8. 8. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 208/51 
APPENDIX 1 
to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following members, present or represented, voted for the Opinion: 
Mr/Mrs/Miss: Amato, Arena, Ataide-Ferreira, Beltrami, Beretta, Bernasconi, Bleser, Boddy, Bredima-Savo-
poulou, Breyiannis, Brigand, Lobo-Brandao R. Cal, Carroll, Cavazzuti, Ceyrac, Christie, Clavel, Collas, 
Cortois, Curlis, van Dam, Dassis, Delhomenie, De Tavernier, Dos Santos, Drilleaud, Droulin, Dunet, van 
Eekert, Etty, Eulen, Flum, Forgas, Frandi, Gayetot, Geuenich, Giacomelli, Glesener, Gomez-Martinez, 
Hammond, Hilkens, Houthuys, Horsken, Jaschick, Jenkins, Kitsios, Laka-Martin, Larsen, Laur, Lojewski, 
Low, Luchetti, Maddocks, Mainetti, Margalef-Masia, Martin-Almendro, Martin-Castella, Mourgues, Muhr, 
Muller, Muniz-Guardado, Murphy, Nielsen B., Nielsen P., Nierhaus, Nieuwenhuize, Noordwal, Orsi, Perrin-
Pelletier, Petropoulos, Polyzos, Proenca, Pronk, Proumens, Raftopoulos, Rangoni-Machiavelli, Robinson, 
Rouzier, Saiu, Schmitz, Schnieders, Schopges, Silva, Spijkers, Stadelin, Tixier, Tukker, Vallejo-Calderon, 
Vanden Broucke, Velasco-Mancebo, Vercellino, Wick, Yverneau, Zufiaur-Narvaiza. 
The following members, present or represented, voted against the Opinion: 
Mr/Mrs/Miss: Fresi, Gardner, Lancastre, Moreland, Poeton, Rolao-Goncalves, Storie-Pugh, Tamlin. 
The following members, present or represented, abstained: 
Mr/Mrs/Miss: Arets, Aspinall, Boisseree, Dodd, Kenna, Kirchfeld, Kroger, de Normann, Nugeyre, Pearson, 
Pelletier, Salmon, Schade-Poulsen, Solari, Tiemann. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation on financial support for Portugal for a 
specific industrial development programme, PEDIP (!) 
(88/C 208/14) 
On 29 April 1988 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. 
Given that the Council, which was asked to decide on this proposal as soon as possible, 
asked the Committee to give its Opinion urgently, Mr Cal was instructed, as rapporteur-
general, to draw up a draft Opinion for the June 1988 plenary session. 
At its 256th plenary session of 1-3 June 1988 (meeting of 3 June 1988) the Economic and 
Social Committee (unanimously) adopted the following Opinion. 
1. Preliminary comments 
1.1. When Portugal signed its Act of Accession, the 
Community recognized that the Portuguese economy 
faced special problems. A ten-year programme for the 
development of Portuguese agriculture was drawn up, 
and it was agreed that a parallel effort would have to 
be made in the industrial sphere in order to modernize 
the manufacturing sector and adjust it to the Com­
munity and international economies. 
(') OJ No C 120, 7. 5. 1988, p. 9. 1.2. The Portuguese Government submitted a blue­
print for a specific industrial development programme 
for Portugal, PEDIP, to the Commission in February 
1986. 
In October 1986 the Commission sent the Council a 
Communication on the PEDIP [doc. COM(86) 552 
final], and at the beginning of 1987 a group of experts 
was sent to Portugal to identify priorities for Com­
munity aid for the period from 1988 to 1992, in line 
with the general approach of the outline framework 
Directive reforming the structural funds. 
No C 208/52 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 8. 88 
1.3. On 12/13 February 1988 the Council approved, 
in addition to the assistance already provided from the 
structural funds and Community loans, an extra budget 
appropriation of ECU 500 million to be spent on the 
PEDIP. 
The Council also instructed the Commission to draw 
up, in close collaboration with the Portuguese Govern­
ment, the series of measures contained in the PEDIP. 
The purpose of the present Commission proposal for 
a Regulation is to lay down provisions for the use of 
these additional resources. 
1.4. The Economic and Social Committee has fol­
lowed the progress of the PEDIP very attentively. In 
the course of 1987 and 1988, various Commission rep­
resentatives attended meetings of the Regional Develop­
ment Section and kept it informed of developments 
even before the Council officially referred the matter 
to the Committee. 
2. General comments 
2.1. The difficulties experienced by Portuguese 
industry in integrating into the Community arise from 
structural deficiencies (low overall productivity, dispro­
portionate number of traditional sectors, inadequate 
basic infrastructure and training for workers, archaic 
production, management and marketing methods, pro­
nounced energy and technology dependency, lack of 
own capital on the part of businesses and consequent 
inability to finance themselves, bureaucratic rigidity, 
limited degree of internationalization, etc.). 
In the meantime, an intensive process of industrial 
modernization and restructuring has been under way 
in the rest of the Community, making it even harder 
for a small, peripheral country like Portugal, with a 
gross domestic product (GDP) of only 0,8% of the 
Community's GDP and a per capita income of about a 
quarter of the Community average, to integrate. 
However, 70% of product imported by Portugal 
already come from the other Community countries. 
2.2. The effect of the internal market to be created 
by 1992 will be to widen the gap between regions 
enjoying cumulative growth and regions which are 
backward, declining or more vulnerable. 
With greater specialization and consequent economies 
of scale naturally tending to accelerate growth in the 
more prosperous regions and heighten regional dispar­
ities, it is imperative to find suitable ways of channeling 
some of this growth towards the poorer regions, includ­
ing Portugal. 2.3. In its November 1987 Opinion on the reform of 
the structural funds (!), the Committee recommended, 
in addition to doubling the resources of the structural 
funds, that economic policies be more closely aligned 
to make for faster growth in the Community economy 
as a whole. 
As far back as 1978, in its overall reflections on enlarge­
ment, the Commission recognized that financial support 
was meaningless unless it was incorporated into a pol­
icy (2) and that only by adopting a broad approach was 
it possible to contribute constructively to the restructur­
ing of the economy. 
2.4. Portugal's traditional industrial structure and 
marked openness to external trade will stand it in good 
stead in the restructuring process, provided a clear set 
of development objectives and priorities is drawn up. 
Community measures in Portugal will have to be con­
sistent and compatible to be effective and to keep sight 
of the overriding need for economic convergence in the 
Community, especially since they will involve transfer­
ring considerable sums in the next few years, which 
will have a marked impact at macroeconomic level in 
Portugal. 
2.5. Administrative ossification and archaic working 
methods on the part of the State and the intermediate 
agencies operating between the State and businesses are 
making it increasingly difficult to exploit the potential 
for growth. Against this background, any measures 
introduced in the industrial sector will have to concen­
trate on changing procedures, training those in pos­
itions of responsibility, making structures more flexible 
and trimming the red tape so that the sector's vitality, 
which we are seeking to enhance, can make itself felt. 
A climate which encourages private and cooperative 
economic initiative is also required. 
This will pave the way for strengthening Portugal's 
technical ability to design and implement large-scale 
projects which, given the severe shortage of basic infra­
structure, are vital if Community funds are to be used 
properly. 
3. Basic content of the Programme 
3.0. The Committee endorses the proposed Council 
Regulation and in particular agrees with the four pri­
ority areas listed in Article 2. These reflect the need of 
Portuguese industry for support, and make it possible 
to effectively coordinate and develop synergy with other 
national and Community programmes designed to 
develop the Portuguese economy. 
(') OJNoC356, 31. 12. 1987. 
(2) See doc. COM(78): General considerations on the problems 
of enlargement. 
8. 8. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 208/53 
3.1. Faster improvement of basic industrial infra­
structure (priority area no. 1) is in response to the 
quantitative and qualitative shortcomings of transport 
networks, the material environment of businesses and 
technological infrastructure. 
Infrastructure to be financed by the PEDIP in these 
three areas, without neglecting other, urgently-needed 
projects, should be identified in a medium-term guide­
line programme on where to set up industry, as pro­
vided for in current surveys and the new Regional 
Development Programme. 
Access to energy supply networks, together with the 
development and modernization of telecommunications 
(especially through the STAR programme), the water 
supply, sanitary installations and industrial waste pro­
cessing plants is essential if industry is to develop in 
the right kind of environment, with close monitoring 
of its ecological impact. 
By creating new technology institutes, technological 
parks and technical centres for the modernization of 
traditional industry, it will be possible to carry out 
more research, improve links between research and 
industry, ensure that existing industries are competitive 
and innovative and set up new industries, creating more 
jobs. 
3.2. Stronger foundations for basic and further 
vocational training (priority area no. 2) is in response to 
the unanimous call by the representatives of employers, 
workers and the public sector: the chief needs in edu­
cation and training are for initial training for workers 
and technicians and specialized training in the use of 
new technologies. 
If industrial productivity and quality objectives are to 
be met, training programmes in health and safety at 
work will also be required, in connection with priority 
area no. 4. 
Production managers will require more general training 
in new management and organisation methods. 
The White Paper on vocational training, which is in 
preparation, will specify all these needs and correspond­
ing resources, in consultation with those involved. 
By building up a network of vocational training centres, 
either State-run or State-approved, for existing indus­
try, increasing and diversifying the training of tech­
nicians, and setting up and running further training 
courses, three integrated operational programmes will 
come into being, requiring Community assistance not 
only financially but also in human terms. 3.3. The financing of productive investment (priority 
area no. 3) should first and foremost help overcome the 
twin obstacles of technological backwardness and poor 
industrial quality. Given the short timescale until 1992 
it will also help restructure and modernize existing 
industry, by ensuring that it is competitive in the future 
in order to safeguard as many jobs as possible. 
If these aims are to be accomplished, an increase in 
own capital and in the capacity for self-financing on 
the part of businesses, together with more modern 
banking and financial systems, will be needed. Financial 
assistance from the European Investment Bank in vari­
ous projects should be accompanied by technical assist­
ance from financial institutions in creating financial 
instruments which are tailored to the needs of firms, 
thereby strengthening the financial measures. 
Technological innovation and industrial investment 
will be financed by public loans. Within the limits laid 
down according to the type of project, Community 
resources will go towards financing research and devel­
opment, the development of new products and process­
es to replace the transfer of technology, investment 
in production and the acquisition of various types of 
technology, products or software. 
By fixing ceilings, co-financing quotas and precise eligi­
bility criteria for firms and projects, and by using public 
selection procedures, it should be possible to make 
effective use of aid, without the administrative aspects 
becoming unwieldy. 
Aid for the improvement of industrial quality will be 
spent on purchasing laboratory equipment, introducing 
and extending quality controls, eliminating inefficiency, 
product certification and calibration of instruments. 
Finally, financial assistance provided by the PEDIP for 
restructuring industry must be compatible with national 
aid and should be additional to European Regional 
Development Fund (ERDF) aid, provided through the 
PNIC and interest rate subsidies for small and medium-
sized enterprises (SME) granted by the European Invest­
ment Bank (EIB). 
3.4. Productivity tasks (priority area no. 4) should 
be a general feature of the various measures needed to 
improve overall productivity and the industrial quality 
of Portuguese firms. The aim of these tasks should be 
No C 208/54 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 8. 88 
to mobilize human resources, increasing workers' skills, 
motivating them and offering them the opportunity to 
use their initiative and make the most of their special 
abilities. This could be brought about by means of 
surveys and the use of consultants. 
The main aim is to provide small and medium-sized 
firms with access to market surveys and feasibility 
studies, to management, organization and innovation 
consultants and to specialist assistance. Setting up busi­
ness and innovation centres would go a long way 
towards achieving this aim, as would sending Portugue­
se managers on training courses in the other Member 
States. 
But other, more substantial, measures will also be need­
ed if Portuguese industry is to be given the necessary 
capacity resources. Testing and measuring laboratories 
will have to be set up, as will bodies dealing with 
standardization, certification and technical inspections 
and hearings, to ensure genuine progress in the area of 
quality. 
Pilot measures will be needed if new technologies are 
to be widely used. Greater resources for employers' 
organizations and trade unions are essential. 
Finally, major funding should be provided for specific 
programmes to develop information technologies, 
exploit natural resources, strengthen the capital equip­
ment industry and use it to better effect, and strengthen 
manufacturing processes, as they will make a general 
contribution to industrial development. 
3.5. As is pointed out in the draft Regulation, it 
would be desirable for priority to go to areas 3 and 4 
when allocating these additional resources. However, 
if the PEDIP is to be wellcoordinated as a whole, some 
of these funds should be combined with ERDF resources 
in order to create technological infrastructures and with 
ESF resources in order to stengthen vocational training 
facilities. More generally, coordination is needed 
between the measures under PEDIP and those of other 
Community programmes in Portugal. 
It would also be helpful for technological infrastructure, 
financial instruments and productivity and quality 
agencies to be incorporated into a Community-wide 
network of cooperation, so as to be able to draw on 
the expertise and collective strength of all the Member 
States. This is a general prerequisite if industrial devel­
opment in Portugal is to converge with that of the other 
EEC Member States. 4. Specific comments 
4.1. Article 1 
In view of the Council's decision on additional budget­
ary resources, it must be understood that the 500 million 
ECU will be covered by a multiannual financial pro­
gramme. 
This will allow for better adjustment to the require­
ments for implementing the Programme, taking into 
account the launching phase, greater transparency and, 
if needs be, readjustments between years in the light of 
the budget procedure in force. 
4.2. Article 2 
The content of the four priority areas of PEDIP, as set 
out in part 3 of this Opinion, should concentrate on 
industrial policy aims. Infrastructure, training, 
financing and all other measures must contribute to 
improving productivity and quality, and to the develop­
ment of Portuguese industry. 
4.3. Article 3 
The procedure for submitting applications is simple 
and straightforward and the Commission will be able 
to take swift decisions. The procedure is based on 
cooperation between Portugal and the Commission, in 
line with the Council Decision, and guarantees the 
necessary flexibility for the correct implementation of 
the Programme. 
4.4. Article 4 
The rate of Community assistance in financing selected 
measures is fixed at 75%, in accordance with the 
Decisions on the reform of the structural funds regard­
ing regions in priority 1 (less-developed). 
The possibility of the Community financing 100% of 
the total cost of preparatory studies, pilot measures 
and technical assistance measures carried out upon the 
Commission's initiative should be extended to include 
measures to inform economic and social agents of the 
Programme. This will make for greater transparency of 
the systems laid down and a better understanding of 
the actions to be carried out. 
4.5. Article 7 
It is right to require an interim report on the implemen­
tation of this Regulation (to be submitted by mid-June 
1990) in addition to the final report due in 1993. Because 
of the unprecedented nature of this financial support 
for one sector of a Member State's economy, it is 
8. 8. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 208/55 
desirable also to set up a more regular scheme for Reports should also be sent to the Economic and Social 
informing the other Member States. Committee for its Opinion. 
Done at Brussels, 3 June 1988. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending for the ninth time Directive 76/ 
769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the 
Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous 
substances and preparations 
(88/C 208/15) 
On 3 May 1988 the Council of the European Communities decided to consult the Economic 
and Social Committee, under Article 100A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs was 
instructed to prepare the Committee's work on the subject. In the course of its work, the 
Committee appointed Mr Proumens rapporteur-general. 
At its 256th plenary session (meeting of 2 June 1988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by a large majority, except for one abstention. 
The Committee welcomes this ninth amendment to Directive 76/769/EEC. The amendment 
is essentially concerned with one substance: pentachlorophenol. 
The Committee does not feel it necessary to comment on the details of this ninth amendment, 
having already discussed its aims in the Opinion on the eighth amendment to the Directive, 
which was adopted at the Committee's plenary session of 27 and 28 April 1988. 
The Committee nonetheless calls on the Commission to exercise vigilance as regards possible 
substitute products so as to ensure that they do not have other drawbacks different from 
those of pentachlorophenol itself. 
Specific comment 
The Committee would like point b) in Article 1 to read as follows: 
'b) in the impregnation in industrial installations of heavy-duty textiles and industrial fibres 
not intended for use in clothing.' 
Done at Brussels, 2 June 1988. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT