No C 263/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 10. 86 
proceedings is adopted, some Member States whose 
laws do not recognize the principle of unity and univer­
sality of bankruptcy proceedings could recognize the 
competence of their own courts for the branch on their 
territory but confine themselves to applying the home 
country's legislation. 
This interpretation could be supported by the third 
paragraph, which implies that a winding-up procedure 
can be opened in respect of a branch, unless such a 
procedure has already been opened in another Member 
State, which does not necessarily have to be the home 
country. 
The Committee therefore proposes that Article 11 (3) 
be reworded as follows: 
'Decisions on the winding-up of a credit institution 
taken by the administrative authorities or courts of the 
home country or winding-up agencies in that country, 
shall also be ...' 
1.7. Article 16(1) 
It would be helpful to specify that any branch in a 
Member State of a credit institution having its head 
office in the Community is entitled to subscribe to the 
host country's guarantee scheme on the same terms as 
those offered to credit institutions having their head 
office in the host country. Should (a) the branch be 
covered in the host country by the home country's scheme, (b) this scheme be no less favourable than the 
host country's scheme and (c) membership of the host 
country's scheme not be compulsory, the branch may 
be exempted from joining the local scheme. If the home 
country's scheme is less favourable than the host 
country's, the branch could be allowed simply to con­
tribute on a supplementary basis, provided that limited 
membership is permitted under the scheme. 
2.8. Article 16 (2) 
This provision should be deleted (see point 1.3.6 of the 
General comments). 
2.9. Article 11 
Instead of setting a deadline already at this stage, a 
period of three to four years from the adoption of the 
Directive should be allowed for Member States to adopt 
the required provisions. 
2.10. Annex 
The Committee has noticed that there seems to be some 
omissions in the list of reorganization measures set out 
in the Annex. Any comments to be made on this 
point will be sent directly to the relevant Commission 
departments. 
Done at Brussels, 2 July 1986. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision amending Decision 85/8/EEC on specific 
community action to combat poverty (!) 
(86/C 263/07) 
On 16 June 1986 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the proposal 
for a Council Decision amending Decision 85/8/EEC on specific Community action to combat 
poverty. 
The Economic and Social Committee decided to appoint Mr Roycroft as rapporteur-general 
with the task of preparing its work on the subject. 
At its 238th plenary session (meeting of 2 July 1986), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion with no votes against and one abstention: 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee once again expresses its pro­
found concern that poverty is increasing in the Euro­
pean Community, not least so among its new adherents. There is ample evidence to prove that more and more 
people are falling into the economic margins of our 
society. 
(!) OJ No C 151, 17. 6. 1986. 
20. 10. 86 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 263/17 
1.2. In previous opinions (!), the Committee posed 
serious questions as to why certain groups tend to 
fall into poverty, why income maintenance and other 
relevant systems of support and solidarity often fail the 
poor, and why increasing disparities between richer and 
poorer sections of society and the general trend towards 
greater inequalities has not been seriously treated as 
an issue for official European Community attention, 
monitoring and policy initiative. The Committee 
repeats its call for greater European Community interest 
and commitment in this matter, as foreseen in the 
preamble and in Article 2 of the Treaty. 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. The Committee stressed in its earlier opinion (2) 
that the 35 million ECU originally proposed by the 
(1) See opinion an poverty, OJ No C 25, 28. 1. 1985, plus opinion 
on social developments in the European Community in 1984, 
OJ No C 218, 29. 7 1985. 
(2) OJ No C 25, 28. 1. 1985. 
Done at Brussels, 2 July 1986. 
1. Preliminary comments 
1.1. The Committee points out that it has on several 
occasions already looked at problems connected with 
forests and the regulations governing forestry. It would 
draw attention to its opinions on the communication 
from the Commission to the Council on forestry policy d European Commission in order to fund the current 
o anti-poverty programme (3) was insufficient, and that 
r at least 44 million ECU needed to be budgeted (in line 
e with current real value, allowing for inflation, allocated 
d to the previous 1975 to 1979 programme). The Com-
s mittee notes with disappointment that the Council cut 
s the budget even further, to 25 million ECU (4). 
i, 
e 2.2. In this context, while supporting the amending 
;t Decision at least to add 4 million ECU to the current 
e programme, in order to take account of the accession of 
Spain and Portugal to the Community, the Committee 
nonetheless stresses once more that the programme's 
budget as a whole is too limited, even as a supplement 
to real 'action' by Member States. 
(3) OJ No C 208, 8. 8. 1984. 
(4) OJ No L 2, 3. 1. 1985. 
in the European Community (') and the draft Council 
resolution on the basis and objectives of forestry policy 
in the European Community. In these opinions the 
Committee has continually come out in favour of a 
(') OJ No C 227, 10. 9. 1979. The Chairman of the Economic and 
Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on Community action in the forestry sector 
(86/C 263/08) 
On 14 February 1986 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, 
on Community action in the forestry sector. 
This document was accompanied by a complementary memorandum (COM(86) 792 final). 
The Section for Agriculture, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on 
the subject, adopted its opinion on 19 June 1986, in the light of the report by Mr Schnieders. 
At its 238th plenary session (meeting of 2 July 1986), the Committee unanimously adopted 
the following opinion: