Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund"

(COM(2002) 514 final - 2002/0228 (CNS))

(2003/C 61/30)

On 25 September 2002 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under the third paragraph of Article 159 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

At its 394th Plenary Session on 24 October 2002 the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Kienle rapporteur-general and adopted the following opinion by 80 votes in favour, with two abstentions.

1. Presentation of the European Commission's proposals

1.1. In the wake of the enormous damage and cost caused by the recent flooding in central Europe, the European Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a new European Union Solidarity Fund. The purpose of this Fund is to help regions in the Member States and the candidate countries that have been hit by major natural, technological or environmental disasters.

1.2. The new Solidarity Fund is to differ in essence from the Structural Funds and other existing Community instruments. It is to be focused on providing immediate financial assistance to help the people, regions and countries affected to return to normal as far as possible.

1.3. Up to EUR 1 billion are to be made available each year between 2002 and 2006. Funding in the form of a single grant will be awarded at the request of the country affected.

2. Comments of the European Economic and Social Committee

2.1. The European Economic and Social Committee gives its unqualified approval to the Commission proposal.

2.2. The Committee supports the need for particularly urgent action so that the Solidarity Fund can be up and running before the end of the year.

2.3. The scale of this year's flooding in central Europe brought to light the intolerable fact that the EU is equipped with Community instruments for providing disaster relief in other areas of the world, but has no such instruments for its own Member States.

2.4. The Committee thinks that it is justified to restrict immediate assistance from the EU to the following measures: immediate restoration to working order of infrastructure and plant in the fields of energy, water and waste water, telecommunications, transport, health and education; providing temporary accommodation; immediate protection of the cultural heritage and cleaning up of the natural zones affected. The Committee considers that it is right and appropriate to apply the subsidiarity principle even in the case of disasters.

2.5. There can be no lasting Europe-wide solidarity unless use of the aid is transparent and makes sense. Accordingly, the Committee advocates the fixing of clear thresholds to trigger the release of Solidarity Fund monies. However, other considerations could have to be borne in mind in the event of cross-border disasters.

2.6. The Committee acknowledges that the European Union has made rapid and unbureaucratic use of existing Community instruments to help the Member States and applicant countries in question and that the European Parliament has supported immediate action: this is particularly true in the case of direct assistance for farmers, the deployment of the Structural Funds, the European Investment Bank's loan offers and the use of the Phare and Sapard programmes in the applicant countries.

2.7. The Committee would pay particular tribute to the fact that the public and organised civil society in the regions and Member States in question have shown solidarity, public spiritedness and an exemplary willingness to help by assisting neighbours directly, rescuing humans and animals, securing dikes, bringing in harvests, taking part in cleaning-up operations, and making generous donations in cash and kind.

2.8. The Committee thinks there is a vital need to examine straight away to what extent human action has contributed to the freak weather and hence the disasters, and to act accordingly. Action to prevent flooding and climate change must take on a new major importance. The Committee endorses the comment made to the European Parliament that "prevention always costs less than having to repair the damage"(1).

Brussels, 24 October 2002.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger Briesch

(1) Speech/02/362, Commissioner Barnier, European Parliament, 3 September 2002.