No C 97/40 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 16. 8. 74 
the medical,  social  and  community  resources,  and  he 
can then  both  pull  his  weight  as a productive 
member  of the  population  and  benefit  personally 
from  the  greater  possibilities  of fulfilment  open  to 
him.  Nevertheless  the  Committee  wishes  to 
emphasize  that  the economic  aspect  is only  one  of a 
complex  problem,  which  involves  psychological, 
emotional,  human  and  social  aspects. 
10. The  Committee  feels  that,  while  the 
Commission  is right  to give  particular  emphasis  to 
the employment  of handicapped  persons  as  an 
economic  problem,  in the  elaboration  of policy 
equal  emphasis  should  be given  to the  impact  that 
physical  and  mental  disablement  has  for  the 
individual  as an obstacle  to personal  fulfilment. 
II. SPECIFIC  COMMENTS 
11. The  Committee  points  out  that  as it was  due 
to start  in 1973,  it will  now  be necessary  to alter  the 
time-schedule  of the whole  programme. 
12. The  Committee  has  a comment  to make 
relating  both  to the  definition  of 'centres'  to be 
studied  and  to  the  limitation  to  teaching  of 
'teachers'.  In some  countries  the  whole  range  of 
rehabilitation  and  placement  functions  is contained 
in integrated  centres. 
13. In  other  countries,  however,  diagnosis  and 
assessment,  medical  rehabilitation,  industrial 
rehabilitation  (including  re-training  where  necessary) 
and ultimate  placement  can  be  carried  out  by 
interlinked  but  separate  authorities  or other  bodies. 
14. The  Committee  considers  it important  that 
the programme  should  be based  widely  enough  to 
embrace  and  gain  experience  of the  best  practice  in 
the various  distinct  elements  in the  rehabilitation 
process. 15. The  Commission  rightly  lays  emphasis  upon 
the need  for  progressive  assessment  of  the 
operational  efficiency  of each  and  every  project.  The 
Committee  doubts,  however,  whether  the  procedure 
of self-assessment  by the  heads  of the  pilot-centres 
as suggested  in the document  is really  enough.  What 
is really  needed  is a small  committee  of independent 
experts  (say  one  from  each  of the  nine  countries) 
which  would  be able  progressively  to monitor  each 
programme  and  finally  assess  its efficiency.  The 
Committee  can  see  no real  need  for  the  type  of 
committee  suggested  by the  Commission,  which  in 
any case  would  be  too  large  to be  effective. 
Although  such  a broad  based  organ  might  serve  a 
useful  purpose  later,  the  Committee  feels  strongly 
that it would  be premature  to establish  it in the 
early  phases  of the programme. 
16. The  smaller  committee  than  that  proposed  by 
the Commission  should  include  experts  with 
experience  of assisting  handicapped  persons  not  only 
with  the  practical  difficulties,  but  also  with  the 
psychological  difficulties  which  are  often  of great 
importance. 
17. There  was  a general  feeling  in the Committee 
that the  Commission's  approach  does  not  have 
enough  room  for  flexible  adjustment.  Three  years 
on the  training  of rehabilitation  personnel  and  three 
years  on research  programmes  are  periods  which 
may need  lengthening  or shortening,  and  should  not 
be fixed  firmly  in advance,  especially  in view  of the 
need  to accomplish  this  effort  as fast  as possible. 
Done  at Brussels,  28 March  1974. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Alfons  LAPPAS 
CONSULTATION  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
on the  proposals  from  the  Commission  to the  Council  on the  shipbuilding  industry 
consisting  of a draft  Council  Directive  on aids  to shipbuilding,  and  a memorandum 
from  the  Commission  to the  Council  on procedures  for  action  in the  shipbuilding 
industry 
A. REQUEST  FOR  AN  OPINION 
On 23 November  1973,  the  Council  decided  to exercise  its option  of consulting  the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  on the  above  proposals  from  the Commission  to the 
Council. 
The request  for an Opinion  was  sent  by the President  of the Council  to the Chairman 
of the  Economic  and  Social  Committee  on 29 November  1973. 
16. 8. 74 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 97/41 
B. TEXT  WHICH  WAS  THE  SUBJECT  OF  THE  CONSULTATION 
The text  of the draft  Directive  which  was  the subject  of the consultation  was  published 
in the  Official  Journal  of the European  Communities  No  C 114  of 27 December  1973, 
page  23. The  text  of the memorandum  from  the Commission  has  not  been  published  in 
the Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities. 
C. OPINION  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
At its 119th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 27 and  28 March  1974,  the Committee 
adopted  its Opinion  on the  text  referred  to under  B by a majority,  with  five  dissenting 
votes  and  four  abstentions. 
The text  of the  Opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to the  request,  dated  29 November 
1973,  by  the  President  of  the  Council  of  the 
European  Communities  for  an  opinion  on  the 
'Proposals  from  the  Commission  to the  Council  on 
the shipbuilding  industry'; 
Having  regard  to Article  198  of the EEC  Treaty; 
Having  regard  to the  decision  taken  by its Bureau 
on 28 November  1973  entrusting  the  Section  for 
Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and  Services  with  the 
preparation  of a report  and  an  opinion  on  the 
matter; 
Having  regard  to the  Opinion  delivered  by  the 
Section  for  Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and  Services 
at its meeting  on 5 and  6 March  1974; 
Having  regard  to the report  submitted  by Mr Arena; 
Having  regard  to its discussions  on 27 March  1974 
(119th  Plenary  Session  on 27 and  28 March  1974), 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION: 
Subject  to the  comments  made  below,  the Economic 
and Social  Committee  broadly  approves  the 
proposals  from  the  Commission  to the  Council  on 
the shipbuilding  industry. 
I. GENERAL  COMMENTS 
The Committee  is  pleased  to  note  that  the 
Commission,  following  its attempt  to work  out  an 
overall  strategy  for  industrial  policy,  is now  turning 
its attention  to an examination  of tangible  problems 
in sectors  — such  as shipbuilding  — which  require 
specific  measures. 
The Commission's  proposal  thus  goes  towards 
meeting  a need  which  has  been  voiced  on several 
occasions  by the  Committee,  and  stressed  in its very recent  Opinion  on the  Commission's  proposals  for a 
technological  and  industrial  policy  programme. 
Among  other  things,  that  Opinion  pointed  to the 
adverse  effects  on  competitivity  of  the  often 
disparate  sectoral  policy  measures  currently  applied 
at national  level. 
Even  though  the  proposals  can  only  be seen  as an 
initial  attempt  to  draw  up  a  Community 
shipbuilding  policy,  this  step  by the  Commission  is 
all the  more  expedient  in view  of the  importance  of 
the shipbuilding  sector  to the  economy  of  the 
Community. 
The Committee  agrees  on the  urgent  need  for  a 
policy  for  restructuring  and  rationalizing 
shipbuilding,  and  states,  at the  same  time,  that 
specific  economic  and  social  reasons  make  it 
essential  for the Community  to pursue  such  a policy. 
Ships  are  products  with  a high  added-value 
component,  which  are  built  and  marketed  outside 
customs  barriers  and  are  export  goods  of prime 
importance.  It follows  that  the  competitivity  of the 
sector  does  not  hinge  solely  on  rationalizing 
assembly  in the  shipyards,  but  also  on competitivity 
at the  previous  production  stages.  As a result,  any 
common  policy  for  shipbuilding  must  be 
coordinated  with  the  other  Community  policies,  and 
especially  industrial,  regional,  social,  commercial  and 
research  policy. 
Furthermore,  the  Committee  considers  that  in order 
to ensure  independence  and  stability  of supply,  at 
least  as far as means  of transport  are  concerned,  the 
shipbuilding  policy  should  not  be  completely 
divorced  from  a wider  vision  of the  whole  'sea 
transport'  question,  embracing  all operators  in that 
field. 
No C 97/42 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 16. 8. 74 
In common  with  all  Community  policies, 
shipbuilding  policy  must  ensue  from  a broad  debate 
between  all the  interested  parties  — shipbuilders, 
users,  subcontractors,  and  workers'  representatives. 
Here  the  Commission  rightly  proposes  to take  on 
the dual  role  of initiator  and  go-between. 
The Committee  stresses  that  a common  policy  for 
this sector  must  not  affect  the freedom  of decision 
of undertakings  and  must  permit  increasingly  close 
consultation  and  practical  collaboration  between 
European  shipbuilders. 
II. THE  SHIPBUILDING  INDUSTRY  IN THE 
COMMUNITY—PRESENT  CONDITIONS  AND 
FUTURE  TRENDS 
Generally  speaking,  the Committee  agrees  with  the 
Commission's  description  of  the  state  of  the 
Community  shipbuilding  industry,  namely  that, 
despite  the positive  surface  picture  of the favourable 
conditions  which  shipbuilding  has  enjoyed  of late, 
the industry  is liable,  for manifold  reasons,  to come 
up against  serious  difficulties  in the next  few  years. 
As regards  market  trends,  the  Committee  does  not 
underestimate  the  difficulties  involved  in making 
medium-  and  long-term  forecasts.  But  it shares  the 
Commission's  view  that,  failing  unexpected 
developments,  the  present  favourable  situation  — 
primarily  caused  by earlier  ordering  due  to the well-
known  inflationary  climate  and  monetary  situation 
— will  probably  be followed  within  the  next  three 
to four  years  by a period  in which  the  flow  of 
orders  for new  shipping  will  lose  momentum  and,  as 
a result,  there  will  be a widening  divergence  between 
steadily  increasing  production  capacity  and  the level 
of demand. 
In addition,  it should  be borne  in mind  that  the 
recent  energy  crisis  could  have  repercussions  on 
world  shipbuilding  trends  and  characteristics. 
However,  these  repercussions  cannot  be identified 
with  precision  at present  in the absence  of a detailed 
analysis  of the scale  and consequences  of the crisis. 
As far as the  competition  issue  is concerned,  it is 
clear  that  at the present  juncture  particular  attention 
must  be paid  to the  main  rival  of Community 
shipbuilding,  viz. Japan.  However,  the Commission's 
approach  does  not  seem  to cover  all sides  of the 
problem  fully.  In fact,  it is clear  that  the  gap 
between  European  shipyards  and  their  Japanese 
competitors  is not  solely  due  to shortcomings  in 
respect  of plant,  but  also  to a nexus  of other economic,  industrial,  commercial  and  social  factors 
which  are  attributable  to  the  different  socio-
economic  structures  of the two  areas. 
In addition,  due  importance  should  be attached  to 
the fact  that  Japan  — on the  basis  of a clear-cut 
industrial  policy  decision  to make  shipbuilding  a 
pillar  of its commercial  strategy  — has  embarked  on 
an impressive  programme  of investments  calculated 
to boost  significantly  the production  capacity  of its 
shipbuilding  industry. 
On the  basis  of this  data,  the Committee  considers 
that although  a Community  policy  — and  more 
specifically  a policy  of investment  aids  — would  not 
be sufficient  in itself  to put  the  Community  on an 
equal  competitive  footing  with  Japanese 
shipbuilding,  it is needed,  nonetheless,  in order  to 
enable  Community  shipyards  to keep  up effectively 
with world  technological  progress  in this  sector  and 
thus not  only  avoid  the risk  of them  falling  further 
behind,  but  also  assist  them  to eliminate  their 
present  lag. 
Lastly,  any  analysis  of conditions  in the shipbuilding 
industry  and  of trends  would  not  be complete  if it 
disregarded  the  market  repercussions  of  the 
emergence  of new  shipbuilding  industries  and  of the 
serious  dangers  which  could  ensue  from  an 
uncontrolled  expansion  of  world  production 
capacity. 
III. OPTIONS 
The Committee  agrees  with  the Commission  that  the 
basic  objective  of a common  shipbuilding  policy  is 
to ensure  that  the  Community  industry  is 
internationally  competitive.  This  would  enable  it to 
keep  going  without  a systematic  need  for aids.  The 
Committee  also  recognizes  the  need  for  a plant 
modernization  and  restructuring  policy  which  is 
coordinated  at Community  level. 
Consequently,  the  Committee  accepts  the  concept 
that functional  aids  should  be gradually  replaced  by 
investment  incentives.  However,  it considers  that 
transition  from  one  system  to the other  will  require 
a longer  period  than  the  one  foreseen  by  the 
Commission.  It is certain  that  more  than  four  years 
will be needed  to take  and  implement  investment 
decisions  and  for  running-in.  Furthermore,  the 
medium-term  deterioration  in market  conditions 
which  is foreseen  at present  will  occur  before  the 
investments  become  fully  productive. 
16. 8. 74 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 97/43 
Consequently,  it will,  in any  case,  be necessary  to 
review  the  situation  at the  end  of 1975,  when  the 
OECD  General  Understanding  involving  the  total 
abolition  of direct  aids  is planned  to come  into 
effect. 
A Community-financed  research  and  development 
programme  would  definitely  be useful  and  should, 
in the  first  instance,  concentrate  on specific  projects 
carried  out  by individual  undertakings  either  alone 
or on a collaborative  basis.  The  programme  should 
be carried  out  under  the  control  of each  individual 
undertaking  and  through  existing  research 
institutions  selected  by  these  undertakings;  new 
common  research  agencies  should  not  be set up.  If 
this is financed  by Community  funds,  provision  will 
have  to be made  for adequate  control  procedures. 
The Committee  agrees  that  it is useful  to have 
adequate  information  on  market  trends  and 
recommends  that  the  Commission  set  up  a 
procedure  which  will  allow  individual  undertakings 
to make  better  use  of these  data  as a basis  for their 
making  a more  effective  penetration  of the market. 
IV. INVESTMENT  AIDS 
The Committee  considers  that  the  investment  aids 
proposed  must  be primarily  an instrument  available 
to undertakings  for  the  purpose  of  facilitating 
modernization  and  rationalization  programmes 
which  are  recognized  as  furthering  Community 
interests  in the  shipbuilding  sector  and  spelt  out  in 
an indicative  programme  to be drawn  up  by the 
Commission  in agreement  with  all  the  interested 
parties.  At  the  same  time,  however,  the  final 
decision  as to whether  to carry  out  investments 
under  such  programmes  should  be  left  to the 
undertakings. 
The Committee  requests  that  the investment  schemes 
eligible  for  assistance  include  social  schemes  — not 
only  investments  aiming  to  improve  working 
conditions  in shipyards,  but  also  investments  whose 
goal  it is to build  up social  infrastructures  (housing 
for instance).  One  of the  advantages  of this  would 
be the  possibility  of  attracting  fresh  skilled 
manpower  to the  shipbuilding  sector.  It would  also 
obviate  an excessively  fast  turnover  of the  existing 
labour  force. 
The Committee  considers  that  there  should  be 
adequate  forms  of supervision,  at Community  level, 
for Community  financed  investment  aids.  All parties 
involved  in  the  shipbuilding  industry  must 
participate  in this  supervision. The investment  programmes  submitted  to  the 
Commission  will,  in addition,  have  to be carefully 
scrutinized  in order  to prevent  their  causing  a 
significant  increase  in  production  capacity  and 
ultimately  —  in  contradiction  with  the 
Commission's  declared  aim  —  changing  trading 
conditions  to a degree  inconsistent  with  the  common 
interest.  However,  it is important  to lay  down  a 
tighter  definition  of the  criteria  by  which  the 
Commission  is to determine  whether  investments 
notified  to it are  eligible  for the proposed  aids,  and 
also of  the  criteria  as  to  procedures  of  the 
investment  aid systems  of the Member  States. 
V. PROCEDURES  FOR  ACTION 
The Committee  endorses  the  Commission's  proposal 
in so far  as this  may  be practicable  to set  up a 
system  of continuous  information  and  guidance  to 
monitor  the  development  of supply  and  demand  on 
the Community  and  world  markets,  to draw  up 
indicative  forward  programmes  on the  prospects  for 
shipbuilding  production  at regular  intervals,  to study 
employment  trends  and  regularly  to  lay  down 
general  objectives  for  modernizing  construction 
techniques  and  the  development  of  production 
capacity.  The  Committee  particularly  welcomes  the 
Commission's  intention  to propose  to the  Council 
that a system  be  set  up  for  collecting  data  on 
undertakings'  capacities  and  investment  projects, 
should  experience  show  this  to be necessary. 
Nevertheless,  the  Committee  urges  the  need  for  the 
Commission  to consult  it together  with  all interested 
parties  and  the  various  institutions  involved  when  it 
carries  out these  activities. 
In addition,  the  Committee  considers  that 
Community  regional  policy,  for  which  it requests 
prompt  implementation,  must  pay  particular 
attention  to  investment  programmes  in  the 
shipbuilding  sector  in order  that  Community  funds 
can be utilized  in the best  possible  way. 
In its Opinion  on the  Commission  Communication 
on the  Technological  and  Industrial  Policy 
Programme,  the  Committee  stated  unambiguously 
that the  close  interrelationship  between  regional  and 
social  policy  must  be taken  into  account  whenever 
measures  are  implemented  for  individual  sectors  of 
the economy. 
As regards  the  social  side  of Community  shipyard 
policy  and  the  possibility  of assistance  from  the 
European  Social  Fund,  the  Commission  — rightly 
No C 97/44 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 16. 8. 74 
concerned  at the  potential  impact  of such  a policy 
on employment  —  has,  in accordance  with  the 
procedures  laid  down,  proposed  an ad hoc  decision 
of the  Council  on  assistance  from  this  Fund  for 
persons  employed  in shipbuilding.  The  proposal  for 
a decision  states  that  such  assistance  may  be granted 
from  the Social  Fund  under  Article  4 of the  Council 
Decision  of 1 February  1971  on the  reform  of the 
Social  Fund. 
The Committee  stresses  the  need  to  monitor 
meticulously  the  social  repercussions  —  both 
favourable  and  adverse  —  of  a policy  for 
restructuring  shipbuilding.  The  reason  for  this  is to 
make  provision  for  the  retraining  and  further 
training  of workers  affected  by this  policy. 
VI. PROPOSAL  FOR  A DIRECTIVE  ON  AID 
The Committee  approves  the  draft  third  Directive, 
subject  to the  measures  set out  in it being  open  to 
review  should  the  competitive  position  of European 
shipyards  be  significantly  weakened  by  a more 
marked  trend  towards  recession  and  keener 
competition  from  non-member  countries. 
The Committee  also  considers  that  other 
Community  aids  for  which  shipbuilding  concerns 
are eligible  and  assistance  provided  by  the  Social 
Fund  to  further  their  conversion  or  rescaling 
should'  not be mutually  exclusive. 
The Committee  proposes  the  following  amendments 
to specific  Articles: 
Article  3 
Amend  (b) to read: 
'the conversion,  in Community  shipyards,  of 
metal-hulled  sea-going  vessels  of not  less  than 
2 000  gross  tons  .. 
Delete  point  (c). Article  4 
Delete  the word  'selling'  in the first  line. 
Article  6 
Amend  the  second  paragraph  to read: 
'This  notification  should  contain  all  elements 
making  it possible  for  the  Commission  to 
determine  whether  aids  requested  for 
investment  schemes  conform  to  the  Treaty  and 
to the  shipbuilding  policy  guidelines  to  be set 
out by the  Community'. 
Insert  at the end  of the third  paragraph: 
'Should  the  Commission  fail  to take  a decision 
within  three  months  the  aid  projects  for 
proposed  investments  shall  be considered  to be 
approved'. 
Article  7 
Amend  to read: 
'Emergency  aid  or intervention  measures  for  a 
limited  period  of time  to rescue  a firm  or keep 
workers  and/or  plant  in employment  may  be 
granted  only  for  crucial  social  reasons.  The 
Commission  will  reach  a decision  within  one 
month'. 
Article  8 
Amend  the second  paragraph  to read: 
\ .. the conditions  laid  down  in Articles  3, 4, 5 
and 6'. 
Done  at Brussels,  27 March  1974. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Alfons  LAPPAS 
ANNEX 
to the Opinion  of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Rejected  amendments: 
The following  amendments,  submitted  in accordance  with  the Rules  of Procedure,  were  rejected 
by the Committee  in the course  of the proceedings. 
General  comments 
Delete  the sixth  paragraph. 
16. 8. 74 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 97/45 
Reasons: 
It would  be impossible  to have  a common  policy  for  shipbuilding  which  did  not  affect  the 
freedom  of decision  of undertakings.  In addition,  paragraph  2 is inconsistent  with  paragraph  1 
since  the  latter  acknowledges  that  the  common  policy  for  shipbuilding  must  ensue  a broad 
debate  between  all interested  parties. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  32. 
Votes  against:  45. 
Abstentions:  7. 
Chapter  111,  beaded  'Options' 
Add the  following  after  the  firsr  paragraph: 
in addition,  the Economic  and  Social  Committee  acknowledges  the  need  for: 
— Coordination  of national  shipbuilding  policies  which  are  orienrated  towards  its 
development; 
— Enabling  shipbuilding  fully  to play  its part  in expanding  national  and  Community 
merchant  fleets; 
— Enabling  shipbuilding  to contribute  towards  the  expansion  of other  fleets  by setting 
up relationships,  based  on  the  mutual  advantage,  with  countries  desiring  such  a 
relationship; 
— The  resultant  creation  of a social  policy  commensurate  with  the  position  which 
shipbuilding  should  occupy  in each  country  and  at Community  level. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  5. 
Votes  against:  59. 
Abstentions:  24. 
Chapter  IV  — Investment  aids 
In the  first  paragraph,  insert  a full  stop  after  'programme';  in line  3, delete  the  remainder  of 
the sentence  and  substitute: 
in so far  as these  aids  are  granted  by Member  States,  they  should  as far  as possible 
conform  with  Community  interests  in the  shipbuilding  sector,  and  these  interests  should 
be defined  by the  Commission  in agreement  with  all the  interested  parties'. 
Reason: 
While  the  Commission  financial  institutions'  resources  remain  limited,  any  suggestion  of their 
being  the  exclusive  source  of Community  investment  aid  should  be resisted. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  24. 
Votes  against:  49. 
Abstentions:  23. 
Chapter  IV 
Delete  the  penultimate  paragraph  of the  Chapter  and  substitute  the  following: 
'The  Economic  and  Social  Committee  thinks  that  both  Community  and  national  public 
investments  level  must  be supervised.  It accordingly  recommends  that: 
— A representative  of the  public  authorities  which  make  contributions  to the  investments 
should  sit on the  board  of directors  of the  shipbuilding  companies; 
No C 97/46 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 16. 8. 74 
— Tripartite  committees,  on which  the  elected  representatives  of shipyard  workers'  trade 
unions  and  of consumers  should  sit, should  be set up at national  and  Community  level 
to supervise  investments' 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  7. 
Votes  against:  58. 
Abstentions:  21. 
Chapter  IV: 
Delete  the penultimate  paragraph  ot the Chapter  and  substitute: 
it is desirable  that  any  investment  aids  financed  by Member  States  should  be reinforced 
by some  Community  financed  investment  aids.  Such  aids  would  of course  be subject  to 
supervision  at Community  level,  in which  all parties  involved  in the shipbuilding  industry 
should  participate'. 
Reason: 
This  paragraph  implies  that  there  will  be 'Community  financed  investment  aids'  to which  this 
paragraph  would  be applied.  Such  aids  could  be valuable  and  the  EEC  Shipbuilders'  Linking 
Committee  has  proposed  one  form  which  they  should  take. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  17. 
Votes  against:  35. 
Abstentions:  32. 
Chapter  V — Procedures  for action 
Delete  the last  two  paragraphs  and  replace  by: 
'The  Economic  and  Social  Committee  is conscious  of the  social  effects  restructuring  of 
the shipbuilding  industry  has  had  and  stresses  the need  to: 
— Conduct  a prior  investigation  with  interested  parties  at all levels  into  the  social 
repercussions  of the  new  phase  of the  restructuring  of the  shipbuilding  industry  and 
inro possibilities  of the local  and  regional  industrial  support  to maintain  employment; 
— Obviate  these  social  repercussions  by the  right  to suspend  redundancies  where 
conditions  do not  allow  the  creation  of equivalent  jobs  in the  particular  locality  or 
region. 
As regards  the social  side  of Community  shipyard  policy  and  the possibility  of assistance 
from  the European  Social  Fund,  the  Commission  — rightly  concerned  at the  potential 
impact  of such  a policy  on employment  — has,  in accordance  with  the  procedures  laid 
down,  proposed  an ad hoc  decision  of the  Council  on assistance  from  this  Fund  for 
persons  employed  in shipbuilding.  The  proposal  for a decision  states  that  such  assistance 
may be granted  from  the  Social  Fund  under  Article  4 of the  Council  Decision  of 
1 February  1971  on the  reform  of the  Social  Fund. 
Briefly,  the Committee  stresses  the need  to monitor  meticulously  the social  repercussions  — 
both  favourable  and  adverse  — of a policy  for restructuring  shipbuilding'. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  29. 
Votes  against:  46. 
Abstentions:  16. 
16. 8. 74 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 97/47 
Chapter  VJ 
After  the  reference  to Article  4, it is proposed  to insert  the  following  text: 
'Article  4 (1) (a) 
The Section  feels  that  the amendment  of the  Council  Directive  of 20 July  contained  in this 
Article  is superfluous'. 
Article  3 (J)  (a)  is compatible  with  the  OECD  agreement  on  credits  for  shipbuilding.  The 
proposed  Article  4 (1) (a) introduces  a new  distortion  of competition  to the  disadvantage  of 
certain  Member  States  including  Denmark,  owing  to the  arbitrary  boundaries  and  calculation 
methods  of the  proposed  system.  The  proposed  calculation  method  is illogical  and  unnecessary 
in view  of the  rules  which  have  been  agreed  to in OECD  and  which  apply  ro our'  competitors, 
including  Japan  and  the  major  Western  European  shipbuilding  nations,  Sweden  and  Spain. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Vores  in favour:  7. 
Votes  against:  63. 
Abstentions:  20. 
on a preliminary  Community  programme  for consumer  information  and  protection 
On 21 December  1973,  the Council  decided  to exercise  its option  of consulting  the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  on the above  programme. 
The request  for an Opinion  was  sent  by the President  of the Council  to the Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee  on 21 December  1973. 
B. TEXT  WHICH  WAS  THE  SUBJECT  OF  THE  CONSULTATION 
The text  which  was  the  subject  of the  consultation  has  not  been  published  in the 
Official  Journal  of the European  Communities. 
C. OPINION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
At its 119th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 27 and  28 March  1974,  the Committee 
adopted  its Opinion  on the text  referred  to under  B by a majority  witih  two  dissenting 
votes  and  two  abstensions  out of all members  present  or represented. 
The text  of the Opinion  is as follows: Reasons: 
CONSULTATION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
A. REQUEST  FOR  AN  OPINION 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, Having  regard  to the  decision  taken  by  the 
Chairman  of the  Economic  and  Social  Committee 
on 7 January  1974  and  confirmed  by the Bureau  of 
the Committee  on 29 January  1974  in accordance 
with  Article  22 of the Rules  of Procedure,  entrusting 
the Section  with  the preparation  of an Opinion  on 
the matter; Having  regard  to the request  for an Opinion  made 
by the  Council  of the  European  Communities  on 
21 December  1973;