8. 2. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 35/9 
APPENDIX 
to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
Article 43, fourth paragraph of the rules of procedure 
The following amendment which amounted to a counter-opinion was defeated at the plenary session: 
'The Committee endorses the Convention's noble aim of protecting animals before slaughter, by ensuring 
proper treatment to spare them unnecessary suffering. However, it feels that the proposed text is repetitive 
and inconsistent, and contains some highly questionable statements. 
The Committee therefore rejects the proposal, not least because it is limited to the slaughtering process and 
does not cover—as it should—the entire life-span of all animals. The Committee urges the Member States 
not to ratify the Convention, and calls on the Commission to draw up a Community instrument to replace 
the Convention and regulate this area in a thorough and satisfactory manner.' 
Result of the voting 
For: 1, against: large majority, abstentions: 12. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation on the granting of financial support to 
transport infrastructure projects 
(88/C 35/06) 
On 2 December 1987 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee on 
the abovementioned proposal. 
At its 251st plenary session the Committee appointed Mr Rouzier rapporteur-general and 
adopted unanimously the following Opinion 
Preliminary comments 
The Committee regrets that the Commission and the 
Council are making it difficult for the Committee to 
carry out fully its consultative functions. The deadline 
by which the Committee has to adopt its Opinion 
is too short, which prevents it from giving proper 
consideration to the implications of the proposal. The 
Commission must have known for some time that the 
Council still does not intend to adopt a Regulation on 
the granting of financial support under a medium-
term transport infrastructure programme (1), a proposal 
which the Committee welcomed (2). This is why last 
November the Commission submitted an ad hoc pro­
posal with a view to using the 1985 budget appropri­
ations for supporting transport infrastructure (*). 
(') OJ No C 288, 15. 11. 1986. 
(2) OJ No C 328, 22. 12. 1986. 
(-') Commission proposal (OJ No C 323, 16. 12. 1986) — Com­
mittee Opinion (OJ No C 68, 16. 3. 1987). 1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee notes that, with the exception 
of Article 1 concerning the projects, the wording of 
the proposal is identical to that of Articles 2 to 4 
of Regulation (EEC) No 4059/86 (4). In the present 
circumstances the Committee approves this part of the 
Commission's proposal. 
1.2. The Committee regrets, however, that the 
Council was still unable to adopt a medium-term Regu­
lation which could have formed a much better instru­
ment than ad hoc measures, which are very often the 
result of a compromise rather than an objective examin­
ation of the real economic priorities. 
(4) OJ No L 378, 31. 12. 1986. 
No C 35/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 2. 88 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. The Committee is unable to make a proper 
assessment of the Commission's selection of 17 projects 
from the 92 projects representing 4 560 million ECU 
submitted by the Member States. More time would 
have been needed for this. 
2.2. The Committee recognizes, however, that the 
funds available under the 1986/1987 budget, i.e. 
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1987. 
1. The aim of the Commission proposal is to extend 
the period of validity of Regulation (EEC) No 3568/ 
83 (*) by one year to 31 December 1989, and accordingly 
to extend until 31 December 1988 the deadline for a 
Council decision on the subsequent rules governing 
rates and conditions for the carriage of goods by road 
between the Member States. This is approved. The 
Committee appreciates the Commission's argument 
that, given the link between transport rates and 
capacity, the submission at the present time of a Com­
mission proposal on the introduction of new tariff 
arrangements covering several years could hinder the 
forthcoming decisions on access to the road haulage 
market. 
(!) OJ No L 359, 22. 12. 1983, p. 1. 53 million ECU, made it necessary to confine the sup­
port to a certain number of projects listed in Article 1. 
2.3. The Committee notes with satisfaction that sev­
eral of these projects relate to major transit routes 
including routes intended to facilitate transit traffic 
through non-member countries. 
2.4. In the absence of precise information on this 
subject, the Committee is unable to judge whether the 
apportionment of funds over the various projects is 
justified. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
2. The Committee is aware of the difficulties 
involved in the introduction of a harmonized tariff 
system in the road haulage sector; this is a key element 
in any common transport policy and closely linked to 
several aspects of such a policy (2). The Committee 
would here also refer to its Opinion of 2 July 1987 on 
the elimination of distortions of competition of a fiscal 
nature in the transport of goods by road: study of 
vehicle taxes, fuel taxes and road tolls (3). It reiterates 
(2) Cf. ESC Opinion of 29 September 1983 on the proposal for a 
Council Regulation on the formation of rates for the carriage 
of goods by road between Member States, OJ No C 341, 
19. 12. 1983, p. 38. 
(3) OJ No C 232, 31. 8. 1987, p. 88. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EEC) 
No 3568/83 on the fixing of rates for the carriage of goods by road between Member States 
(88/C 35/07) 
On 4 December 1987 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 100 A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
As the Council had requested the Opinion for the plenary session of December 1987, Mr 
Eulen was appointed as rapporteur-general with the task of drawing up a draft Opinion on 
this subject, which falls within the remit of the Section for Transport and Communications. 
At its 251st plenary session (meeting of 17 December 1987) the Committee adopted the 
following Opinion by 67 votes to 7 with 17 abstentions: