ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
3.3.5.

The EESC endorses the SEAP’s take on workers’ buyouts, pointing to the role of cooperatives formed by employees who take over companies that are in crisis and establish a cooperative. Workers’ buyouts are successful if the workers forming the cooperative can count on suitable funding mechanisms and the establishment of funds for the capitalisation of these enterprises. However, alongside these financial instruments it is essential for workers to be properly supported through training and skill-building activities. The EESC also urges the Commission to continue to work closely with the Member States to identify tools and solutions to remove obstacles and speed up legal procedures for transferring ownership of an enterprise to its employees after it closes, through worker cooperatives or other forms of worker-owned social economy enterprises.
4.2.1.

The EESC is of the view that draft national texts potentially hindering the internal market must be notified to the EC and must be commented upon and evaluated. Without a commitment from the Member States to notify and comment/evaluate, these procedures remain ineffective. Hence, more effective surveillance in support of the harmonisation of product market regulation across EU Member States is required. As an example, the retail sector has recently experienced a surge in national restrictions through authorisations and local content requirements. This runs counter to Articles 28 and 30 of the Treaty with national re-testing often applied on purchases of products, already lawfully placed on the single market. On services, the EESC is also of the view that the notification procedure under the Services Directive is not functioning as well as expected. Regarding the freedom of establishment, the EESC regrets to note that Member States have not reached a compromise on the proposal for a so-called Notification Directive. This text would have strengthened the obligation for Member States to notify the Commission of draft laws or regulations on authorisation schemes for services (and therefore for town planning) ( 7 ) . The EESC also urges the EC and Members States to provide more detailed information on the justification and proportionality applied when Member States notify technical rules. It is also important to ensure that notified requirements receive the appropriate scrutiny regardless of which notification procedure is used ( 8 ) . In order to address the problem at its core, the EESC believes a further legislative shift from minimum harmonisation towards maximum harmonisation would be needed.
2.1.

Directive 2002/65/EC on Distance Marketing of Consumer Financial Services (DMFSD) aims to ensure the free movement of financial services in the single market by harmonising certain consumer protection rules in this area, and to ensure a high level of consumer protection. It is important to highlight that there are already a number of recent directives and regulations establishing high standards of consumer protection, and the merit of the proposal for a new Directive is to provide a safety net in cases where this protection is, or might be, missing. Where there is no EU product-specific legislation or no EU horizontal rules covering the consumer financial service, the Directive shall apply horizontally to any present or future service of a banking, credit, insurance, personal pension, investment or payment nature contracted by means of communication at a distance (i.e., without the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer). The Directive sets out information to be provided to the consumer prior to the conclusion of the distance contract (pre-contractual information), grants the consumer a right of withdrawal for certain financial services, and establishes rules on unsolicited services and unsolicited communication.
1.1.

The ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) by the European Union is a landmark for disability rights, for the EU and its Member States. The review of the EU, by the UN CRPD Committee in 2015, concludes the first period of implementation of the CRPD. The UN CRPD committee’s concluding observations (COs) requires the EU institutions to meet their obligations since they should organise and coordinate the implementation of the UN CRPD according to the COs. The COs have reconfirmed that the EU policy making on the ground of disability requires a profound transformation in the way policies have been made up to now. So far, the EU has not really undertaken a real adaptation of its policy making to this new transformation required by the UN CRPD.
3.33

There is a lot of discussion regarding the issue of who can be held liable when a AI system causes damage, particularly if the AI system is self-teaching and continues to learn after entering into use. The European Parliament has drawn up recommendations for civil law on robotics, including a proposal to explore an ‘e-personality’ for robots so that they can incur civil liability for any damage they cause. The EESC is opposed to any form of legal status for robots or AI (systems), as this entails an unacceptable risk of moral hazard. Liability law is based on a preventive, behaviour-correcting function, which may disappear as soon as the maker no longer bears the liability risk since this is transferred to the robot (or the AI system). There is also a risk of inappropriate use and abuse of this kind of legal status. The comparison with the limited liability of companies is misplaced, because in that case a natural person is always ultimately responsible. In this regard, it should be examined to what extent the current national and EU laws, rules and jurisprudence in the area of (product and risk) liability and own risk provide an adequate answer to this question and, failing that, what kind of legal solutions can be put forward.
5.7.

In principle, prosumers produce energy for their own private use. They become the co-producer of the goods consumed. Individuals who produce an amount of energy similar to what they consume are also considered prosumers, even if the two processes are not simultaneous. For instance, this is the case when they produce energy mainly during the day, but consume relatively little for their own needs, selling off any surplus to other consumers and consuming most of their energy at times when they themselves are producing much less of it.
6.5.

With fully autonomous transport, new questions regarding liabilities also arise. This is also reflected in the development of insurance systems. The main challenge may be the factual establishment of liability in the event of an accident, given the role of digital systems and the involvement of several actors such as the manufacturers and owners of vehicles, and the managers of the infrastructure. This may require increased data storage in order to establish the circumstances of the accident. The EESC therefore calls on the Commission to investigate possible data collection frameworks and requirements for liability purposes, while bearing in mind the need for privacy.
3.6.

Data and studies by both academics and the food industry have improved our understanding of how European food systems impact on society, the environment and health outcomes. Taken together, these suggest the need for a more integrated approach. While the current policy frameworks may have been successful in addressing individual problems, they do not provide the collective coherence needed to address the range of challenges that global and EU food systems are expected to face in the future. Food-related policies are largely developed in isolation from each other and often lack consistency. Policies at various governance levels are also disconnected from each other. One example which illustrates the need for a more integrated approach is antimicrobial resistance, which has spread through the use of antibiotics in animal husbandry and now threatens human health. The importance of an integrated food policy in relation to this issue was also highlighted by Commissioner Andriukaitis in a recent speech. Another example is the conflict between land use for food and land use for energy generation, housing and other pressures. Food waste, too, is partly an outcome of production efficiency gains; there is a constant and massive flow of food through the system. Appealing to rational consumer behaviour to resolve this does not work.
4.4

A deeper partnership between Latin America and the European Union would enable economic growth to be accelerated as well as progress in terms of structural change towards sectors making intensive use of knowledge; it would also enable poverty to be reduced, social inclusion fostered and the environment protected. All of this can be achieved by: — deepening association agreements to open up space for investment, particularly in new activities making intensive use of knowledge and in high-quality jobs, — stimulating small and medium-sized business start-ups by creating jobs in networks, — investing in areas that facilitate sustainable growth, decent work, social inclusion and environmental sustainability, — boosting innovation in, democratising and contributing to the widespread use of new technologies, in particular information and communication technologies (ICT), — constructing inclusive and environment-friendly infrastructure that facilitates access to basic services under a new framework for urban development and that promotes territorial cohesion, — promoting investments in technologies that mitigate global warming, — increasing the use of environment-friendly energy, using non-conventional renewable sources to diversify energy consumption, and capitalising on the experience of European companies in this area to make progress towards a green economy, — promoting and empowering business organisations and trade unions as key participants in social dialogue, so as to enhance the development of the local productive fabric as smoothly as possible, including reducing the informal economy.
1.4.

It is difficult to identify a coherent EU economic strategy relating to Africa as a whole. The EESC would like to stress its engagement to being involved in such a transparent and coherent approach, as a body representing organised civil society and as an active partner in all such EU agreements. The European External Action Service (EEAS) has announced that the EU is already a strong political partner with Africa and that the next step is to be true economic partners and deepen our trade and investment relationship. The EESC has played a major role in identifying civil society relationships under the Cotonou Agreement. It is now important that continued and even greater engagement by the EESC and its structures becomes a substantial element of the post-Cotonou agreement. In this way EU civil society will be enabled to help civil society from African countries to become a reliable and trustworthy partner for investors. This will only be accomplished by fostering a partnership on an equal footing and by taking into real account the current asymmetries in the economic situation.
The EESC is in favour of adapting the EU rules on the trans-European energy networks (TEN-E) to the objectives of the Green Deal more effectively, combining in particular the decarbonisation of the energy system, the transition to climate neutrality, the development of renewable energy sources, energy efficiency, and the prevention of the risk of fuel poverty. As energy networks play a key role in ensuring the balance, resilience and development of the energy system, the EESC calls for the Regulation to fit more clearly into the process of integrating the energy system, in order to promote all decarbonised forms of energy, and for any form of break-up to be rendered impossible. Against this background, the Committee welcomes the initiative adopted by the Council and the European Parliament to define distribution grids as a matter of ‘overriding public interest’, alongside renewable energy.

The EESC is in favour of adapting the EU rules on the trans-European energy networks (TEN-E) to the objectives of the Green Deal more effectively, combining in particular the decarbonisation of the energy system, the transition to climate neutrality, the development of renewable energy sources, energy efficiency, and the prevention of the risk of fuel poverty. As energy networks play a key role in ensuring the balance, resilience and development of the energy system, the EESC calls for the Regulation to fit more clearly into the process of integrating the energy system, in order to promote all decarbonised forms of energy, including nuclear, and for any form of break-up to be rendered impossible. Against this background, the Committee welcomes the initiative adopted by the Council and the European Parliament to define distribution grids as a matter of ‘overriding public interest’, alongside renewable energy.
2.2.

Responsibility of the world's leading economies : the EESC underlines that the EU and the US still have the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship and enjoy the most integrated economic relationship in the world. Although overtaken by China as the largest EU import source for goods in 2021, the US remains the EU's largest trade and investment partner by far. The transatlantic relationship defines the global economy, in a challenged multilateral trade system that has been impacted by a WTO in crises, two years of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and now the war in Ukraine. Either the EU or the US is the largest trade and investment partner of almost every other country in the global economy. The transatlantic partnership is no goal in itself but has to build on common values, interests and a common responsibility. The EU and the US should be an anchor for democracy, peace and security around the world, the rule of law and human rights for all : the EESC underlines that the EU and the US still have the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship and enjoy the most integrated economic relationship in the world. Although overtaken by China as the largest EU import source for goods in 2021, the US remains the EU's largest trade and investment partner by far. The transatlantic relationship defines the global economy, in a challenged multilateral trade system that has been impacted by a WTO in crises, two years of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and now the war in Ukraine. Either the EU or the US is the largest trade and investment partner of almost every other country in the global economy. The transatlantic partnership is no goal in itself but has to build on common values, interests and a common responsibility. The EU and the US should be an anchor for democracy, peace and security around the world, the rule of law and human rights for all ( 1 )
28. 11.79 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 297/21 
Finally, the Committee feels that, following the intro- made to facilitate health check-ups for nuclear 
duction of new dosimetric units, efforts should be- workers and to publicize protection measures. 
Done at Brussels, 26 September 1979. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Raffaele VANNI 
Opinion on the 
— proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78 on the 
common organization of the market in dried fodder, and the 
— proposal for a Council Regulation fixing for the 1979/80 marketing year the flat-rate 
production aid for dehydrated potatoes 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 170 of 7 July 1979, pages 4 and 5. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 4 July 1979, the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic and 
Social Committee in accordance with Articles 47 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
171st plenary session, held in Brussels on 26 and 27 September 1979. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community, and in particular 
Articles 47 and 198, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of the European Communities on 4 July 1979 for an 
opinion, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
16 July 1979 instructing the Section for Agriculture to 
prepare on opinion on the matter, 
No C 297/22 Official Journal of 
Having regard to the opinion submitted by the rap­
porteur, Mr De Tavernier, and approved by the 
Section for Agriculture under the written procedure, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 171st plenary 
session, held on 26 and 27 September 1979 (meeting 
of 26 September 1979), 
Done at Brussels, 26 September 1979. European Communities 28.11.79 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
unanimously: 
The Committee approves the Commission's proposal. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Raffaele VANNI
No C 57/12 Official Journal of the European Communities 29.2.84 
Opinion on the proposal for a Sixth Council Directive amending Directive 69/169/EEC 
on the harmonization of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action 
relating to exemption from turnover tax and excise duty on imports in international 
travel 
(84/C 57/07) 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the 
European Communities No C 114 of 28 April 1983, page 4. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 19 April 1983 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic 
and Social Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
214th plenary session held in Brussels on 25 and 26 January 1984. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community, and in particular 
Article 198 thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of 
the European Communities on 19 April 1983 for an 
opinion on the proposal for a Sixth Council Direc­
tive amending Directive 69/169/EEC on the har­
monization of provisions laid down by law, regula­
tion or administrative action relating to exemption 
from turnover tax and excise duty on imports in 
international travel, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
26 April 1983, instructing the Section for Industry, 
Commerce, Crafts and Services to draw up an 
opinion and a report on the matter, 
Done at Brussels, 25 January 1984. 
Francis CEYRAC Having regard to the opinion adopted by the Section 
for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services at its 
meeting on 4 January 1984, 
Having regard to the report submitted by the rap­
porteur, Mr De Grave, 
Having regard to the discussions on 25 January 1984 
during the 214th plenary session held on 25 and 
26 January 1984, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
with no dissenting votes and two abstentions: 
The Committee welcomes the Commission proposal 
and refers in this connection to its opinion of 24 
February 1983 on the internal market (OJ No C 90 
of 5 April 1983). 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee
16. 3. 87 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 68/13 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision introducing a supplementary Community measure for 
the eradication of brucellosis, tuberculosis and leukosis in cattle (*) 
(87/C 68/08) 
On 10 November 1986 the Council, acting in accordance with the provisions of Articles 43 and 19 8 of 
the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, asked the Economic and Social 
Committee for an opinion on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Committee appointed Mr Storie-Pugh as rapporteur-general and instructed him to prepare its 
work on the matter. 
On 16 December-1986 during its 242nd plenary session held on 16 and 17 December, the Committee 
adopted the following opinion with no dissenting votes and 3 abstentions. 
The Committee approves the draft Decision. 
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1986. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
(>) OJ No C 292, 18. 11. 1986, p. 2. 
Opinion on local employment initiatives 
(87/C 68/09) 
On 19 December 1985 the Economic and Social Committee, acting on the fourth paragraph of Article 
20 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on local employment initiatives. 
The Section for Social Questions, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the 
subject, adopted its opinion on 13 November 1986 in the light of the report by Mr Roycroft and 
Mr Roseingrave. 
At its 242nd plenary session (meeting of 17 December 1986), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion by 108 votes to 6, with 23 abstentions: 
1. General comments remains difficult to assess, as does the measurement of 
economic activity generated. 
1.1. The Committee notes that the widespread increase in 
local employment initiatives (LEIs) in recent years must be 
seen in the context of the parallel unemployment crisis which 
has developed in Europe during the same period. The net 
'job-creativeness' of LEIs and their impact on local labour 
market conditions are therefore clearly of primary 
importance. Yet the total number and quality of jobs created 1.1.1. On the one hand, the projects summarized in the 
report, and the fact that many LEIs tend to develop in areas 
where, apparently, the 'optimal business mix' is lacking, 
would indicate that LEIs can: 
— 'create' new local jobs; 
— 'save' local jobs;