ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 161/44

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version)

COM(2006) 812 final — 2006/0264 (COD)

(2007/C 161/13)

On 17 January 2007 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 February 2007. The rapporteur was Mr Grasso.

At its 434th plenary session, held on 14 and 15 March 2007 (meeting of 14 March), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 157 votes with three abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1 A codification of rules that have frequently been amended is essential if Community law is to be clear and transparent.

1.2 Codification must be undertaken in full compliance with the normal Community legislative procedure.

1.3 The purpose of this proposal is to undertake a codification of Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks. The new Directive will supersede the various acts incorporated in it; this proposal fully preserves the content of the acts being codified and hence does no more than bring them together with only such formal amendments as are required by the codification exercise itself.

1.4 The Committee endorses this codification.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 120/49

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movements of pet animals as regards the extension of the transitional period’

COM(2007) 572 final — 2007/0202 COD

(2008/C 120/12)

On 23 October 2007, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 37 and 152 (4 (b)) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movements of pet animals as regards the extension of the transitional period.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the contents of the proposal and has already set out its views on the subject in its earlier opinion CESE 1411/2000, adopted on 29 November 2000 (1), it decided, at its 440th plenary session, held on 12 and 13 December 2007 (meeting of 12 December), by 131 votes with 4 abstentions to issue an opinion endorsing the proposal and to refer to the position it had taken in the abovementioned document.

Brussels, 12 December 2007. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(1) OJ C 116 of 20.4.2001, p. 54-56.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 151/35

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on safety rules and standards for passenger ships (Recast)

COM(2007) 737 final — 2007/0257 (COD)

(2008/C 151/11)

On 18 December 2007 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 80 (2)of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on safety rules and standards for passenger ships (recast)

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 441st plenary session of 16 and 17 January 2008 (meeting of 16 January) by 131 votes and 2 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 162/41

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the colouring matters which may be added to medicinal products (Recast)

COM(2008) 1 final — 2008/0001 (COD)

(2008/C 162/09)

On 31 January 2008, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the colouring matters which may be added to medicinal products (Recast)

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 442nd plenary session of 13 and 14 February 2008 (meeting of 13 February 2008), by 122 votes to 1 and 4 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 162/86

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (Codified version)

COM(2007) 667 final — 2007/0235 (COD)

(2008/C 162/19)

On 22 November 2007 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 175 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (Codified version)

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, the Committee decided, at its 442nd plenary session, held on 13 and 14 February 2008 (meeting of 13 February), by 132 votes to two with two abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 211/17

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on roll-over protection structures of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (static testing)’ (Codified version)

COM(2008) 25 final — 2008/0008 (COD)

(2008/C 211/04)

On 7 March 2008 the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on roll-over protection structures of wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (static testing) (Codified version).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 444th plenary session of 22 and 23 April 2008 (meeting of 22 April), by 143 votes and 6 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 77/148

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on tax exemptions applicable to the permanent introduction from a Member State of the personal property of individuals (Codified version)’

COM(2008) 376 final — 2008/0120 (COD)

(2009/C 77/31)

On 18 June 2008, the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on

Tax exemptions applicable to the permanent introduction from a Member State of the personal property of individuals (Codified version).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided unanimously, at its 447th plenary session of 17 and 18 September 2008 (meeting of 17 September), to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 100/120

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy related products’

COM(2008) 399 final — 2008/0151 (COD)

2009/C 100/20

On 10 September 2008, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy related products.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 448th plenary session of 21, 22 and 23 October 2008 (meeting of 22 October), by 113 votes and 1 abstention, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 175/123

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive …/…/EC of […] determining the scope of Article 143(b) and (c) of Directive 2006/112/EC as regards exemption from value added tax on the final importation of certain goods on the common system of value added tax (codification)’

COM(2008) 575 final — 2008/0181 (CNS)

(2009/C 175/24)

On 8 October, the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 93 and 94 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Council Directive …/…/EC of […] determining the scope of Article 143(b) and (c) of Directive 2006/112/EC as regards exemption from value added tax on the final importation of certain goods on the common system of value added tax (codification)

COM(2008) 575 final — 2008/0181 (CNS).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 449th plenary session of 3 and 4 December 2008 (meeting of 3 December), by 167 votes in favour, three against with three abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/68

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a multi-annual plan for the western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel and the fisheries exploiting that stock’

COM(2009) 189 final — 2009/0057 (CNS) (1)

2010/C 354/13

The Council and the European Parliament decided on 18 January 2010 and 5 March 2010 respectively, to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (ex Article 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community), on the

Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a multi-annual plan for the western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel and the fisheries exploiting that stock

COM(2009) 189 final — 2009/0057 (CNS) (1).

Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 461st plenary session, held on 17 and 18 March 2010 (meeting of 17 March 2010), unanimously to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 17 March 2010. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Mario SEPI

(1) The acronym should read COD.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 43/13

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 as regards certain provisions relating to risk sharing instruments for certain Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability’

COM(2011) 655 final — 2011/0283 (COD)

2012/C 43/03

Rapporteur-General: Mr SMYTH

On the 8 November 2011 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 177 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 as regards certain provisions relating to risk sharing instruments for certain Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability

COM(2011) 655 final — 2011/0283 (COD).

On 25 October 2011 the Committee Bureau instructed the Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion to prepare the Committee's work on the subject.

Given the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Smyth as rapporteur-general at its 476th plenary session, held on 7 and 8 December 2011 (meeting of 8 December 2011), and adopted the following opinion by 128 votes to zero with 7 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1 The EESC notes the Commission's proposal to amend articles 14 and 36 of Regulation 1083/2006 allowing on the one hand for risk sharing instruments to be managed under indirect centralised management and on the other for Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability to contribute part of their allocations under the ‘Convergence’ and ‘Regional competitiveness and employment’ objectives of cohesion policy to the provisioning and capital allocations of loans or guarantees issued to project promoters and other public or private partners directly or indirectly by the EIB or other international financial institutions. The proposed modifications would not change the maximum amount of financing provided for in the operational programmes for the programming period 2007-13.

1.2 The EESC approves the proposal.

2. Reason

2.1 The current proposal would facilitate the approval of loans granted as per Article 36 of Regulation EC No 1083/2006 for one or more priorities of an operational programme by the EIB or by other financial institutions at a moment when due to the downgrading of the public and private debt of the State and financial institutions of the Member States such loans would not be available.

2.2 The Committee agrees that it is vital to support projects and the recovery of the economy and therefore supports the above-mentioned proposal.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 181/200

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription’

COM(2012) 49 final — 2008/0255 (COD)

2012/C 181/36

On 27 February and 13 March 2012 respectively, the Council and the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 114 and 168 (4)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription

COM(2012) 49 final — 2008/0255 (COD).

Since the Committee had already set out its views on the contents of the proposal in question in opinion CESE 1025/2009, adopted on 10 June 2009 (1), it decided at its 479th plenary session, held on 28 and 29 March 2012 (meeting of 28 March), by 156 votes to 1 with 9 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

Brussels, 28 March 2012. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Staffan NILSSON

(1) OJ C 306, 16.12.2009, p. 33.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 11/87

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain technical and control measures in the Skagerrak and amending Regulations (EC) No 850/98 and (EC) No 1342/2008’

COM(2012) 471 final — 2012/0232 (COD)

2013/C 11/24

On 11 September 2012, the European Parliament, and, on 12 September 2012, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain technical and control measures in the Skagerrak and amending Regulation (EC) No 850/98 and Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008

COM(2012) 471 final — 2012/0232 (COD).

Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal, it decided at its 484th plenary session of 14 and 15 November 2012 (meeting of 14 November 2012), by 157 votes to 2 with 9 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
4.8

It is important to consider how to build trust in a new mark. From the perspective of consumers, the current situation is already confusing: there are a variety of labelling systems, many of which are difficult to understand, and it is impossible to keep up with them. Adding another new system and asking consumers to make informed choices could be expecting too much of them. Instead of introducing a new social mark, it would be worth considering expanding existing labelling systems to cover social responsibility (where they do not already do so). The same applies to the mark's ability to increase investor confidence. The Commission will use, for example, initiatives relating to social investment to develop guidelines for improving the reporting of social outcomes achieved by these efforts; the EESC highlighted this approach as essential in connection with investment in social enterprise (12), and it should also be taken into account in this initiative.
4.5

The third area in which the Commission specifically mentions the role and involvement of social actors and the social partners concerns pay, in relation to which, in the words of the Commission, the social partners should be ‘consulted’ on the reform of wage-setting systems. In this respect, the Committee wishes to draw the Commission's attention to the fact that in many Member States, not only wages and wage-bargaining, but even the wage-setting system itself, come within the autonomous remit of the social partners, which negotiate and conclude collective agreements in this respect. This autonomous negotiation role of the social partners cannot be reduced to mere consultation. Nor can the right to take part in dialogue be restricted to a mere advisory role. Indeed, the autonomy of the social partners and of social dialogue is confirmed in Articles 152 and 153(5) TFEU, which, among other things, state the principle that the EU must respect the national systems of industrial relations. In this context, ‘consultation’ of the social partners in relation to, for example, reforms to indexation mechanisms is wholly inadequate and even inappropriate, particularly where, in the relevant national model of social dialogue, such indexation mechanisms are negotiated and agreed by the social partners themselves by way of collective agreements. On the substance of this issue, the Committee wonders whether the Commission is not attributing rather too much importance to the role played by downward adjustments of wages. Closer analysis of the country-specific recommendations that accompany the Commission communication shows that, of the 17 Member States that have received Commission recommendations concerning pay, 16 of them have recommendations aimed at reducing wage growth, whether by reforming indexation, limiting minimum wages, decentralising wage bargaining or increasing the flexibility of the lowest wages. However, the imbalances that characterise European monetary union are primarily structural and are mainly linked to the fact that globalisation has different effects on different members of the monetary union (Footnote: Reference to IMF Working Paper 12/236, External Imbalances in the Euro Area, 2012). The fact remains that the competition with low-wage countries cannot be won by reducing wages.
3.3.2

These are the EESC's answers to the questions posed in this section of the Green Paper: — Question 6: UTPs are routinely used in the food sector, especially by supermarkets, in day-to-day commercial dealings. — Question 7: Suppliers of commodities other than foodstuffs are evidently victims of UTPs by retail chains to a far lesser degree. This is probably because of their lesser dependence on large retail networks, since suppliers of toys, sports goods or clothes, for example, have a far greater range of potential buyers than food producers. Unfair trading practices occur in franchise relations, both in the food and non-food retail sectors. The same problems in food supply chains described in the opinion apply here too, with an imbalanced relation between stronger parties (franchisers/chains) and significantly weaker ones (franchisees). As a result, we see the same lack of freedom in negotiating contracts. Franchisees sign initial contracts with conditions imposed by franchisers and have no other choice if they want to secure the contract. The same comments about the fear factor and costs inherent in distribution (the franchiser) being transferred to suppliers (franchisees) without compensation/added value for the franchisee also apply here. Often during execution of a contract, franchisers extra-contractually impose unilateral changes by means of instructions. — Question 8: UTPs have a big impact on the ability of farming and food SMEs to invest and innovate. Investment to protect aspects of public interest – such as the environment, working conditions, animal welfare and climate – is lower because of dependence on a small number of purchasers and the uncertainty this situation engenders. — Question 9: The impact of UTPs in business-to-business relations on consumers is examined in detail in a specific study (5). The current system is detrimental to consumers particularly over the long term, since investment is lacking for sustainable production and innovation. In the long run, again, they also lose out as a result of market failure in areas such as the environment, climate, working conditions and animal welfare. In the interests of counteracting this, it seems to us more acceptable for consumers to pay a little more for food now, since competition between retail chains is currently based solely on the lowest possible consumer price, with everything else sacrificed to this. — Question 10: There is no doubt that UTPs have an adverse effect on the functioning of the single market, since they significantly restrict the opportunities for small and medium-sized operators to make their mark. In effect, large retailers decide what is sold where and in many cases the criterion is not the best value for money, but often the greater "willingness" or "ability" to accept UTPs.