12. 9. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 237/41 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision on the transition of the EUROTRA 
programme to the third phase 
(88/C 237/13) ' 
On 16 June 1988, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
In view of the deadline set by the Council, the Economic and Social Committee decided to 
appoint Mr Romoli as rapporteur-general, with the task of preparing its work on the subject. 
At its 257th plenary session (meeting of 7 July 1988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
The Committee approves the proposal. However, since 
its deadline prevents it from examining in substance 
whether the conditions for moving on to the third phase 
have been met, this Opinion is first and foremost a 
reaffirmation of its support for the EUROTRA pro­
gramme. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The EUROTRA programme, whose aim is to 
establish a common translation system for all of the 
Community's official languages, was the subject of a 
Council decision in November 1982 (!). This decision 
was amended in November 1986 (2) so as to include 
Spanish and Portuguese and make major changes in the 
timetable, the budgetary allocation and the procedures 
for implementing the programme. 
1.2. The 1986 amendment to the Council's 1982 
decision stipulated that the three-phase programme was 
to last a total of seven years, and increased the total 
appropriations considered to be necessary for the pro­
gramme's implementation from 16 to 20,5 million ECU, 
broken down as follows: 
Phase 1: preparatory phase: 2 years—2 million ECU. 
Phase 2: phase of basic and applied linguistics research: 
3 years—13 million ECU. 
Phase 3: phase of stabilization of the linguistic models 
and evaluation of results: 2 years—5,5 million ECU. 
1.3. The November 1986 decision also makes the 
move to the next phase conditional on a new Council 
decision, to be taken in the light of a report from the Commission and the opinion of the Management and 
Coordination Advisory Committee on linguistic prob­
lems. 
1.4. The present proposal for moving on to the third 
phase is thus in response to a legal obligation. The 
Council decision will also release the 5,5 million ECU 
set aside for implementation of the third phase by the 
Council's decision of November 1982. 
1.5. At the same time the Commission has submitted 
a proposal allocating an extra 6,5 million ECU to the 
third phase, a proposal on which the Committee will 
be asked for its Opinion later. 
1.6. The Committee approves the proposed move to 
the third phase, albeit subject to the following com­
ments. 
2. Comments 
2.1. This Opinion is first and foremost a basic re­
affirmation of the support which the Committee gave 
to the initial proposal in its Opinion of June 1981 (3) 
and reaffirmed in May 1986 (4) when the Commission 
proposed extending the programme to Spain and Por­
tugal. 
2.2. The Commission proposes that the transition to 
the third phase take place on 1 July 1988, hence the 
need for a quick decision on the part of the Council. 
The deadline thus set for the Committee's Opinion 
makes it quite impossible for the Committee to judge 
for itself whether the aims of the second phase have 
(') OJL317, 13. 11. 1982, p. 19. 
(2) OJ L 341, 4. 12. 1986, p. 39. (3) OJ C 138, 9. 6. 1981, p. 3. 
(4) OJC207, 18. 8. 1986, p. 13. 
No C 237/42 Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 9. 88 
been achieved or whether, as the Commission states, 
the conditions for the third phase's launch obtained. 
Therefore the Committee is in no position to make any 
substantive comments. 
2.3. Nevertheless the Committee is fully aware that 
any delay in the decision to move on to the third phase 
would interrupt the programme's implementation and 
might ultimately threaten the very existence of research 
units which are doing some outstanding work together 
Done at Brussels, 7 July 1988. 
The Committee endorses the Commission proposal in 
the light of the following considerations. 
1. This proposal is necessary because the common 
customs tariff (CCT) as used up to 31 December 1987 
lapsed on 1 January 1988. It has been replaced by the 
(1) OJNoC 179,8.7. 1988, p. 10. in every part of the Community. Furthermore, it is not 
the object of the present proposal to amend or revise 
the programme. 
2.4. At all events, the Committee will comment on 
the progress made in implementing the programme 
when it delivers its Opinion on the proposal referred 
to in 1.5 above concerning a specific programme for the 
completion of a machine translation system of advanced 
design, EUROTRA. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
harmonized commodity description and coding system 
('harmonized system') which applies at international 
level, and not only to trade within the Community. 
2. The proposed arrangements were in fact enacted 
by the Commission in Regulation (EEC) No 4000/87 
of 23 December 1987. Since however they entail an 
amendment to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2771/75 
which can only be undertaken by the Council, the above 
Regulation must be repealed and superseded by the new 
proposal. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) amending Regulation (EEC) 
No 2771/75 on the common organization of the market in eggs(!) 
(88/C 237/14) 
On 24 June 1988 the Council, acting under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, asked the Economic and Social Committee for an Opinion on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Wick as the rapporteur-general for the 
Opinion. 
The Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion at its 257th plenary session 
(meeting of 6 July 1988).