19. 11. 84 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 307/19 
APPENDIX III 
Minority statement 
Following the vote by roll-call on the opinion as a whole, various members (listed below) of the Employers' 
Group, who had voted against the opinion or abstained, issued the following statement: 
Members of the Employers' Group agree with the rapporteur that unemployment is the most serious 
problem in the Community and that every effort must be made to restore a satisfactory level of 
employment. They take the view that more importance must be attached to economic measures. They 
consider that the Member States should make greater efforts to achieve adequate economic growth. 
The measures should be focused on promoting productive investment, both private and public, in 
industry, small and medium-sized enterprises, and services. Consideration should also be given to how 
the formation of venture capital can be boosted in order to make possible the establishment of new 
businesses, particularly smaller firms, which are still the mainstay of the Community's economy. 
These members take the view that a social action programme can make only a limited contribution to 
improving the employment situation. Preference should be given to outline programmes at Community 
level. These members find it disquieting that the opinion calls for a maximum of State intervention and 
guidance to improve the employment situation. Government employment programmes and economic 
intervention and controls cannot replace market-oriented entrepreneurship. These members also 
disagree with the rapporteur's proposal to gear all Community measures to employment policy, since in 
their view this goes too far. Moreover, they maintain that lasting jobs are created not only through 
consumption but also, and above all, through greater investment. 
The Community should intervene only where national policies can lead to distortions of competition. 
Extensive harmonization in all areas is rejected. Community instruments should not invariably be used 
for upward harmonization. It is also necessary to preserve the autonomy of the two sides of 
industry. 
These members take the view that wages and working conditions in the Member States cannot be laid 
down at Community level, but can only be settled by the two sides of industry at national level in 
accordance with relevant customs and practice. They advocate better information and consultation of 
workers and call for a dialogue between the two sides of industry at Community as well as national 
level. The instruments proposed by the Commission are, however, rejected as unsuitable. These 
members therefore oppose points 3.6.6 and 3.6.7. 
Finally, there are also objections to the proposals on reduction and reorganization of working time. 
The members of Group I have repeatedly drawn attention to these objections. General reductions of 
working time are rejected since it is to be feared that more jobs would be endangered thereby. 
Messrs Antonsen, Arena, Bagliano, Binnenbruck, Mrs Bredima, Messrs Breitenstein, Broicher, 
Cammann, Campbell, De Bievre, Dracos, Fortuyn, Fuller, Hannon, Kenna, Low, Masprone, Noordwal, 
Pearson, Pelletier, Schnieders, Stahlmann, Staratzke, Storm Hansen, Swift, Tamlin, van der 
Mensbrugghe, Van Melckenbeke, Wagner, Wick, de Wit, Zinkin. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 81/363/EEC on aid to 
shipbuilding 
(84/C 307/07) 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 86 of 28 March 1984, page 5. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 2 April 1984 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. 
No C 307/20 Official Journal of the European Communities 19. 11. 84 
Procedure 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 5 September 1984, in the light of 
the report by Mr Arena. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
At its 219th plenary session (meeting of 26 September 1984) the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following opinion, with nine dissenting votes. 
The Committee approves the proposed Directive, and 
would make the following comments. 
1. The Community shipbuilding industry has been 
declining for some time. Today, however, it is fighting for 
its very survival. The extension of the Fifth Directive is 
therefore necessary to provide timely support for the 
industry, in a period when the market situation is 
deteriorating in many respects. However, the Directive 
does not constitute a Community shipbuilding policy 
capable of putting the sector on a less precarious 
footing. 
The Committee understands that the Commission is 
shortly to present a communication on this subject, and 
assumes that it will be consulted. It reserves the right to 
give its views on this at the proper time. 
2. The Commission paper suggests that the 'crisis 
within a crisis' will end in 1986/87, and that Community 
shipyards may become fully competitive, thanks to 
restructuring measures further drastically reducing 
production capacity. 
However, the efficiency and scale economies of Japanese 
shipbuilding, the proposed government programmes to 
increase its competitiveness in the very near future, and 
the very low labour costs of some non-member countries, 
seem likely to prevent Community shipyards from 
reducing the current yawning gap between market prices 
and production costs; and there is no short or 
medium-term prospect of a stable, substantial recovery in 
demand, which would help improve the current 
cut-throat competition climate. 
While accepting the need to continue with restructuring, 
by reducing the number of production units rather than 
reducing the production level of each one, it should also 
be clear that the extension of the Directive is an emergency measure. A selective cut-back in production 
capacity should fit in with a Community shipbuilding 
policy. The Committee hopes that the Commission will 
submit proposals in this connection soon. The Directive 
must therefore be implemented in a spirit which will bring 
sufficient orders, this being a sine qua non for the success 
of the programmes to reduce and rationalize national 
production capacities. 
However, the individual Member States will still find it 
very difficult to contend with Japan and the new 
shipbuilding countries (e.g. South Korea today and China 
in the near future). 
3. Given the gravity of the situation and the short time 
available, the Committee recommends that work start at 
once on a Community shipping policy aimed at 
safeguarding the Community shipbuilding industry, so 
that before long it is modern, efficient, and the right size 
at least to renew the Community fleets, which also need to 
be safeguarded. Suitable social measures - including 
creation of alternative employment - must also be 
provided, to help solve the problems caused by the closure 
and restructuring of shipyards. 
The Committee would recommend that greater attention 
be given to the following areas: 
— encouraging Community shipowners to place their 
orders with Community shipyards, by introducing a 
home credit scheme to make the financing offered for 
the purchase of vessels built in the Community more 
competitive, 
— financing methods and priorities which encourage 
further standardization of ship components and 
equipment, to make shipbuilding more efficient, 
— monitoring and inspection arrangements for vessels 
entering Community ports, to reduce the number of 
unsound vessels, 
19. 11. 84 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 307/21 
— fight unfair shipping competition from certain third 
countries, 
— continue stepping up the efforts to achieve greater use 
of ERDF non-quota measures in the areas hit by the 
shipbuilding crisis, 
— include specific measures such as early retirement in 
the revision of the Social Fund, 
— encourage European level research and development 
of the shipbuilding sector. 
4. Consideration should also be given in a future 
opinion to the way in which an international Community 
maritime policy can support Community shipbuilding by 
means of international shipping agreements with 
non-Community countries. The Community must show a 
united front in these agreements, and use all its 
negotiating strength. 
Thus, if cargoes are to continue being transported in 
conditions of free competition, demand for maritime 
Done at Brussels, 26 September 1984. 
Francois CEYRAC 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation on the designations used in the marketing of 
milk and milk products 
(84/C 307/08) 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 111 of 26 April 1984, page 7. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 13 April 1984 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
Procedure 
The Section for Agriculture, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the 
subject, adopted its opinion on 6 September 1984, in the light of the report by Mr 
Strauss. transport services must be strengthened, and this in turn 
will stimulate demand for new ships. 
The Community must thus start making a serious effort 
to reach a common EEC position as soon as possible, in 
order to define a 'strategic dimension' for Community 
shipbuilding as such; 'strategic' with reference (a) to the 
maritime traffic fleet of this major economic area, and (b) 
to all the possible 'integration synergies' (induced effects, 
research, etc.) through which use can be made of an 
industrial dimension which has long been lost at national 
level. 
Determination of a 'minimum healthy level' is an essential 
prerequisite for effective international action with a view 
to orderly marketing, and a vital incentive for 
governments and industries to proceed with 
rationalization. 
5. While reiterating its support for the draft Directive, 
the Committee feels it vital that precise guidelines are 
drawn up and adopted as soon as possible, in order to be 
able to develop measures which, suitably coordinated, 
can form the basis of an overall policy for the sector. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee