31. 8. 87 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 232/9 
vary between a few hours and a few weeks and really does 
need to be clarified in order that all Member States have 
common practices in this regard. 
Furthermore, the Committee recommends that the Member 
State which is challenging CoP should not only notify the 
Member State which granted type approval — i.e. the normal 
practice, but also should simultaneously advise the 
manufacturer. This would allow manufacturers to take 
immediate action to check CoP and minimize the possibility 
of producing vehicles not in conformity, which then have to 
be traced and rectified. vehicles already produced if this is demanded by the 
authorities. Not only would such an agreement on a 
Community basis represent an equitable and reasonable 
allocation of responsibility, it might also act as a deterrent 
vis-a-vis any Member State which might contemplate 
misusing the provisions of this Directive for purposes other 
than those for which it is specifically intended. 
4. Articles 11 and 13 
Furthermore, the Committee proposes that the words 'au 
besoin' in the French version be replaced by 's'il l'estime 
necessaire'. 
3.1.4. Article 8, paragraph 4 
The wording of this Article does not, in the Committee's 
opinion, reflect the 'loser pays' principle. In other words, if a 
Member State challenges conformity of production, which 
after having been checked by the Member State which 
granted type approval, is nevertheless found to conform to 
the type approved, then the Member State which wrongly 
challenged CoP should pay whatever reasonable costs 
were incurred to verify CoP. Similarly if the vehicle is 
found not to conform then the manufacturer bears the cost of 
the CoP check and, as is normal, the cost of rectifying 4.1. Although the Committee is in general in favour of a 
speeding-up of the procedure of adaptation of Directives to 
technical progress it cannot, as far as the automobile sector is 
concerned, agree with the introduction of a new procedure 
which in the end would reduce the role of the Committee on 
Adaptation to Technical Progress to a purely consultative 
one. The Committee feels that it is vital not to abolish the 
voting procedure of a committee which has proved itself 
capable of results and brought considerable expertise to the 
ongoing work of preparing Community legislation in this 
area, in particular at a moment when the completion of a 
European type-approval system is nearing its end. This 
notwithstanding, however, the Committee would be in 
favour of a tightening of the ramifications of the committee's 
working procedures, especially the setting of precise and 
binding deadlines. Steps should however be taken to ensure 
that the organizations concerned (those representing 
industry, employers, workers and consumers) are consulted 
on all issues having a bearing on health and safety. 
Done at Brussels, 1 July 1987. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the proposal for a Council Decision with regard to 
the 'Consolidated resolution on the facilitation of road transport' of the United Nations Economic 
Commission for Europe 
(87/C 232/07) 
On 13 April 1987 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 
75 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the abovementioned 
proposal. 
The Section for Transport and Communications, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 10 June 1987 in the light of the report by Mr 
Alexopoulos. 
At its 247th plenary session (meeting of 1 July 1987) the Economic and Social Committee 
unanimously adopted the following opinion: 
No C 232/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 8. 87 
1. The Economic and Social Committee approves the 
proposal by the Commission of the EC for a Council 
Decision recommending that the Community and its 
Member States act jointly to accept the 'Consolidated 
resolution on the facilitation of road transport' of the United 
Nations Economic Commission for Europe. The Committee 
shares the view of the Commission of the EC that, by 
simplifying and harmonizing procedures and approximating 
the various regimes in force, the proposed Resolution will 
contribute to the further development of road transport in 
Europe. 
2. The Committee considers that the joint action by the 
Community and its Member States recommended in the 
resolution is necessary because the subject matter either 
comes within the Community's exclusive jurisdiction 
(passenger transport by road, in accordance with the 
Community's secondary legislation) or else is of particular 
importance with regard to the common market (Article 116 
of the EEC Treaty). In the latter instance, the subjects 
concerned (transport of goods, vehicle insurance and 
registration) are covered in part by Community rules and in 
part by national ones. 
3. The Committee welcomes the change in the legal basis 
of the EC Commission's proposal: whereas in 1984 the legal 
basis consisted of the EEC Treaty in general, the 1987 
version proposes that Article 75 of the Treaty be specified, 
entitling the Committee to issue an opinion on the subject, which is of great importance to the common transport 
policy. 
4. The Committee is concerned that although the EC 
Commission's original intention was to introduce a 
non-binding legal instrument in the form of a 
recommendation, this has not been clearly understood, at 
least by some Member States. It also appears that there is no 
scope for joint action in many areas related to goods 
transport. These reservations have resulted in a long delay in 
the Council decision. The Committee would like to reiterate 
that the proposal is of a non-binding nature. On the other 
hand it believes that it is possible to achieve a minimum 
framework for joint action on goods transport, subject to 
certain collective reservations, as is proposed by the 
Commission of the EC. 
5. As these recommendations affect such a crucial sector 
(road transport), the Committee feels it is essential for the 
Community and its Member States to take immediate joint 
action within the framework of the United Nations 
Economic Commission for Europe. The Committee does not 
underestimate the difficulties involved (legal, economic, 
political, etc.). Nor would it overlook the fact that the last 
few years have been formative ones for the Community's 
road transport policy, and it has not yet taken on its definitive 
shape. Nevertheless, this should under no circumstances 
result in a delay in taking immediate joint action; at the same 
time, the Community and the Member States should seek to 
update at regular intervals (e.g. every two years) the 
provisions contained in the resolution. 
Done at Brussels, 1 July 1987. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the impact of current US economic and political 
developments on the Uruguay Round and international trade 
(87/C 232/08) 
On 12 May 1987 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the fourth paragraph of Article 
20 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on the impact of current US economic and 
political developments on the Uruguay Round and international trade. 
The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the 
subject, adopted its opinion on 12 June 1987, in the light of the report by Mr Romoli. 
At its 247th plenary session (meeting of 2 July 1987), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the 
following opinion unanimously: