28.7.77  Official  Journal  of the European  Communities  No  C 180/31 
2. The  Committee  deplores  the  fact  that  it has 
been  given  totally  inadequate  time  for carrying  out a 
detailed  examination  of the Commission  report  to the 
Council  on the situation  regarding  the production  and 
marketing  of hops:  1976  harvest,  this  report  being  the 
basis  of the  proposal  on which  the  Committee  has 
been  requested  to deliver  an opinion. 
3. The  Committee  observes,  moreover,  that  it was 
not consulted  by the Council  on the proposal  for a 
Council  Regulation  laying  down  in respect  of hops, 
the amount  of aid to producers  for the 1975  harvest. 
4. The  Committee  notes  that  the  proposal  under 
review  cites  as its legal  authority  Basic  Regulation 
(EEC)  No  1696/71  and  not  Regulation  (EEC) 
No 1170/77  of 17 May  1977  (*), which  will  come  into 
effect  on 1 July  1977. 
The justification  for this  seems  to be: (a) that  the aid 
for the 1976  harvest  needs  to be paid  out  rapidly; 
(b) that  this  will  allow  market  stabilization  measures 
to be taken  at producer  group  level  in the  1977 
marketing  year. 
Accordingly,  the  Committee  understands  why  the 
amount  of aid for the 1976  marketing  year  needs  to 
be fixed  by the  proposed  deadline,  viz.,  before 
1. July  1977. 
5. Article  1(3)  of the  proposal  applies  Article 
12 (4) of Regulation  (EEC)  No 1696/71,  which  makes 
it possible  for the grant  of aid  to be limited  to an 
amount  corresponding  to a given  area. 
The Commission  adjudges  the acreages  which  were 
registered  in 1976  and  already  cultivated  in 1975 
to be representative  of the  average  acreages  for the 
(!) OJ No L 137,  3 6.1977. past three  years.  It considers  that  as a result, 
measures  to limit  the  aid  granted  to an amount 
corresponding  to these  acreages  are consonant  with 
the spirit  of Article  12 (4) of Regulation  (EEC) 
No 1696/71  and  make  implementation  by  the 
national  authorities  a simpler  and  speedier  matter. 
6. The  average  EEC  aid which  is proposed  for the 
1976  harvest  is 2 % up on the average  for the 1975 
harvest. 
There  are two  aims: 
— cyclical,  viz.,  to alleviate  the  impact  which  the 
poor  harvest  has had  on producers'  incomes, 
— structural,  viz.,  to reduce  the differential  between 
the highest  and  lowest  levels  of aid  granted  in 
respect  of the various  varieties  and  to fix a more 
even  level  of aid for varieties  destined  for similar 
uses in the brewery.  In this  way  the Commission 
is establishing  an initial  link  between  the  aid 
fixed  for the 1976  harvest  and  the  provisions  of 
the amended  Basic  Regulation,  which  will  come 
into effect  for the 1977  harvest. 
7. In  its  previous  opinions  on  proposals  for 
Regulations  on  aid  to hop  producers  and,  in 
particular,  in its opinion  of 24 September  1975  on aid 
for the 1974  harvest,  the Committee  decided  not  to 
express  its views  on the  amount  of aid  and  on the 
allocation  among  the various  varieties.  The  reason  for 
this was  the divergent  views  held  by hop  producers 
on this  score. 
Bearing  in  mind  as  well  its  comments  in 
paragraph  2 of this  opinion,  the Committee's  attitude 
is the same  today. 
Done  at Brussels,  22 June  1977. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Basil  de FERRANTI 
Opinion  on the  proposal  for  a Council  Regulation  concerning  Community  aid  for 
financing  cyclical  stocks  of hard  coal,  coke  and  patent  fuel 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 87 of 7 April  1977,  page  6. 
No C 180/32 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 28. 7.77 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 4 April  1977,  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 
150th  plenary  session,  held  in Brussels  on 22 and  23 June  1977. 
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  for  an opinion  made 
by the  Council  of the  European  Communities  on 
4 April  1977, 
Having  regard  to the  decision  taken  by its Bureau 
on 29 March  1977,  instructing  the Section  for Energy 
and Nuclear  Questions  to draw  up an opinion  and 
a report  on the  matter, 
Having  regard  t©  the  opinion  adopted  by  the 
Section  at its 32nd  meeting,  held  on 8 June  1977, 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 150th  plenary 
session  held  on 22 and  23 June  1977  (meeting  of 
22 June), 
Having  regard  to the  report  submitted  by  the 
rapporteur,  Mr Sj. Jonker, 
Done  at Brussels,  22 June  1977. Whereas  the  maintenance  of  indigenous  coal 
production  at an annual  level  of 250  million  tee 
under  satisfactory  economic  conditions  is one  of 
the energy  policy  objectives  of the  Community; 
Whereas  the  proposal  under  consideration  has  been 
drawn  up by the  Commission  as one  of a series  of 
measures  designed  to achieve  this  objective, 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
by 58 votes  to 6, with  7 abstentions: 
1. The  Committee  approves  the  principle  of 
Community  aid  for coal. 
2. For  this  reason  the  Committee  approves  the 
system  of financial  aid  for  cyclical  coal  stocks  as 
proposed  by the  Commission.  But  the  scheme  must 
be closely  monitored,  and  where  necessary  corrected, 
so as to ensure  the stocks  do not  become  structural. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Basil  de FERRANTI 
ANNEX 
to the  opinion  of the  Economic  and  Social  Committee 
The following  amendments  were  rejected  during  the discussion: 
Paragraphs  1 and  2 
Replace  by the following  text: 
'1. The  Committee  doubts  whether  helping  to finance  coal  stocks  from  public  funds  is 
the best  way  of dealing  with  the  repercussions  of the  present  bad  economic  situation  in 
28. 7. 77 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 180/33 
the coalmining  industry.  It considers  that  the proposed  scheme  could  lead  to stocks  being 
maintained  at excessively  high  levels  for a long  period  and  prevent  the  adjustment  of 
output  to the actual  level  of demand. 
2. The  Committee  does  not approve  of using  EEC  funds  to finance  coal  stocks.'. 
Reasons 
The theory  underlying  the Commission's  proposal  is that  the  coal  industry  must  be put  in 
a position  where  it can  satisfy  demand  when  it picks  up again  and  that,  accordingly,  large 
stocks  need  to be kept.  But nobody  can  say when  the economic  revival  will  materialize.  Above 
all, it is impossible  to say  whether  it will  be strong  enough  to absorb  rapidly  output 
running  at 240  to 250  million  tonnes  plus  tens  of millions  of tonnes  of coal  in stocks.  If it 
is not,  stocks  would  have  to be kept  at a high  level  for a long  period,  and  the amount  of 
stocks  might  even  rise. 
Therefore,  it is fair  to ask  whether  using  public  aid to encourage  an increase  in stocks  is 
economically  the most  appropriate  method  of helping  the coal  industry  to weather  the present 
economic  storm.  The  Commission  itself  admits  that  production  will  have  to be adjusted 
should  stocks  remain  at an excessively  high  level.  The  Commission  also  admits  that  the 
normal  level  is one  month's  output  (20  million  tonnes).  It is therefore  unclear  why  it is 
proposed  that  production  should  only  be adjusted  to suit  demand  once  stocks  exceed 
40 million  tonnes. 
It would  perhaps  be better  to use  the  proposed  funds  to finance  the cost  of cutting  back 
production,  though  this  should  not  involve  pit closures. 
Community  financial  support  to the  coal  industry  is not justifiable  at present,  when  we do 
not have  an overall  common  energy  policy  and  real  economic  integration. 
Apart  from  the case  of existing  common  policies  (the  CAP  for instance)  or measures  in the 
common  interest  of all the Member  States  (e.g.,  Social  Fund,  Regional  Fund),  recourse  should 
be made  to the Community  budget  solely  for purposes  and  by means  that  will  secure  for all 
the Member  States  a reasonable  balance  between  the cost  to the  budget  and  the immediate 
or potential  gains  that  will  accrue  from  using  Community  funds  in that  particular  way.  One 
instance  in which  this  criterion  should  be employed  is that  of aids  to specific  production 
sectors. 
The Commission's  proposal  plainly  lacks  this  balance  in that  it would  make  all the Member 
States,  including  non-coal  producers,  share  the  cost  of aid  to the  coal  industry.  The  only 
return  the non-coal  producers  would  have  is as consumers,  in that according  to the Commission 
keeping  cyclical  coal  stocks  will  reduce,  the  risk  of a cut-back  in coalmining  capacity  in the 
Community  and  ensure  supplies  when  demand  picks  up again  as the economy  pulls  out  of 
recession. 
This is an indirect  advantage  and  enough  to invest  with  a Community  character  and 
Community  interest  a measure  which  ... i be of direct  benefit  to a few  Member  States  only. 
To proceed  with  this  (and  similar)  proposals  would  be to encourage  a resurgence  of the 
attitude  'only  put  in what  you  can  get out',  which  should  be abandoned  in the interests  of 
creating  a real  Community. 
V oting 
For: 9, against:  55, abstentions:  7. 
Paragraph  2 
Replace  the second  sentence  by the following: 
in any  case,  aid is going  to have  to be of a temporary  nature  since  it will  be provided  only 
in cyclical  situations  and  not  where  there  are structural  problems.  Moreover,  aid schemes 
will have  to be run by the Commission  in close  harmony  with  the other  measures  intended 
to promote  the use  of coal,  such  as the proposal  on power  stations,  which  has  already 
been  approved  by the  Committee,  and  the  proposal  on the  gasification  and  liquefaction 
of coal.' 
No C 180/34 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 28.7.77 
Reasons 
No reasons  given. 
Voting 
For: 10, against:  40, abstentions:  16. 
Opinion  on the  proposal  for  a Council  Regulation  on the  necessary  measures  to 
achieve  comparability  between  the accounting  systems  and  annual  accounts  of railway 
undertakings 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 91 of 15 April  1977,  page  1. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 31 March  1977,  the Council  referred  the abovementioned  proposal  to the Economic 
and Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Article  75 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 
150th  plenary  session,  held  in Brussels  on 22 and 23 June  1977. 
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  75 thereof, 
Having  regard  to the  request  for an opinion  made 
by the  Council  of the  European  Communities  on 
31 March  1977, 
Having  regard  to the  Council  Decision  of 20 May 
1975  on the improvement  of the situation  of railway 
undertakings  and  the  harmonization  of the  rules 
governing  financial  relations  between  such  under-
takings  and  States,  and  in particular,  Article  8 (2) 
thereof  (*), 
Having  regard  to the Committee's  opinion  of 29 June 
1972  on this  matter  (2), 
Having  regard  to the  decision  taken  by its Bureau 
on 29  March  1977,  instructing  the  Section  for 
Transport  and  Communications  to draw  up  an 
opinion  and  a report  on the new  proposal, 
Having  regard  to the opinion  issued  by the Section 
for Transport  and  Communications  at its 113th 
meeting  held  in Turin  on 1 June  1977, 
(!) OJ  No L 152,  12. 6. 1975,  p. 3 et seq. 
(') OJ  No C 89, 29. 8. 1972,  p. 1 et seq. Having  regard  to the  oral  report  made  by the 
rapporteur,  Mr  Fredersdorf  (Article  29  of the 
Committee's  Rules  of Procedure), 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 150th  plenary 
session  held  on 22 and  23 June  1977  (meeting  of 
22 June  1977), 
Whereas  the coordination  of national  railway  policies 
in the  Community  —  if only  because  of the 
importance  of the railway  for transport  — is a major 
concern  of the common  transport  policy; 
Whereas  the comparability  of railway  undertakings' 
annual  accounts  can  make  a contribution  in this 
direction; 
Whereas  such  comparability  also  constitutes  an 
important  step  towards  the possible  future  integration 
of the Community's  railways, 
HAS  UNANIMOUSLY  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING 
OPINION: 
The Committee  gives  its approval  to the  Commis-
sion's  proposal,  subject  to the  comments  set  out 
below.