ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
3.11.

The external energy policy of the EU, including gas procurement policy, must take account of a broad geopolitical context. The EESC has previously stressed that commercial aspects of the project should not be the sole factor in the decision, especially considering the tendency of Russia to use energy as a tool for geopolitical aims. The political stability of countries along the pipeline route and their vulnerability to foreign political influence, the social and environmental record of project developers as well as the involvement of Russian companies in exploration and production are among factors which the EU’s energy diplomacy must consider. The assessment of new project needs, furthermore, to take into account their impacts on the energy security of neighbouring countries. With respect to Ukraine, for example, there is a risk that projects removing the transit of gas from its territory will affect its revenues, forestall investment in network upgrades and take away leverage with Moscow.
2.13.

The main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy are still relevant. The unemployment rate remains unacceptably high, with more than 22 million unemployed in the EU and more than 17 million in the euro area. More than 122 million people are living either on the verge of poverty or at risk of poverty. The lack of prospects for young people constitutes a significant obstacle to a renewable future for Europe. There is a low level of labour mobility. The system of lifelong learning is still not the focus of policies. The trends, which are diverging from the objectives, are not encouraging. There are already more than 70 Directives concerning social rights in force. In its opinion on the European Pillar of Social Rights the EESC argues that, as part of the preparation of the Annual Growth Survey, upward convergence needs to be set as an objective for social rights in Europe. Likewise, it stresses the need to ensure growth and competitiveness across the EU. In this context, it underlines the necessary interdependence between economic, employment and social policy (2).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 288/130

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council fixing the adjustment rate provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 for direct payments in respect of the calendar year 2017’

(COM(2017) 150 final – 2017/0068 COD)

(2017/C 288/19)

Referral European Parliament, 06/04/2017 Legal basis Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment Adopted at plenary 31/05/2017 Plenary session No 526 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 177/0/0

Since the Committee had already set out its views on the contents of the proposal in question in opinion CESE 2942/2013, adopted on 25 May 2013 (*1), it decided at its 526th plenary session, held on 31 May and 1 June 2017 (meeting of 31 May 2017), by 177 votes to none with no 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, 31 May 2017. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Georges DASSIS

(*1) EESC opinion on the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate to direct payments provided for in Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2013, COM(2013) 159 final — 2013/0087 (COD) (OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 143).
4.18.

Various independent studies and reports by the Commission have indicated the variable speed and effectiveness with which Member States are implementing the requirements of the EPBD Directive. Issues include: — Problems of transposition and interpretation, which the Commission continues to pursue through enforcement mechanisms. Greater recognition of the centrality of building energy efficiency to energy and climate targets and commitment to national renovation strategies is required by several Member States. The EESC would encourage DG ENER to maintain its watchful oversight on implementation and continue to act rapidly in invoking infringement proceedings. — The quality and comparability of energy performance certificates (EPCs). Specific harmonisation of EU requirements for qualified experts and certifiers and the inclusion of quality checks for EPCs would be helpful. The development of EPCs to provide further technical information and recommendations for improvement would also be welcome. — The EESC notes that the Directive’s method of linking financial incentives to EPCs allows only for a posteriori payment of the financial incentives, as payment depends on comparison of ‘before’ and ‘after’ EPCs. This is counter-productive in terms of energy efficiency, as renovations dependent on subsidies will not happen unless the owner is sure of receiving the subsidy before renovating. — The use of European Structural and Investment Funds and specifically Cohesion Policy Funds. Under the European Regional Development Fund a minimum percentage of funding will be directed to the shift towards a low-carbon economy in all sectors yet the application of all these funds to building energy efficiency varies greatly between Member States. Clear interpretative guidance exists but further encouragement to use such funding is necessary. — Support for relevant technical training in building renovation, particularly amongst SMEs which constitute over 90 % of European construction enterprises.
2.3.

The main changes proposed cover: i) Exporting unemployment benefits: The period for ‘exporting’ unemployment benefits (when benefits are ‘exported’ to another Member State where one is looking for a job) is to be extended from a minimum period of 3 to 6 months, with the possibility of a further extension for the remaining period of entitlement. ii) When assessing whether a jobseeker qualifies for unemployment benefits, a Member State will be required to verify and consider any previous periods of insurance in other Member States (as it is the case in the current rules). However, this is only possible if the person concerned has worked in that Member State for at least 3 months (new proposal). If the person does not qualify, it will be the Member State where he/she was formerly employed that will be responsible for paying those benefits. iii) Unemployment benefits for frontier workers: Under the proposed rules, it is the Member State of former employment that will be responsible for paying any unemployment benefits if these workers have worked there for 12 months. However, under the current rules, frontier workers currently pay contributions and taxes to the Member State where they work. For employment periods below 12 months it will be the Member State of residence which pays the unemployment benefits. iv) Welfare benefits for economically inactive persons: In this case, the proposal aims to codify the recent case law of the European Court of Justice whereby economically inactive citizens moving from one Member State to another can only access welfare benefits if they satisfy the condition of legal residence, as defined in the Free Movement Directive. However, legal residence of economically inactive persons requires that they prove they have sufficient means of subsistence and a comprehensive health insurance. This condition does not apply to active jobseekers: their right of residence in another Member State is conferred directly from Article 45 TFEU. v) Social security for posted workers: It is stated that the proposed rules aim to strengthen the administrative tools related to the social security coordination of posted workers, to ensure that national authorities have the adequate means to verify the social security status of such workers and to address potential unfair practices or abuses. vi) Family benefits: The proposal updates the rules on parental leave allowances, which compensate a parent for loss of income or salary during time spent raising a child. The proposal does not modify the existing rules on exporting child benefits. No indexation of child benefits is envisaged either.
1.3.

The Committee nevertheless notes that interoperability capacity varies considerably between and within Member States. The current consensus is that regulation or mandatory governance procedures remain off-limits but this places a greater responsibility on Member States to voluntarily engage in every possible way with the spirit and substance of the EIF and its implementing programmes. Security and privacy continue as one of the 12 principles of the EIF and the EESC notes positively that these principles are elaborated in some detail and are the subject of two clear recommendations in the Interoperability Implementation Plan. By its nature the EIF offers a broad framework within which Member States can exercise their subsidiarity rights but it is undoubtedly the case that public unease about personal data ownership, use and security is widespread and common concerns are shared across Europe. Such issues are linked to the fundamental rights enshrined in the EU Treaties.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 197/72

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 as regards the location of the seat of the European Banking Authority’

(COM(2017) 734 final — 2017/0326 (COD))

(2018/C 197/12)

Consultation Council of the European Union, 14.12.2017 European Parliament, 11.12.2017 Legal basis Articles 114 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion Adopted at plenary 17.1.2018 Plenary session No 531 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 167/0/1

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided unanimously not to hold a general discussion and to put the opinion straight to the vote (Rule 50(4) and 56(3)).
3.10.

In its recent initiatives in the area of employment, the Commission has placed considerable emphasis on the issue of transitions . One of the more worrying trends in recent years has been the increase in the time lag between young people completing their studies and finding their first job, particularly when it comes to their first stable job. Moreover, the situation has also deteriorated for the long-term unemployed and for people coming up to retirement age. The EESC warmly welcomes initiatives such as the Youth Guarantee, the Upskilling Pathways and the promotion of apprenticeships as the main form of access to employment via the European Alliance for Apprenticeships and strategies to tackle long-term unemployment. It therefore calls on European and national institutions to secure the appropriate resources to facilitate and speed up transitions and the necessary training to guarantee continuity of income , in an adequate manner, particularly for the most disadvantaged and those who are difficult to re-skill and thus enhance their employability. It also recommends creating the right environment for businesses for competitiveness, while ensuring smooth transitions between jobs by means of social safety nets and other external flexibility measures that take account of the needs of workers and businesses.
6.3.

The EESC would, however, like to raise strong concerns about the proportionality of this approach . The proposal claims to be in accordance with the principle of proportionality. It does, however, not reflect at all on the additional financial burden for the public bodies and does not compare the proposal with other industry policy options. It is not evident, therefore, that an extra burden in public procurement for mainly cities and municipalities is the most efficient way to trigger industry activities and market developments. Strong concerns have been expressed by local public transport organisations as well as representatives from cities and municipalities. The main points raised by these stakeholders are: — significant additional money is necessary for investments, which is far beyond their capacities, — many cities have already done a lot for clean transport, but the directive ignores all these efforts, — modern Euro VI diesel buses are ignored, although they have been set as a new standard in 2011 (10) and can bring cost-efficient reductions of public transport emissions, — plug-in hybrids are not accepted after 2025, — the infrastructure for electric charging of buses and trucks is quite distinct from charging light vehicles like private cars, therefore the synergy is rather limited, — exemptions have to be made for fire brigades, police, ambulance vehicles, — in some municipalities, public procurement involves rather low numbers of vehicles (fewer than 10) with which the minimum targets are hardly likely to be met, — the proposed reporting can only be realised with acceptable administrative efforts when a ‘clean vehicles’ category would be introduced into the official car registers.
3.5.4.

The success of the European Energy Union depends on the ability to uphold European legislation and ensure that energy projects in Europe operate under European market legislation. This is of specific concern for investment projects which potentially, and to many clearly, contradict the objectives of the Energy Union. This raises political and economic concerns in a number of Member States, which in turn are seen to contribute to the loss of confidence of societies of these countries in the values, which guided them to joining the European Union. A failure to uphold rule of law is also used by the reluctant European integration politicians as an example to point to the weaknesses of the Union integration, which further damages the unity and integrity of the EU. Therefore the Committee highly recommends that a project like Nord Stream 2 and other strategically important projects should be developed according to the Energy Union rules.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 227/101

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 92/66/EEC introducing Community measures for the control of Newcastle disease’

(COM(2017) 742 final — 2017/0329 (COD))

(2018/C 227/15)

Consultation European Parliament, 14.12.2017 Council of the European Union, 22.12.2017 Legal basis Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment Adopted at plenary 14.2.2018 Plenary session No 532 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 151/2/5

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the contents of the proposal and has already set out its views on the subject in its earlier opinion EESC 4014/2013 (NAT/611), adopted on 16 October 2013 (*1), it decided, at its 532nd plenary session of 14 and 15 February 2018 (meeting of 14 February), by 151 votes to 2 with 5 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text and to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

Brussels, 14 February 2018. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Georges DASSIS

(*1) OJ C 67, 6.3.2014, p. 166.
Official Journal of the European Union

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on

Council directive amending Directives 2006/112/EC and 2008/118/EC as regards the inclusion of the Italian municipality of Campione d’Italia and the Italian waters of Lake Lugano in the customs territory of the Union and in the territorial application of Directive 2008/118/EC

(COM(2018) 261 final — 2018/0124 (CNS))

(2018/C 367/23)

Consultation Council of the European Union, 29.5.2018 Legal basis Articles 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion Adopted at plenary 11.7.2018 Plenary session No 536 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 174/0/2

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decides unanimously not to hold a general discussion and to put the opinion straight to the vote (Rule 50(4) and 56(3)).
4.13.

One of the problems with disinformation is the fact that it is impossible to check the identity of the sources spreading disinformation through the internet. It is too easy to operate in cyberspace with a fake identity — and in general that is exactly what those who are active online with malicious intent do. The Commission presents several proposals, which are set out in the Joint Communication on Cybersecurity published in September 2017. The problem is that these proposals are not mandatory: users could choose to only engage on online platforms with others who have identified themselves; the Commission will promote the use of voluntary online systems allowing the identification of suppliers of information, etc. Of course, there is a potential conflict of interest between privacy and full control and it should be possible to maintain anonymity when surfing the internet passively. However, if we really want to make a difference in the fight against disinformation we may need more strict measures regarding identification when people are operating proactively on the internet. After all, that is how the quality media operate, in compliance with the 1954 Code of Bordeaux, which was drawn up by the International Federation of Journalists and sets very clear and strict principles for how to work with sources. There are sometimes valid reasons why traditional quality news organisations publish stories with anonymous sources, but they always include an indication that the name and address of the source are known to the editorial staff.
2.2.10.

The Committee wants to reiterate the 2030 Agenda’s statement on the interlinkages and integrated nature of the SDGs which are of crucial importance in ensuring that the purpose of this Agenda is realised. We recommend setting up cross-cutting programmes, which would cover several relevant areas of action and be able to deliver tangible results in the individual third countries. As an example, climate change is adversely affecting agricultural activities in sub-Saharan Africa. The fact that it is not possible to farm the land is leading to the break-up of communities and constitutes a major cause of migration to Europe. In practice, these people could be considered ‘climate refugees’, and this requires a complex response, at the centre of which should be halting desertification, as well as rolling out support programmes both for those at risk and for those who have decided to migrate.
3.21.

LoI countries dominate the European defence market in terms of the number of active companies and their arms sales. For example, in the UK, BAE Systems is the largest defence company. SAAB is the main Swedish aerospace and defence company, while the largest in France are Dassault Aviation, Naval Group, Safran and Thales . In Germany, Rheinmetall, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems and Diehl are important companies. In Italy, Leonardo and Fincantieri represent the two main companies. Airbus , a trans-European company, ranks second in Europe after BAE Systems . Another relevant transnational company is MBDA, a joint venture of the three European leaders in aerospace and defence ( Airbus, BAE Systems and Leonardo ) active in missile and missile system manufacturing. And KNDS , owner of Nexter and KMW, is also becoming a trans-European company. Note that some of these companies are not exclusively operating in the defence market, which explains the varying ratios of sales to employees. Looking at smaller companies, a recent IHS study identified almost 1 600 SMEs active in the defence sector in Europe and estimated the total number of SMEs in defence supply chains at 2 000-2 500. A number of these companies are dual-use in nature, engaged in both the civil and defence domains. In any case, SMEs play an important role in the defence industry and are a key enabler for competitiveness.
3.5.

The EESC emphatically warns that money laundering is not only a way to legalise the proceeds of activities considered as criminal and incompatible with the law, but also leads to a senseless allocation of resources in which the main aim of these operations is ‘not to be discovered’ and to ‘legalise’ the invested resources or transfer them to a place where further crime will be committed, rather than to achieve profit. At the same time, the EESC respects and highlights the fact that the amendment does not concern itself with analysing new trends or money laundering is occurring in the current circumstances. The proposal homes in on particular aspects of eliminating these shady practices, mainly bolstering the EBA’s role in relation to European Supervisory Authorities in addressing the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism and improving its coordination and communication with national supervisory authorities in instances of combating money laundering, which are part of banking or financial market supervisory authorities.
2.5.

The modifications proposed by the Commission also include: i) a new exception to the general rule according to which the place of supply of an intra-Union supply of goods will be deemed to be the place where the goods are located at the time when dispatch or transport of the goods to the customer ends; ii) an amendment that determines a single rule for the moment of chargeability of VAT on intra-Union supplies; iii) a new article according to which VAT is to be payable by the person to whom the goods are supplied insofar as that person is a certified taxable person (‘CTP’). According to the Commission, the proposal is also expected to reduce cross-border VAT fraud by up to EUR 41 billion per annum.
The Commission proposal COM(2018) 819 final introduces further rules that should improve the functioning of the VAT e-commerce package adopted in December 2017, which will enter into force on 1 January 2021. It introduces further clarifications on the VAT treatment of suppliers using an electronic interface to facilitate supplies of goods to consumers in the EU when they are considered to be deemed suppliers according to Article 14a(2) of the VAT Directive and thus responsible for the collection and payment of VAT to the tax authorities. In principle, pursuant to Article 369b of VAT Directive 2006/112/EC ( 2 ) , the OSS can only be used to declare and pay VAT on cross-border supplies of services and for intra-Community distance sales of goods and not for the domestic supply of goods. However, since suppliers selling goods through the use of an electronic interface may hold a stock of goods in different Member States from which they carry out domestic supplies, this would entail that traders operating such electronic interfaces who become deemed suppliers for these supplies would have to register in all EU Member States, where the original suppliers hold a stock and carry out domestic supplies. Therefore, it is proposed to allow them to also use the OSS for the domestic supplies for which they are treated as deemed supplier according to Article 14a(2) of the VAT Directive. Thus, the simplification of the OSS for electronic interfaces is maintained, avoiding further burdensome procedures for companies. Commission proposal COM(2018) 819 final lays down specific rules needed to support the adoption of a OSS through some targeted modifications to the current legal framework.