18. 2. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 41/37 
national nature of the TIR Convention should not stand 
in the way of such a simplification. 
The Committee is of the considered opinion that the 
Member State's requirements as regards the documents 
covering the implementation of the TIR procedure are 
in urgent need of harmonization. 
2.3. Article 13(2) 
The planned exchange of all relevant findings, obser­
vations etc. among the competent authorities is particu­
larly to be welcomed. One aim of this must be to ensure that irregularities of any kind are prevented as far as 
possible, since, apart from other considerations, they 
can constitute a serious safety hazard. 
2.2. Article 14 
The Committee regards it as inappropriate to allow the 
Member States only a right to be consulted on questions 
concerning the application of this Regulation. Since 
implementing provisions can also have an effect on 
national administrative structures, it is all the more 
necessary for Member States to have an active right of 
co-determination. 
Done at Brussels, 20 November 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francis STAEDELIN 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) amending Regulation (EEC) 
No 1785/81 on the common organization of the markets in the sugar sector (*) 
(91/C 41/12) 
On 3 October 1990 the Council decided, in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community, to ask the Economic and Social Committee 
for an Opinion on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Economic and Social Committee decided to make the Rapporteur-General, Mr Barbagli, 
responsible for the preparatory work on the matter. 
At its 281st plenary session (meeting of 20 November 1990), the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following Opinion by a large majority, with 3 votes against and 7 
abstentions. 
1. The Committee notes that the Commission pro­
posal is concerned with the renewal of existing measur­
es, particularly those dealing with such aspects of the 
common organization of the sugar market as the quota 
system, the system of self-financing funded by contri­
butions from growers and manufacturers, and the 
granting of different types of aid. 
2. The Committee takes note of the fact that Italy 
will continue to be authorized to grant digressive 
(!) OJ No C 258, 13. 10. 1990, p. 9. national adjustment aid and considers that the measure 
in question must be judged in the light of the role the 
sugar sector plays in reducing regional disparities. 
2.1. In this context the Committee believes that the 
proposal to henceforth totally exclude from aid the 
industrial part of the Italian sugar sector is too extreme. 
3. Bearing in mind 
— the trends emerging from the multilateral nego­
tiations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade (GATT) on agriculture, 
No C 41/38 Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 2. 91 
— the uncertainty of the current world sugar market 
situation, and 
— the fact that substantial changes in the common 
organization of the sugar market cannot be con­
ceived without taking into account its relationship 
with other sectors (cereal and oil seeds in particular) 
whose stabilizing mechanisms will shortly be 
reviewed, 
the Committee considers that the Commission proposal 
currently strikes a balance between the different interests at stake and therefore deserves to be approved 
pending an overall review of the organization of the 
sugar market which will enable the aspirations of pro­
ducers, manufacturers and consumers to be reconciled 
more fully. 
It must be pointed out that the sugar production indus­
try requires long term planning and investment at all 
levels; the limits for Community sugar production 
should therefore be laid down as soon as possible and 
for longer than the proposed two years. 
Done at Brussels, 20 November 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN 
APPENDIX 
Fourth paragraph of Article 43 of the Rules of Procedure 
The following amendment was rejected during the plenary session debate: 
Page 1 point 2.1 
Insert the following phrase at the end of point 2.1: 'Since it would be unacceptably discriminatory. 
Reason 
This amendment is necessary to avoid distortion of competition. 
Voting : 
For: 19, against: 29, abstentions: 18.