No C 116/20 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 30.9.  74 
3. Other  pollutants 
3.1. The  first  problem  is that  of the  substances 
which  would  have  to be added  to petrol  in the place 
of lead,  to achieve  the  same  anti-knock  qualities. There  is surely  the  possibility  that  these  substances 
might  be more  polluting  than  the lead  itself? 
3.2. It  was,  however,  agreed  that  Article  3 of the 
Directive  appeared  to deal  satisfactorily  with  this 
problem.  Lead  is not  to be removed  at the  cost  of 
adding  other,  possibly  more  polluting,  substances. 
Done  at Brussels,  27 June  1974. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Alfons  LAPP  AS 
Opinion  on the 'Proposal  for a Council  Regulation  (EEC)  laying  down  conditions  for 
granting  national  aid under  the common  structural  policy  for seafishing' 
The text  referred  to the Committee  has  been  published  in the Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 110  of 13 December  1973,  page  64. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
At its 117th  plenary  session  held  on 30 and  31 January  1974  the Committee,  acting  on 
a proposal  from  the Bureau,  decided  to deliver  an Opinion  on the  abovementioned 
subject  on its own  initiative. 
B. OPINION  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  prepared  its Opinion  on the above  matter  at its 
121st  plenary  session,  held  in Brussels  on 26 and  27 June  1974. 
The full  text  of the Opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE: 
Having  regard  to Articles  43 and  198  of the Treaty 
establishing  the European  Economic  Community; 
Having  regard  to the Decision  taken  on 30 January 
1974,  in accordance  with  the  fourth  paragraph  of 
Article  20 of the Rules  of Procedure,  to draw  up on 
its own  initiative  an Opinion  on the 'Proposal  for a 
Council  Regulation  (EEC)  laying  down  conditions for granting  national  aid  under  the  common  struc-
tural  policy  for seafishing'; 
Having  regard  to the various  Opinions  delivered  by 
the Economic  and  Social  Committee  on the fisheries 
sector,  and  in particular  its Opinion,  dated  27 March 
1969,  on the  'Proposal  for  a Council  Regulation 
establishing  a common  structural  policy  for 
seafishing'  (*); 
(*) OJ No C 76, 17. 6. 1969. 
30. 9. 74 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 116/21 
Having  regard  to the Decision  taken  by its Bureau  on 
29 January  1974,  instructing  the  Section  for 
Agriculture  to prepare  the Committee's  work  on the 
matter; 
Having  regard  to the  oral  report  made  by the 
rapporteur,  Miss  Mackie; 
Having  regard  to the  Opinion  delivered  by  the 
Section  for Agriculture  at its meeting  on 3 May  1974; 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its plenary  session 
on 26 and  27 June  1974,  sitting  of 27 June  1974, 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
with  no votes  against  and  16 abstentions: 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  approves  the 
draft  Regulation,  submitted  by the  Commission  to 
the Council,  subject  to the  following  general  and 
specific  comments. 
1. General  comments 
1.1. The  proposal  stems  from  Article  9 of 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  2141/70  6n  which  the 
Committee  delivered  an Opinion  on 27 March  1969. 
The Committee  is pleased  that  it can  now  deliver  an 
opinion  on a proposal  to laying  down  conditions  for 
granting  national  aids  to the seafishing  sector,  but it 
deplores  the particularly  substantial  delay  with  which 
this proposal  has been  presented  by the Commission, 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  2141/70  having  laid  down  1 
June  1971  as the deadline. 
1.2. As  it has  pointed  out  on several  occasions  in 
previous  Opinions,  the  Committee  stresses  that 
rational  development  of the seafishing  sector  requires 
inter  alia  that,  as far as possible,  conditions  in the 
Community  for financing  and  utilizing  vessels  should 
not depend  on  regional  or national  intervention 
which  distorts  competition.  Consequently,  the 
Committee  holds  that  the seafishing  industry  should 
continue  to receive  aid,  but in such  a manner  that  the 
bulk  of this  aid  becomes  as soon  as possible 
Community  aid.  This,  however,  should  not  entail  a 
decrease  in aids  for those  receiving  them. 1.3. In  addition,  the  Committee  considers  it 
necessary  to ensure  that  the various  aids  granted  by 
the Member  States  are published  in full  and  objective 
form  so as to enable  each  Member  State,  persons 
involved  in a professional  capacity  in seafishing,  and 
the Community  bodies  to have  a clear  picture  of the 
actual  position  of seafishing  and  of any  disparities 
which  currently  exist  in the Community. 
1.4. The  Committee  considers  that  the 
Commission  could  achieve  this  not  only  within  the 
terms  of reference  of the  draft  Regulation  under 
review,  but also  in virtue  of Articles  92 and  94 of the 
Treaty. 
1.5. In  the light  of the conditions  prevailing  within 
the Community,  the Commission  has  restricted  itself 
to defining  certain  objectives  for the Member  States, 
and, in order  to lessen  the distortion  of competition 
which  exists  between  countries  granting  high  levels  of 
national  aid and  those  granting  low  levels  of national 
aid, has  defined  the  maximum  amount  of national 
aid which  can be granted. 
1.6. The  Committee  shares  the Commission's  view 
that rational  development  of the  seafishing  industry 
in the Community  could  be hindered  if determination 
of the  maximum  level  of aids  were  left  to the 
discretion  of the  Member  States.  Despite  this,  the 
Committee  considers  that  the ceiling  proposed  by the 
Commission  should  be increased.  In some  Member 
States,  the  levels  of aid  proposed  would  be 
insufficient  to offset  the  high  capital  cost  of 
purchasing  and fitting  out new  fishing  vessels. 
1.7. The  Commission  cannot  compel  the Member 
States  to grant  a minimum  level  of aid,  and  the 
Committee  therefore  considers  that,  as  far  as 
possible,  total  harmonization  by way  of Community 
aid should  be the long-term  objective. 
1.8. Lastly,  the  Committee  draws  the  Commis-
sion's  attention  to the  need  to make  sure  that  the 
translations  of the  proposal  in all the  Community 
languages  coincide  exactly,  particularly  in the case  of 
Articles  2, 3 and  5. 
2. Comments  on Articles 
2.1. Article  2 A — second  line 
2.1.1.  The  Committee  wonders  —  for  both 
economic  and  legal  reasons  — whether  the  phrase 
'registered  in the  territory  of one  of the  Member 
No C 116/22 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 30. 9. 74 
States'  would  not  have  been  preferable.  It urges  the 
Commission  to consider  this  point. 
2.2. Article  2 A (a) 
2.2.1.  The  purchase  of used  fishing  vessels  should 
be included,  since,  due  to rising  costs,  numerous 
fishermen  no longer  have  the funds  to purchase  new 
vessels  whilst  frequently  second-hand  vessels  can very 
well improve,  or even  provide,  the means  of existence 
of other  fishermen,  particularly  young  fishermfen. 
2.2.2.  The  Committee  considers  that  the  term 
'hydraulic  winches'  is too  restricitve,  and  requests 
that the adjective  'hydraulic'  be deleted. 
2.2.3.  In  addition,  in order  to obviate  the risk  of 
impeding  improvement  to equipment  which  has been 
made  necessary  by technical  advance,  the following 
should  be added  after  the word  'winches':  'and  such 
equipment  as is necessary  to improve  catching 
methods  and  the quality  of the catch'. 
2.3. Article  2 A (c) 
2.3.1.  The  rapid  progress  in fishing  technology, 
possible  changes  in yields  from  certain  grounds,  and 
the effect  of decisions  taken  at the Conference  on the 
Law of  the  Sea  could  make  fishing  vessels 
uneconomic  before  15 years  elapses;  therefore,  the 
Committee  considers  that  the  period  in question 
should  be reduced. 
2.4. Article  3 (a) and (c) 
2.4.1.  The  Committee  requests  that  the  words 
'chilling  and  freezing'  be deleted  and  replaced  by 
'preserving'  since  new  methods  of preserving,  which 
are likely  to be introduced  in the near  future,  should 
be taken  into  account. 
2.5. Article  4 (b) 
2.5.1.  The  first  line should  read  as follows: 
'Measures  relating  to  the  obtaining  of 
qualifications  or to the qualifications  of fishermen 
and persons  employed  .. 
2.6. Article  5 
2.6.1.  As  it has  already  indicated  in its general 
comments,  the Committee  considers  that  the levels  of aid proposed  by the  Commission  are  lower  than 
those  currently  required  to maintain  and  expand 
productive  fishing,  particularly  inshore  fishing.  In 
general  terms,  the Committee  considers  that  the level 
of aid should  be increased  to take  account  of the high 
capital  requirements  of the seafishing  industry. 
2.6.2.  In  addition,  the Committee  points  out  that 
the idea  of 'actual  costs',  which  is mentioned  on 
several  occasions  by the  Commissions,  is open  to 
different  interpretations.  It requests  that  this 
expression  be clarified. 
2.6.3.  The  Committee  further  considers  that  a 
clear  statement  of the  methods  of evaluating  such 
costs  in properly  comparable  terms  should  be made 
by the Commission. 
2.7. Article  5(1) 
2.7.1.  The  Committee  notes  that  the Commission 
differentiates  between  specialized  and  multi-purpose 
vessels.  The  Committee  considers  that  encouragement 
can be given  to multi-purpose  vessels  in the case  of 
inshore  or off-shore  fishing,  but that  the building  of 
multi-purpose  fishing  vessels  for high  sea or deep  sea 
fishing  should  not  be stimulated.  For  the latter  type 
of fishing,  efficiency  goes  hand  in hand  with  greater 
specialization. 
2.8. Article  5 (2) — second  indent 
2.8.1.  The  proposed  aid  should  be fixed  at 200 
units  of account  per registered  ton and  not  100  units 
of account  as the Commission  proposes. 
2.9. Article  5 (3) 
2.9.1.  The  Committee  considers  that  the  level  of 
aid proposed  should  be increased  to 15 % in line 
with  the  Commission's  proposals  in Article  6. The 
Committee  requests  that  Article  5 (3) be deleted  and 
Article  6 re-worded  in order  to make  the proposal 
clearer. 
2.10.  Article  6 
2.10.1.  In  view  of the  preceding  comment,  the 
Committee  asks  that  the  first  line  be amended  to 
read: 
'... operations  specified  in Article  2 A (d) and 
Article  3 (a), (b) and  (c) may  not exceed  ...'. 
30.9.  74 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 116/23 
2.11.  Article  7 
2.11.1.  The  Committee  notes  that  members  of 
recognized  producer  organizations  can  obtain  a 5 
percentage  point  increase  in aid. 
2.11.2.  The  Committee  points  out  that  all 
Community  policy  in the fishing  sector  is based  on 
recognized  producers'  organizations  and  that  it has 
always  been  anxious  to strengthen  the  role  and 
power  of these  organizations  and  unions  of such 
organizations  in the agricultural  sphere.  In this  light, 
the Committee  is pleased  to note  the Commission's 
intention  shortly  to publish  a report  on the situation 
of producers'  organizations  in the fisheries  sector  in 
the enlarged  Community. 
2.11.3.  In  the  Committee's  view,  national  aid  for 
'recognized  activities'  should  be restricted  to members 
of producers'  organizations  recognized  by  the 
Commission.  However,  as there  are  no recognized 
producers'  organizations  in some  Member  States,  this 
stipulation  cannot  be applied  at the  present  time. 
Nevertheless,  the Committee  notes  that  according  to 
the Commission  Member  States  could  — if they  so 
desire  —  grant  aids  solely  to  producers' 
organizations. 
2.11.4.  Pending  publication  of the abovementioned 
report  — which  should  allow  the present  situation  in 
respect  of producers'  organizations  to be better 
assessed  — the  Committee  considers  that  the  draft 
Regulation  must  form  an extra  incentive  — in 
addition  to existing  Community  rules  — to the 
establishment  of producers'  organizations  in places 
where  such  organizations  do not  exist,  and  stimulate 
interested  parties  to join  such  organizations  where 
they already  exist.  Nevertheless,  as regards  the 
operations  set out in Article  3 (c) and  Article  2 A (d), 
the Committee  stresses  that  the aids  which  may  be 
granted  to producers'  organizations  must  not  be 
liable  to engender  distortions  of competition  to the 
detriment  of the  fish-processing  industry  and  other 
agricultural  and  food  industries  in the Community. 2.12.  Article  8 
2.12.1.  The  Committee  considers  that  the  10-year 
period  laid  down  in paragraph  (a) is too  long  for 
various  reasons.  Obliging  an investor  to keep  his 
vessel  for 10 years  before  disposing  of it is to run  the 
risk of obliging  him  to forego  the  technological 
changes  which  could  take  place  or may  make  his 
vessel  unsuited  to the  role  it is to accomplish.  The 
arguments  put  forward  under  Article  2 (c) apply 
equally  to Article  8 and  therefore  the  Committee 
requests  that  a five-year  period  as stipulated  in 
paragraph  (b) be adopted  in respect  of paragraph  (a), 
or that  at the least,  derogations  be expressly  provided 
for in certain  cases. 
2.12.2.  In  addition,  the Committee  considers  that, 
under  certain  circumstances,  the  transfer  of fishing 
vessels  without  repayment  of aid should  be allowed, 
for example,  from  father  to son  or in the event  of the 
death  of the owner. 
2.12.3.  Finally,  the  Committee  requests  the 
Commission  to review  this  Article  in the  light  of 
Community  policy  on the  cessation  of agricultural 
activity. 
2.13.  Article  10 
2.13.1.  Although  in agreement  with  the  goals 
pursued  in this  Article,  the Committee  considers  that 
there  should  be a clear  statement  of the effect  of this 
draft  Regulation  on the availability  of other  forms  of 
aid. In particular,  it should  be ensured  that  this  draft 
Regulation  results  in keeping  aids  at a level 
comparable  to that  afforded  to other  occupations  in 
the region  concerned. 
2.14.  Article  11 
2.14.1.  Following  on from  the  comments  made 
under  the  heading  General  Comments,  the 
Committee  requests  the  Commission  to amend  this 
Article  so that  the  Member  States  are  obliged  to 
notify  the Commission  of all aids  which  have  been 
granted,  whatever  be their  type  and  regardless  of 
which  public  or semi-public  authority  has  granted 
them. 
Done  at Brussels,  27 June  1974. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Alfons  LAPP  AS 
No C 116/24 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 30.9.74 
ANNEX 
to the Opinion  of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
The following  amendment,  tabled  in accordance  with  the  procedure  laid  down  in the  Rules 
of Procedure,  was  rejected  in discussion. 
Point  1.6. 
Amend  the second  sentence  to read: 
. . Despite  this,  the  Committee  considers  that  the  ceiling  proposed  by the  Commission 
should  be examined  in more  detail.  In some  Member  States  the levels  of aid  proposed  . . 
Result  of the vote: 
For: 26. 
Against:  29. 
Abstentions:  15. 
Opinion  on the 
— 'Amendment  to the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on the approximation  of the 
laws  of the Member  States  relating  to analytical,  pharmaco-toxicological  and  clinical 
standards  and  protocols  in respect  of the testing  of proprietary  medicinal  products' 
— 'Amendment  to the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on the approximation  of the 
laws  of the Member  States  relating  to publicity  for proprietary  medicinal  products 
and to package  leaflets' 
— 'Amendment  to the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on the approximation  of the 
laws  of the Member  States  relating  to matter  which  may  be added  to proprietary 
medicinal  products  for colouring  purposes' 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 35 of 28 March  1974,  pages  68 and  69. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 18 February  1974,  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 
121st  plenary  session,  held  in Brussels  on 26 and  27 June  1974. 
The full  text  of the Opinion  is as follows: