Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the European Democracy Action Plan’

(COM(2020) 790 final)

(2021/C 341/09)

Rapporteur: Carlos Manuel TRINDADE Co-rapporteur: Andris GOBIŅŠ

Referral European Commission, 24.02.2021 Legal basis Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship Adoption in section 26.05.2021 Adopted at plenary 10.06.2021 Plenary session No 561 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 231/1/8

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) agrees with the European Commission (hereinafter the Commission) on the need to act to increase the resilience of European democracy. Moreover, it views the European Democracy Action Plan (EDAP) as both positive and necessary, broadly supports the measures proposed therein and proposes additional emphasis and action in several areas.

1.2. The EESC considers the EDAP to be extremely topical, given the worrying signs that the rule of law is being eroded by challenges for our democracy, both from within and from players abroad.

1.3. The Committee is concerned by attempts in several Member States to take advantage of the challenging situation created by COVID-19 in order to weaken the rule of law. It believes that the Commission should take political action in this regard.

1.4. For the reasons given in the three following points, the EESC recommends that the Commission create a specific pillar in the EDAP for the involvement of civil society and social partners and the promotion of labour democracy. It considers this new pillar to be essential and sets out concrete proposals for it in part 6 of this opinion.

1.5. The EESC’s view is that in addition to the areas already included in the EDAP, the promotion of European democracy should involve the fostering of democratic participation at EU, national, regional and local levels, the involvement of civil society and of democracy in all its facets and areas, including labour democracy, among others. The EESC believes that these aspects of the exercise of democracy should be included in the EDAP, as each has its own advantages that make democracy more dynamic and resilient.

1.6. The EESC is disappointed that the EDAP has failed to address the important role of the social contract in reducing inequalities and encouraging Europeans to embrace democratic ideals and does not include any measures to strengthen this role. Likewise, social dialogue and collective bargaining are not recognised or supported in the plan, and nor has the contribution of these areas to the stability of European democracies been made visible.

1.7. The EESC also believes that greater emphasis should be placed on civil dialogue, which is a key prerequisite for the highest quality decision-making and ownership in any democracy, showing due regard for Article 11 TEU. The EESC reiterates the recommendation it made to the Commission in its opinion SOC/627 ( 1 ) to hold an annual Civil Society Forum on Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law.

1.8. The EESC believes that the EDAP should include a large-scale initiative to foster education on democracy and fundamental rights, which is instrumental for safeguarding democratic values and active citizenship, in particular with regard to young people.

1.9. The EESC asks the Commission to ensure that the EDAP reflects the assessment of the Member States’ implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, and calls on the Member States to swiftly implement this directive.

1.10. With regard to supervision, the EESC calls for online platforms to be made accountable and transparent, and supports the development of a regulatory mechanism in the framework of the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act (DSA/DMA) to prevent disinformation, hate speech and manipulations.

1.11. The EESC calls on the European institutions, as a matter of urgency, to take the proposed steps for the security and working conditions of journalists and to prevent the harassment of both journalists and other public interest activists who are victims of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP).

2. Background

2.1. The EU is founded on the ‘universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law’ ( 2 ) and is an area where fundamental rights are protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ( 3 )

2.2. The EESC firmly believes in European democratic values, strongly supports the Commission’s ongoing efforts to safeguard and strengthen these values and reiterates the conclusions of previous opinions on democracy and the rule of law ( 4 ) . The value of democracy, as well as the importance of the rule of law in our society, must not be forgotten or devalued by citizens.

2.3. History has shown that democracy must be actively promoted and continually defended against repeated attacks. In her political guidelines for the EU, President von der Leyen identified ‘a push for European democracy’ as one of her six priority ambitions ( 5 )

2.4. The profound political, social and economic changes arising from digitalisation — and which the COVID-19 pandemic has only accelerated — create new risks and vulnerabilities, including the erosion of traditional equal opportunities mechanisms for candidates in election campaigns, uncontrolled funding of political actors, harassment of journalists, dissemination of false information and coordinated disinformation campaigns, cyber-attacks and many other forms of behaviour that jeopardise the integrity of elections. Risks for media and information pluralism, public debate, attacks on the independence of the media and weakening civil society can also be observed.

2.5. The COVID-19 pandemic has also had an impact on the quality of European democracies, given the need for exceptional responses to this public health emergency. The Venice Commission examined these measures and concluded that the COVID-19 crisis should not be used as an opportunity to strengthen governments at the expense of parliaments ( 6 ) . It also noted that serious consideration should be given to ensuring that the necessary regulatory framework is in place as well as identifying to what extent some of these measures could be maintained over time.

3. On the EDAP

3.1. The EDAP, which we consider both necessary and timely in an era when democracy in Europe is facing serious challenges, made worse by the COVID-19 response measures, sets out an enhanced EU policy framework and specific measures organised into three pillars: — promoting free and fair elections and strong democratic participation, — supporting free and independent media, and — countering disinformation (7).

3.2. The proposed EDAP also addresses empowering citizens and civil society to counter threats to democracy and the rule of law, treating this as a cross-cutting issue for all pillars.

4. General comments

4.1. On the state of democracy in Europe and the need for the EDAP

4.1.1. The EESC notes with concern the serious challenges for democracy and public trust in governing institutions in recent years, as demonstrated, inter alia, by: decline in electoral turnout; the number of breaches of the rule of law in several Member States; the emergence and spread of populism and hate speech; pressure on and even violence against journalists; attacks on the independence and pluralism of the media; the concentration of media ownership; illegitimate interference in electoral processes from both inside and out as a result of disinformation, improper financing and external influence; attempts to weaken organised civil society and its participation in decision making and to devalue or even suppress social dialogue, collective bargaining and negotiation.

4.1.2. The EESC considers the EDAP to be a positive and necessary instrument and is broadly supportive of the measures proposed therein, notwithstanding the specific observations made in part 5 and the proposals set out in part 6.

4.1.3. The EESC regrets that the preparation of the EDAP only included a limited dialogue process, as such dialogue would have increased the effectiveness of the plan.

4.2. On the scope and implementation of the EDAP

4.2.1. The EESC believes that action to promote democracy in Europe must include — but should not be limited to — protecting the integrity of elections, strengthening media freedom and pluralism, and combating any disinformation and interference.

4.2.2. The EESC believes that the scope of the EDAP should be broadened, and should include a separate pillar on the importance of active citizenship exercised through the involvement of civil society (see part 6).

4.2.3. The EESC believes that the EDAP should have attached greater value to democracy at national, regional and local levels.

4.2.4. Likewise, it believes that the EDAP should cover all facets and areas of European democracy, including labour democracy and structured dialogue with civil society.

4.2.5. The EESC hopes that the EDAP will be implemented in a way that acknowledges the need for the EU to play a key role as a model for promoting democratic values and standards, such as consistency in its internal and external action.

4.2.6. The EESC believes that the EU should take action to strengthen the resilience of European democracies, their social contract and their economic competitiveness, in line with the ambitions of the Conference on the Future of Europe.

4.3. Integration of the EDAP into EU policies and effective monitoring

4.3.1. The EESC believes that, in order to be successful, the EDAP should be closely linked with other ongoing initiatives at EU level that contribute to the same goals, and in particular with the implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European rule of law mechanism and the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights and new strategies for equality, and regrets that this link is not sufficiently visible. The EESC recommends that the links between the various action plans be made explicit and effective.

4.3.2. The EESC reminds the Commission that in its opinion SOC/627, it proposed holding an annual Civil Society Forum on Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law. Accordingly, it proposes adding a separate part of the EDAP on the state of democracy, including the issue of the application of Article 11 of the EU Treaty.

4.3.3. The EESC regrets that the EDAP is not accompanied by a monitoring framework and an accompanying model to measure progress, and that for many of the measures, no dates have been set, which makes it difficult for the evaluation scheduled for 2023 to be followed up in a timely manner. The EESC proposes that an appropriate monitoring framework be put forward. An important role can be played by the Rule of Law Report as described in part 6.

4.3.4. The EESC, while stressing the importance of significantly reducing social inequalities in terms of strengthening democracy, is disappointed that no mention is made in the EDAP of the need to maintain social cohesion as a key element of democratic stability in Europe. The importance of the social contract in encouraging Europeans to embrace democratic ideals and the need for action to maintain and strengthen this contract are also not mentioned. The EESC recommends that this dimension be included in the EDAP.

4.4. On the impact of digitalisation on democratic societies

4.4.1. The impact of attacks on democratic life is exacerbated by the lack of regulation of online platforms — which are concentrated in a very select group that is used widely around the world — and also by the action of their opaque algorithms. The mechanisms used to ensure the accountability of these platforms are insufficient. Ensuring that electoral processes engage voters, guarantee plurality and are fair and transparent is an issue for all democratic nations, and requires attention and action.

4.4.2. The EESC reiterates the assertion made in NAT/794 ( 8 ) to the effect that the EU should adopt policies that further embed a digital economy incorporating our societal values.

4.4.3. The EESC shares the view that a more vigorous approach to the regulation of online platforms is needed, ensuring that the major players are made accountable to the public and guaranteeing regulation by robust public authorities.

4.4.4. The EESC welcomes the preliminary regulatory steps taken to hold online platforms, in particular very large online platforms, accountable through the proposed Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act.

4.4.5. It also views the evaluation and updating of the Code of Practice on Disinformation as important intermediary steps to ensure robust monitoring of the impact of disinformation, including in relation to COVID-19, and the related responses of online platforms.

5. Specific comments

5.1. On the promotion of free and fair elections and strong democratic participation

5.1.1. The EESC agrees on the need to take action to guarantee the transparency of political advertising and communication (EDAP point 2.1) and supports the adoption of European legislation which should ensure that citizens always have full transparency with regard to sponsored content of a political nature at all decision-making levels. National authorities should receive all necessary information from social media networks and others to be able to secure free and fair elections at EU, national, regional and local levels.

5.1.2. The EESC supports imposing additional restrictions on micro-targeting via the use of opaque algorithms and psychological profiling in the political context, which the Commission proposes to explore in its legislative proposal on the transparency of sponsored political content.

5.1.3. The EESC considers free and fair elections, forming part of trustworthy electoral systems, to be a permanent challenge for all democratic systems, welcomes closer European cooperation on elections in the EU, and calls on the Commission, the EP and the Member States to develop further forms of enhanced cooperation in this area to ensure that elections are more inclusive, transparent and representative. The compendium on best practices should support these efforts.

5.1.4. The EESC welcomes the adoption of a new EU operational mechanism to support resilient electoral processes, organised and coordinated via the European Cooperation Network on Elections (point 2.3).

5.1.5. The EESC shares the concern stated in the EDAP regarding the prevention and combating of foreign influence on European democratic processes and deems it appropriate for the EU to impose costs via joint, clear and strong sanctions on those responsible for such interference and by launching a joint initiative on cybersecurity.

5.1.6. The EESC believes that the identification of electoral processes as critical infrastructure, which may already be considered when assessing foreign direct investment ( 9 ) , should be adopted, and that the EU’s operational mechanism to support resilient electoral processes should have the operating conditions and means to guarantee the security of procedures, including the cybersecurity of elections, at all levels.

5.1.7. The EESC suggests implementing meaningful transparency regarding online content distribution, which includes auditing of algorithms, better transparency in the online advertising ecosystem and transparent processes for content promotion/demotion; empowering civil society (academics, researchers, journalists, CSOs) and independent regulators in their role of enforcing the accountability of online actors; sanctioning those acting in bad faith, especially when there are repeated efforts to escape transparency and accountability from society.

5.1.8. The EESC regrets that the EDAP does not provide for the promotion of democratic engagement and active participation beyond elections as a separate pillar, does not recognise the role of social dialogue in democratic stability and does not include any specific measures in this regard. It recommends that the promotion of social dialogue, freedom of association for business and trade unions, collective bargaining and the right to information and consultation be included in the new pillar proposed in part 6.

5.1.9. As regards the already-existing proposals in the EDAP on the fostering of democratic participation and active participation outside the electoral context (point 2.4), the EESC believes that a large-scale initiative to promote education on democracy, including media and information literacy should be included in the EDAP, although it welcomes the fact that education about citizenship is mentioned in relation to the use of the Structural Funds.

5.1.10. The EESC points to its call in SOC/627 for an ambitious public communication, education and awareness-raising strategy on fundamental rights, the rule of law and democracy. Such a strategy should include a strong focus on active citizenship.

5.1.11. The EESC recommends that Member States make use of the Structural Funds and that the Commission itself use the funds at its disposal to support and strengthen the capacities of civil society.

5.1.12. Independent fact-checkers should receive adequate funding to be able to operate in real time, as the EESC has already recommended in relation to the Action Plan against Disinformation ( 10 ) . It is important to give the Commission greater power at the European level to act more effectively at this level and to better support Member State action at the national level.

5.1.13. The EESC recommends taking the utmost care to ensure that any consideration of criminalising hate speech at European level (point 2.4) cannot be interpreted as restricting freedom of expression, and emphasises that any initiatives in this area must comply with the principle of subsidiarity.

5.1.14. The EESC is pleased to note that the EDAP advocates promoting equality at all levels and fostering the participation in political life of women, LGBTIQ persons, disadvantaged young people, people with a minority racial or ethnic background, persons with disabilities and persons or groups with lower levels of digital literacy or digital engagement.

5.2. On support for free and independent media

5.2.1. With regard to the safety of journalists (point 3.1), the EESC is concerned by signs that restrictions are being placed on journalists’ freedom, including threats to their physical safety, and agrees that the situation is alarming. The Committee considers it very important for the Commission to propose the drafting of a recommendation in this regard before the end of 2021 and calls on the Commission, the EP and the Member-States to urgently propose effective mechanisms to protect journalists, editorial independence, diversity and pluralism, media literacy, an enabling environment that will ensure the sustainability of the sector, and good working conditions for journalists.

5.2.2. The EESC expresses its disapproval of the harassment meted out to journalists and other public interest activists in the form of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP). The EU must ensure that the scope of anti-SLAPP measures includes journalists, activists, trade unionists, academics, digital security researchers, human rights defenders, and media and civil society organisations, among others.

5.2.3. With regard to measures to support media pluralism (point 3.4), the EESC regrets the vagueness of the EDAP as to how the Commission will act to preserve media pluralism — enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights — particularly as regards the very important issue of media ownership. A more proactive attitude on the part of the EU is needed in view of the finding in the 2020 Rule of Law Report that some Member States have no system in place to ensure the transparency of media ownership or face obstacles to effectively disclosing such ownership publicly. The EESC therefore encourages the Commission to advance its understanding of who the players operating in the media markets are and which safeguards and conditions are conducive to pluralism, and to monitor the concentration of distribution networks and the intermediaries which increasingly influence or determine the conditions for access to, and the nature of, the media and content. The public consultation on the EDAP also demonstrated that the imposition of clear-cut obligations on all media outlets and companies to publish detailed information about their ownership was being adhered to.

5.2.4. The EESC is concerned about the ongoing attempts in several Member States to use the difficult situation created by COVID-19, which has weakened the media sector, to attack press freedom by means of abusive, discriminatory and even repressive actions. The EESC calls on the Commission to work together with the Member States to bridge the gap identified in the Rule of Law Report regarding the rules for the distribution of state advertising to the media.

5.2.5. The EESC calls on the Commission to examine the mechanisms used to fund media pluralism and support innovation, freelance journalists and local media. Evaluating the implementation and effectiveness of the ‘neighbouring’ right for press publishers in copyright in the digital single market directive might be considered.

5.2.6. Given that the deadline for Member States to implement the Audiovisual Media Services Directive was on 19 September 2020, the EESC asks the Commission to ensure that the EDAP reflects the assessment of this process and calls on the Member States to swiftly implement this directive.

5.2.7. The EESC asks the Commission to analyse the possibility of allowing the streaming of public media produced to all Member States free of charge, including, inter alia, via cable networks and streaming providers. This would be a clear step towards multilingualism, better understanding and cooperation, and would bringing the EU closer to a common public space by uniting people in diversity and pluralism.

5.3. On countering disinformation

5.3.1. The EESC agrees with the emphasis placed on tackling disinformation (part 4) and considers it important to strengthen cooperation between Member States in order to combat disinformation.

5.3.2. The EESC underlines the importance of the Digital Services Act (point 4.2) in terms of the oversight, accountability and transparency of online platforms, and supports the drafting of a regulation mechanism for the prevention of disinformation.

5.3.3. The EESC believes that, given the importance of education on democracy to the quality of democratic life (point 4.3), the EDAP should be much more ambitious in this area and should set objectives and targets for supporting innovative projects and funding civil society initiatives in this field.

5.3.4. EU mechanisms should support better cooperation among the relevant regulatory authorities to decrease the risk that disinformation will be disseminated via propaganda channels registered within the EU.

5.3.5. Online advertising platforms should be required to deliver annual transparency reports, ideally to a designated, independent auditing authority. Annual transparency reports could include detailed information and explanations on policies and internal processes for tackling disinformation, down- and upranking criteria, and content selection and presentation mechanisms as well as advert targeting and delivery policies, policies on the display of ‘accurate’ information (e.g. on COVID-19 and elections), and appeal mechanisms for content that was wrongfully removed. An independent auditing body could take the form of an EU-level body made up of national oversight authorities, a new EU body for auditing social media platforms.

5.3.6. As the Digital Services Act (DSA) provides an opportunity to address the power and information asymmetry from digital gatekeepers such as Google and Facebook who have a major impact on democracy, the European Democracy Action Plan should secure a rights-based approach to the DSA.

5.3.7. EU policymakers must ensure freedom of speech principles are protected while adopting legislation to tackle disinformation. In particular, the use of criminal law to fight large-scale disinformation risks creating a dangerous space for human rights abuse in the form of state-sponsored intimidation and unjustified prosecution of critical voices.

6. Proposal for the creation of a fourth pillar in the EDAP: ‘Promoting active and democratic participation beyond elections’

6.1. Background

6.1.1. The EESC believes that, in order to give due weight in the EDAP to a clear strategy on active citizenship, a specific pillar should be created in the plan. The Committee considers this essential to ensuring a smoother recovery from the current crisis and paving the way for a more sustainable and robust democracy in Europe.

6.1.2. The promotion of social dialogue, collective bargaining and civil dialogue should be included in this new pillar.

6.1.3. The EU Treaty introduced a major innovation: the concept of citizen participation in Article 11. However, more than 10 years after its entry into force, the opportunities for citizens to participate in decisions beyond elections still fall far below needs, which often leads to a twofold dissatisfaction: with the policies themselves and with the lack of opportunities to influence decisions. In this context, the EESC notes the position it expressed in SOC/423 ( 11 ) , to the effect that it is of the utmost importance to develop proposals for specific actions in order for the EU institutions to take the initiatives incumbent on them to establish the appropriate measures for the implementation of Article 11(1) and (2) TEU.

6.1.4. Likewise, Article 152 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU states that the EU has a role to play in recognising and promoting the role of the social partners.

6.1.5. In this context, the EESC proposes the creation of a fourth pillar in EDAP: ‘Promoting active and democratic participation beyond elections’, which the present contribution outlines.

6.2. Promoting a culture of active participation

6.2.1. Creating an open and enabling environment for civil society in Europe — Civic space should form a specific pillar/section of the Rule of Law Report and should be given more attention, including a thorough assessment of the civic space in each Member State, taking into account its different components, their inter-connectedness and their impact on the political system and the rule of law. — The Commission should develop, on the basis of existing international law (12) and more detailed guidance (13) and in cooperation with civil society, a set of guidelines to defend and promote civic space in the EU and its Member States; this should encompass (1) freedom of association; (2) the right to operate free from state interference; (3) freedom of expression; (4) the right to cooperation and communication; (5) the right to public information; (6) the right to freedom of peaceful assembly; (7) the right to seek and secure resources; (8) the duty of State protection; (9) academic freedom; and (10) philanthropic action; the possible negative side effects of new and existing legislation and its implementation should be assessed (in other words, legislation on money laundering and transparency should be proportionate and risk-based). — The Commission should make provisions, in its organisation, for contact persons responsible for civil dialogue. It should also work with the Member States to promote the strengthening of civil dialogue structures and support their creation where they do not yet exist, by harnessing European funds. — The Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme should be accessible to European, national and local civil society organisations in all Member States, including human rights activists wishing to promote and protect the EU’s fundamental values; funding under this programme should cover operational costs, as well as litigation, capacity building, surveillance activities and cooperation at EU level. — The Erasmus + programme should provide opportunities for exchanges between civil society organisations and the social partners to promote mutual learning and the exchange of good practices.

6.2.2. Education on democratic citizenship and human rights should be a priority for the EU. — An important prerequisite for active citizenship and civic engagement is civic education (including media literacy) at all levels, both formal and informal, intra- and extra-curricular in all Member States. Civic education is a key tool in efforts to combat anti-democratic trends, promote European values and overcome current divides. — As current practices differ considerably across the EU, a separate set of minimum standards or recommendations should be drawn up on the basis of the Council of Europe’s Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education (CM/Rec (2010)7). — A culture of active participation requires specific attention to ensure that no citizen residing in the EU is excluded or at risk of exclusion or discrimination due to a failure to respect their political or socioeconomic rights.

6.3. Give citizens and their organisations a real say in EU decision-making processes

6.3.1. The EU and its Member States should support the mobilisation of citizens on the ground and empower- them to speak in all their diversity by giving practical expression to their ‘right to participate in the democratic life of the Union’ enshrined in Article 10 TEU. The EU and its Member States should give citizens the means to engage in an ‘open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society’ (Article 11 TEU). The EESC should produce an annual report on this issue.

6.3.2. Citizens and their organisations should be fully involved in shaping EU policies; a sound balance should be ensured between the different stakeholders’ contributions by reviewing the consultation methodology to include more civil society and social organisations at EU and national level and by harnessing the potential of the European Citizens’ Initiative for citizens to set the agenda.

6.3.3. The provision in Article 11 TEU for an ‘open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society’ in all EU policy areas should be fully implemented. The Commission should initiate an inter-institutional agreement on civil dialogue with European civil society.

6.3.4. Meaningful and inclusive participation of civil society in the Conference on the Future of Europe should be ensured, with a link to the EDAP, as an opportunity to discuss how democratic processes and active civic engagement can be strengthened.

6.3.5. Within their Multi-Annual Financial Framework plans, Member States should be asked to allocate adequate resources to finance civil dialogue and boost the capacity of CSOs to participate in decision-making; the Commission should include civic participation/democracy among the horizontal priorities of its country-specific recommendations .

6.3.6. An annual event should be launched bringing together the highest-level representatives of the EU institutions and representative civil society organisations/associations, as well as representatives of sectoral dialogues and local, regional, national and macro-regional (transnational and neighbourhood policy) dialogues to share best practices and draw up an annual plan to strengthen democracy, participation and civic dialogue . The Commission and the EESC should play a leading role in this process as organisers.

6.4. Strengthening support structures for social dialogue and collective bargaining

6.4.1. Acting to promote democracy through economic and social cohesion, including by promoting labour democracy. Democracy is also under attack at this level and the pandemic has raised important issues that need to be addressed quickly.

6.4.2. Social dialogue and collective bargaining are among the best examples of democratic functioning. Dialogue between organisations representing their own interests and values is a structured space for discussing and negotiating matters of common importance, albeit with different interests. Mutual recognition and respect between partners and the rational search for resolutions to situations, problems and conflicts are the building blocks of a democratic culture.

6.4.3. The pillar should include measures to promote these principles, such as: — respect by all Member States of ILO conventions, with particular focus on the main conventions, which concern free trade union activity, — a structured information, consultation and hearing process and a final report of that process for all legislative initiatives at Member State level, — support for the strengthening and, where necessary, the establishment of Economic and Social Councils, — the appointment, at Commission level, following acceptance by the European social partners, of a senior European officer responsible for promoting and monitoring social dialogue in the Member States and the EU, who can also assume the duties of supporting civil dialogue if, after consultation of civil society organisations, they agree on that, — the organisation of a biannual high-level tripartite social dialogue meeting (European social partners, Commission and Member States) to promote and monitor social dialogue at European and Member-State level, — the adoption of a measure promoting collective bargaining in public procurement and access to public funds, including European funds, requiring contracting employers to enter into a collective agreement or, until existing such agreements, ensure high-quality jobs on the basis of applicable legal regulations, following the applicable national law and practice resulting from agreements between social partners and governments at national level. This will prevent social dumping and ensure fair competition, — the adoption of training programmes for representatives of the social partners to foster social dialogue and collective bargaining.

Brussels, 10 June 2021. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Christa SCHWENG

(1) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 39.

(2) Preamble to the Treaty on European Union.

(3) OJ C 202, 7.6.2016, p. 389.

(4) See in particular opinions — OJ C 228, 5.7.2019, p. 24; OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 39; OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 16.

(5) https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/political-guidelines-next-commission_en.pdf

(6) Venice Commission (2020), Interim Report on the measures taken in the EU Member States as a result of the COVID-19 crisis and their impact on democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 124th plenary session (held online on 8-9 October 2020), https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2020)018-e

(7) COM(2020) 790 final.

(8) OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 187.

(9) As expressed in the Communication, and in particular footnote 17.

(10) Conclusions — point 1.7 of the opinion (OJ C 228, 5.7.2019, p. 89).

(11) OJ C 11, 15.1.2013, p. 8.

(12) European Convention on Human Rights, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

(13) OSCE/ODIHR, Guidelines on Freedom of Association.