No C 159/62 Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 6. 89 
4.3. The tax which will replace dock dues must be of the DOM, according to clear rules which the social 
targeted solely on the economic and social development partners and the local populations can monitor easily. 
Done at Brussels, 26 April 1989. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a specific multiannual research 
and training programme for the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) in the field 
of radiation protection (1990/1991) (}) 
(89/C 159/25) 
On 16 January 1989, the Council decided, in accordance with Article 170 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, to ask the Economic and Social 
Committee for an Opinion on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for the 
preparatory work on the matter, adopted its Opinion on 6 April 1989 (rapporteur: Mr Sai'u). 
At its 265th plenary session (meeting of 27 April 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
The Committee supports the continuation of research 
and training activities in the field of radiation protection 
and approves, subject to certain reservations, the aims 
and content of the proposed programme. But it con­
siders the proposed funding to be unsuited to the Com­
munity's long-term needs in the field of radiation pro­
tection and asks that, when the framework programme 
is reviewed, there should be a very substantial increase 
in the budget earmarked for research and training in 
this area. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The aim of the proposed Decision is to continue 
the research and training activities in the field of radi­
ation protection begun in 1961 and performed most 
recently in the 1985-1989 programme (2) which is still 
being implemented; this programme was adopted by 
the Council in March 1985 and modified in December 
1987 (3). 
1.2. Under the terms of the framework programme 
of Community activities in the field of research and technological development (1987-1991) (4), the aims of 
the radiation protection programme are to provide data 
and methods with a view to preventing and combatting 
the harmful effects of ionizing radiation and radioac­
tivity and assessing the consequences of accidents 
involving irradiation. 
1.3. Under this new programme, the Commission 
proposes that the following subjects be dealt with: 
a) human exposure to radiation and radioactivity: 
— measurement of radiation dose and its interpret­
ation, 
— transfer and behaviour of radionuclides in the 
environment; 
b) consequences of radiation exposure to man: their 
assessment, prevention and treatment: 
— stochastic effects of radiation, 
— non-stochastic effects of radiation, 
— radiation effects on the developing organism; 
(!) OJ No C 16, 20. 1. 1989, p. 5. 
(2) OJ No L 83, 25. 3. 1985, p. 23. 
(3) OJ No L 16, 21. 1. 1988, p. 44. (4) OJ No L 302, 24. 10. 1987, p. 1. 
26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/63 
c) risks and management of radiation exposure: 
— assessment of human exposure and risks, 
— optimization and management of radiation pro­
tection. 
1.4. The proposed research and training activities 
must form part of a five-year programme for the years 
1990-1994; the Commission considers that appropri­
ations amounting to 90 million ECU are necessary for 
its implementation. 
1.5. But for budgetary reasons the proposed decision 
submitted by the Commission is limited to a period of 
two years, 1990/1991, as the framework programme 
of Community activities in the field of research and 
technological development 1987-1991 at present only 
allows a budget of 21,2 million ECU for research into 
radiation protection. 
2. General comments 
2.1. In its Opinion of 18 November 198711),-the 
Committee stressed that 'the Chernobyl nuclear disaster 
has helped to highlight the need to spend more on 
research in the field of radiation protection' and added 
that 'sufficient funds must be set aside as from now to 
ensure effective radiation protection research in the 
Community. Otherwise, competence will be impaired.' 
2.2. In this respect, the Committee is deeply con­
cerned by the corroborating conclusions of the Manage­
ment and Coordination Advisory Committee (CGC) on 
radiation protection and of the independent panel of 
experts regarding the evaluation of the programme 
for 1985-1989 and the consequences of the Council's 
reduction of the appropriations earmarked for this pro­
gramme from the Commission's initial proposal; 
according to the panel of experts, this reduction in 
funding 'represents a large bill for the future radiation 
protection efforts in the Community'. 
2.3. Among the consequences noted by the Com­
mittee are: 
— a retreat from, or even abandonment of certain 
research areas, leading to a loss of scientific know­
ledge, 
— the stoppage of work by several research teams, 
— a shortage of young researchers who are experts 
on radiation protection, mainly due to the lack of 
resources provided for training, and 
— a lack of flexibility, preventing the Commission 
from responding to the Chernobyl nuclear accident 
t1) OJ No C 356, 31. 12. 1987, p. 4. by an appropriate redirection or extension of 
research activities. 
2.4. Bearing in mind what has just been said, and the 
Community's long-term needs in the field of radiation 
protection, the Committee would have expected the 
new radiation protection programme to have been given 
priority and, in particular, to have been given appropri­
ate funding. 
2.5. An increase in the funding for radiation protec­
tion activities is all the more necessary because: 
— the Chernobyl nuclear accident has engendered new 
radiation protection needs, which it has only been 
possible to cover partially and through a big cutback 
in the already reduced funds allocated for research 
and training under the 1985-1989 programme, and 
— in order to prevent a recurrence of the situation 
described above with the same effects, provision 
should be made for funds to enable the Community 
to deal with the possible consequences of nuclear 
accidents like Chernobyl, without having to jeop­
ardize the aims and content of programmes which 
have initially been decided. 
The Committee therefore emphasizes the necessity of 
creating a reserve fund to enable the Community to 
cope with such emergencies. 
2.6. The Committee regrets that such has not been 
the case and that, on the contrary, as the Commission 
itself admits, research and training in the field of radi­
ation protection for the two years 1990/1991 will still 
have to be severely restricted. This negative trend is 
confirmed by the independent panel of experts, who 
note that the 21,2 million ECU proposed will cover 
little more than 50 % of the research activities carried 
out under the 1985-1989 programme. 
2.7. This situation is all the more unacceptable, 
especially bearing in mind the expectations and con­
cerns of public opinion, because the general public, 
which is particularly aware after the Chernobyl acci­
dent, would have backed an extra special effort by the 
Community and its Member States. 
2.8. The Committee feels under these circumstances 
that the proposal for a decision does not make it poss­
ible to preserve a balanced research programme and 
thereby ensure a large pool of knowledge of radiation 
protection for the future, an area in which it is essential 
for the Community to maintain and increase its expert-
No C 159/64 Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 6. 89 
ise so as to ensure an ever-greater protection of people 
and the environment against the dangers resulting from 
ionizing radiation. 
2.9. The Committee is particularly aware that this 
state of affairs, which is totally inadmissible and which 
must be put right with the greatest urgency, is one of 
the consequences of the cut in the funds allocated by 
the Council to the 1987-1991 framework programme, 
to which the ESC has already drawn attention, and that 
it is no longer possible in this framework to get more 
money set aside for research and training in radiation 
protection. 
2.10. In view of this, the Committee cannot endorse 
such a situation for much longer; it particularly asks 
that, when the framework programme is reviewed, 
priority be given to research and training activities in 
the field of radiation protection, and firmly expects, at 
the very least, that the Commission's intention to allo­
cate 90 million ECU to the implementation of the 
programme for 1990-1994 will be put into effect. 
Assuming this will happen, the Committee feels, in spite 
of everything, that it would be appropriate to examine 
the aims and content of the proposed programme. 
2.11. The Committee generally approves the aims 
and content of the proposed programme, which incor­
porates several suggestions made, in particular, in its 
Opinion of 23 November 1983 on the programme for 
1985-1989 (l) and in the Opinion of 18 November 1987 
referred to earlier. 
2.12. In this regard, the Committee considers the 
following as essential: 
— the continuation of research activities which enable 
the Commission to perform the regulatory task 
assigned to it by the Euratom Treaty, particularly 
the updating of the basic standards for the protec­
tion of workers and the general public against the 
dangers resulting from ionizing radiation, 
— the assessment of the cancer and genetic risks of 
exposure at low dose and dose rate to natural 
radiation, medical x-rays and the nuclear industry, 
— the acquisition of the information necessary to 
develop concepts and practices in radiation protec­
tion resulting from the application of radiation in 
medicine and industry, 
— the active publication of information to the public 
in plain language about the results of research and 
the progress made in understanding the nature and 
effects of radiation and the actions which are being taken for public safety and the protection of the 
environment. 
2.13. The Committee considers in this context that 
priority must be given to research concerning: 
— the consequences of radioactive substances in the 
food chain, so that the maximum permissible levels 
of radioactive contamination in food, drinking 
water and animal feed can be updated, 
— exposure to radon, which could be the cause of 
around 15 000 lung cancer deaths a year in Europe, 
— irradiation of the embryo, which many experts feel 
is a probable cause of mental retardation, 
— irradiation from medical and dental x-rays, which 
is said to be the origin of up to 40 % of the public's 
total exposure to radiation in the Community, 
— the effects of using ionizing radiation for medical 
treatments. 
The Committee would stress here that the reliability of 
the radiological equipment used for x-rays should be 
improved, as should the means for monitoring 
irradiation of the public by such practices, as these are 
currently considered as untrustworthy. 
2.14. The Committee would also like to reiterate the 
importance it attaches to finding a solution for the 
problems associated with exposure to radiation at 
work, and to the recommendation in its Opinion of 23 
November 1983 that the radiation protection pro­
gramme could contribute more towards solving the 
problems raised in the safety and hygiene committees. 
2.15. The Committee therefore finds it deplorable 
that the Council has still not adopted the proposal 
for a decision submitted by the Commission in 1987 
concerning the extension of the responsibilities of the 
Advisory Committee on safety, hygiene and health pro­
tection at work to include health protection against the 
dangers arising from ionizing radiation, an extension 
which the ESC approved on 30 November 1987 (2). 
2.16. The Committee vigorously supports the panel 
of experts when it stresses that there is an absolute need 
to preserve knowledge about radiation protection and 
build on what is known. The panel notes that past 
pleas about training have not been answered and that 
new pleas must be couched in terms of the utmost 
urgency before it is too late. 
2.17. The Committee doubts whether the effort pro­
posed by the Commission can enable this objective to 
t1) OJ No C 23, 30. 1. 1984, p. 12. (2) OJNoC319, 30. 11. 1987. 
26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/65 
be attained, unless a particular effort is made as regards 
training in radiation protection as part of the decisions 
referred to in point 2.10. 
2.18. The Committee also feels that particular atten­
tion should be given to training Spanish and Portuguese 
scientists, so that these two countries can be associated 
fully and without delay in the Community's radiation 
protection work. 
2.19. The Committee wishes to emphasize that the 
Community's research and training activities in the field 
of radiation protection must be accompanied by a major 
effort to inform the public and make people aware of 
the problems connected with radiation and how they 
can be solved; among those involved in this effort 
should be the two sides of industry, consumers' associ­
ations and environmental protection organizations. 
Done at Brussels, 27 April 1989. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The Committee recognizes that, in view of the 
problems and challenges concerning free movement and 
residence in other Member States, the Commission is 
correct in wishing to bring up to date the relevant 2.20. Also worth remembering is the ESC's request in 
its previous Opinions that the abovementioned interests 
should be involved as widely as possible in consultations 
leading to the drawing-up of a radiation protection 
programme. The Committee notes that such practice 
has not always been the case under the present pro­
gramme. 
2.21. Finally, the Committee repeats its request that 
Article 4 of the proposed decision be modified so as to 
provide expressly for the forwarding of the assessment 
of the programme to the Economic and Social Com­
mittee, especially as Article 7 of the Euratom Treaty, 
which is the legal basis of the present proposal, states 
that 'the Commission shall keep the Economic and 
Social Committee informed of the broad outlines of 
Community research and training programmes'. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
legislation, in the spirit of the advancement towards a 
People's Europe, and as endorsed by the Committee in 
its Opinion on guidelines for a Community migration 
policy (1). 
(!) OJ No C 188, 29. 7. 1985. Opinion on: 
— the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom 
of movement for workers within the Community, and 
— the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive (EEC) No 68/360 on the abolition 
of restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for workers of Member 
States and their families 
(89/C 159/26) 
On 23 January 1989, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee 
under Article 49 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community on the 
abovementioned proposals. 
The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 13 April 1989. The 
rapporteur was Mr Pearson. 
At its 265th plenary session (meeting of 27 April 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by a unanimous vote with one abstention.