ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
2.1.

The Communication deals with energy taxation and Euratom Treaty reform, both issues closely linked to sovereignty. This is a controversial issue, and requests for transfers of sovereignty in such a sensitive field as taxation at this very time requires a wise approach. As stressed by the Commission in its document under the heading ‘Energy tax reform should reflect social equity considerations’ (point 2.3), any taxation on more ‘polluting’ energy could directly harm the weaker parts of society. This measure could thus be experienced by many European citizens as an additional burden, and the EESC is therefore pleased that the Commission recognises the sensitivity of the issue. The EESC refers to the many opinions it has published with recommendations to the Commission on how to address this problem. The need for more efficient governance of the climate and energy strategy and greater coherence in EU legislation consequently brings with it the need for a much more intensive debate, at all levels of society, on the way in which decisions on energy taxation are taken, taking into account the concerns of EU businesses, workers and other stakeholders, including consumers. The right tool for this is an effective Energy Dialogue with organised civil society at EU, national, regional and local level.
1.3.

However, as some EU countries have already used up or committed their funds under the EAFRD, the EESC thinks that the European Commission should set up a special fund outside of the common agricultural policy (CAP) budget using resources from the Recovery Plan, to implement the measure without having to reduce funds under the EAFRD. Failing this, the Committee believes that the legislative proposal in question should introduce some flexibility into the EAFRD. It therefore calls on the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament to take into account the general comments made in this opinion.
2.1.4.

The Commission also intends to use preventive mechanisms to: avoid new barriers to providing services in the single market; improve capacity to detect non-compliance; set up a platform for online enforcement (e-enforcement lab) to share information about illegal and non-compliant industrial and consumer products; establish a single European information entry point for authorities for controls on non-food products and the forthcoming Customs Single Window; ensure that the Internal Market Information system (IMI) becomes the default tool; create a tool allowing individuals and businesses to report anonymously on regulatory obstacles encountered by them in exercising their internal market rights; improve enforcement in relation to EU agri-food legislation (including animal and plant health); assess the integration of existing structures (such as the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network, the EU Product Compliance Network or the EUIPO observatory) and a laboratory funded under the Single Market Programme or the Digital Europe Programme to test and apply advanced IT solutions; strengthen the fight against counterfeit and illegal products, including illicit products produced or assembled in the EU from imported components, and extend OLAF’s current mandate; strengthen enforcement in the agri-food chain; develop labelling and traceability systems by promoting the use of digital tools to allow for more targeted controls at the external borders and within the EU; make SOLVIT the default tool for single market dispute resolution; streamline the process for handling cases, carrying out a preliminary review of complaints within two months so as to establish the next steps; and use the EU Pilot system under clear conditions and timetables for cases where a quick solution within a short period appears attainable.
2.17.

While the EESC acknowledges the need for conformity testing of AI, it fears that a one-off (or even a regularly repeated) prior conformity assessment will not suffice to guarantee the trustworthy and human-centric development, deployment and use of AI in a sustainable manner. Trustworthy AI needs a continuous, systematic socio-technical approach , looking at the technology from all perspectives and through various lenses. For policy-making, this requires a multidisciplinary approach where policy-makers, academics from a variety of fields, the social partners, professional organisations, professionals, businesses, and NGOs work together continuously. Especially when it comes to public interest services related to the health, safety and well-being of people and based on trust, it has to be guaranteed that AI systems are adapted to practical requirements and cannot overrule human responsibility.
3.6.

In order to restore degraded and fragile ecosystems (for which an effective legal framework is not yet in force) and to reduce the pressure on biodiversity, numerous measures are envisaged, inter alia, to: — draw up a proposal for a new legal framework for nature restoration; — by 2030, restore significant areas of degraded and carbon-rich ecosystems, prevent deterioration in conservation trends and status of habitats and species, and ensure that at least 30 % reach favourable conservation status or at least show a positive trend; — halt and reverse the decline in farmland birds and insects, in particular pollinators; — reduce the use and risk of chemical pesticides by 50 % and likewise reduce the use of more hazardous pesticides by the same amount; — ensure that at least 10 % of agricultural land qualifies as ‘areas of ecological focus’, including high-diversity landscape features; — ensure that at least 25 % of agricultural land is under organic farming management, and that the uptake of agro-ecological practices is significantly increased; — plant at least three billion trees, with full respect for ecological principles, and protect remaining primary and old-growth forests; — make significant progress in the remediation of contaminated soil sites; — restore 25 000 km of the EU's rivers to a free-flowing state; — reduce the number of Red List species threatened by invasive alien species by 50 %; reduce losses of nutrients caused by fertilisers by at least 50 % and the use of fertilisers by at least 20 %; — ensure that cities with at least 20 000 inhabitants have an ambitious Urban Greening Plan; — ensure that no chemical pesticides are used in sensitive areas such as EU urban green areas; — substantially reduce the negative impacts on sensitive species and habitats, including on the seabed through fishing and extraction activities, to achieve good environmental status; — eliminate by-catch of species or reduce it to a level that allows full species recovery and does not threaten their conservation status.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules ensuring basic air connectivity following the end of the transition period mentioned in the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community’

(COM(2020) 827 final — 2020/0363 (COD))

(2021/C 123/15)

Referrals Council of the European Union, 11.12.2020 European Parliament, 14.12.2020 Legal basis Articles 100(2) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society Adopted at plenary 27.1.2021 Plenary session No 557 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) unanimous

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided unanimously, at its 557th plenary session of 27 and 28 January 2021 (meeting of 27 January), to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
3.2

The Committee agrees with the Commission's analysis of the urgency from the climate perspective of taking action on renovating housing and other buildings and of the opportunity presented by the COVID-19 crisis to rethink, redesign and modernise our buildings, taking an environmental, social and economic win-win-win approach. This is indeed a unique opportunity to take action simultaneously on climate neutrality, recovery and social cohesion. The Committee would raise the issue of the diversity of the buildings concerned — in particular the diversity of housing to be renovated, ranging from individual houses to large soviet-era housing estates and working-class suburbs. In this great housing diversity, Eastern European housing blocks, very old houses from undervalued city centres, suburban housing and rural housing can be subject to specific prioritisation. In connection with the fact that the housing stock has become obsolete and requires renewal processes both to improve the quality of life of citizens and for building technical advancement, it is necessary to ensure access to financing for citizens as it is currently a major barrier for renovation. Similarly, accessibility for people with disabilities will have to be taken into account. The European Union also needs to seize this opportunity for large-scale action to get closer to its citizens and the areas in which they live by means of appropriate communication.
1.1.

The EESC underlines the importance of making efficient use of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and other investments to support economic growth and a resilient society within the digital and green transition of the economy, by improving the quality and inclusiveness of education and training (systems, institutions and programmes) in order to respond to the needs of learners of all ages and stages in their learning, to prepare them for life and work, and to ensure that all workers, as well as the increased numbers of people not in employment, especially women, have access to training. This will also help to safeguard the free movement of workers and services and ensure that companies are well equipped to handle developments in their industry and to close the skills gaps they face in the digital and green transition of industries.
4.1.8.

The strategy announces increased investment in innovative technologies. This is a great opportunity to foster research in the field of valorisation of industrial waste products, particularly from agri-food waste , the great potential of which has been hampered by insufficient investment. However, legal requirements for products from agri-food waste valorisation are almost neglected in both the ‘Farm to Fork’ and sustainable chemicals strategies. For instance, the presence of pharmaceutical residues in treated animal manure for fertilisation, the re-use of treated waste-water for crop irrigation and the residues of pharmaceuticals and pesticides, herbicides and insecticides in optimised food waste are matters of particular concern, as these bioactive substances might spread throughout the environment, triggering adverse effects on ecosystems. They should, therefore, be identified, evaluated and regulated. Human populations might be affected not only via exposure but also through consumption, as these substances may bioaccumulate and bio-magnify along the food chain.
4.11.

The EESC considers it necessary to establish producer liability that is compatible with the promotion of ecodesign, and in particular with an incentive to design batteries that can make it possible to retrofit, remanufacture and reuse batteries. This need relates to the second life of batteries, which should be promoted. In this context, it is necessary to separate the end of life of the batteries from the end of life of the devices, thus not relegating batteries to the status of waste when the devices that carry them reach the end of their life. When the battery or the device it is part of reaches the assumed end of its life, it will be the producer’s responsibility to demonstrate that the battery should have the status of waste. This must be demonstrated by an assessment or tests carried out on the battery and by demonstrating in a document that it is technically impossible, taking into account current technologies and the industries which could be outlets for them, to reuse the battery by means of retrofit or remanufacturing operations compatible with the conditions of these markets. Thus, the concept of ‘end-of-use’ should be introduced in addition to ‘end-of-life’ in order to promote the re-use, refurbishing or second life and recycling of batteries. This requires the new regulation to integrate these new stakeholders and activities.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2020/2222 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the cross-border infrastructure linking the Union and the United Kingdom through the Channel Fixed Link

(COM(2021) 402 final — 2021/0228(COD))

(2021/C 517/19)

Referral Council of the European Union, 15.7.2021 European Parliament, 13.9.2021 Legal basis Articles 91(1) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Section responsible Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society Adopted at plenary 22.9.2021 Plenary session No 563 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 239/1/5

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 563rd plenary session of 22 and 23 September 2021 (meeting of 22 September), by 239 votes to 1 with 5 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.
1.10.

The annual average economic losses from climate-related disasters are in the hundreds of billions of dollars. The UN report on the Human Cost of Disasters also paints a stark picture: ‘Over the last 20 years, 7 348 disaster events were recorded […] disasters claimed approximately 1,23 million lives […] and affected a total of over 4 billion people (many on more than one occasion). Additionally, disasters led to approximately US$ 2,97 trillion in economic losses worldwide.’ There are several sources of EU funding available for financing adaptation: the budget of the European Green Deal, the MFF and NextGenerationEU. The EESC calls for more clarity on the different options, as well as user-friendly procedures to ensure timely access to financing at a practical level. In addition, the abolition of fossil fuel subsidies and a green fiscal reform would free up considerable resources from public budgets, address systemic inconsistencies, and generate new revenues to finance climate adaptation. The EESC is critical of the fact that a specific roadmap for abolishing the environmentally harmful subsidies has yet to be put forward.
Section 2.1: (i) with regard to people qualified as self-employed, to whom under the strategic framework the OSH rules do not apply, the EESC recommends that a study be carried out in useful time involving the Commission, experts and the social partners, to find the best solution with due regard for the principle that all self-employed must also have a safe and healthy working environment, and that the conclusions of the study be presented at the OSH summit in 2023; (ii) with regard to the non-legislative initiative on mental health at work which the Commission plans to launch at EU level, the EESC proposes, precisely because of the relevance of the grounds set out in the strategic framework, opting for a legislative initiative ;

Section 2.1: (i) with regard to people qualified as self-employed, to whom under the strategic framework the OSH rules do not apply, the EESC recommends that a study be carried out in useful time involving the Commission, experts and the social partners, to find the best solution with due regard for the principle that all self-employed must also have a safe and healthy working environment, and that the conclusions of the study be presented at the OSH summit in 2023; (ii) with regard to the non-legislative initiative on mental health at work which the Commission plans to launch at EU level, the EESC welcomes the approach adopted by the Commission ;
4.9.

Better cooperation between the Member States is needed urgently. At the same time, the EU must take into account that media freedom, which is inseparable from freedom of expression, is currently at risk in several Member States. The same applies with regard to their legal systems. This will inevitably have a negative impact on the ability of these countries to cooperate successfully, for example in the field of fact-checking and in accordance with the values of the EU and more precisely the principles of the rule of law. Any effort to tackle disinformation can have very significant consequences for fundamental rights, which must be guaranteed and defended in all Member States.
1.7.

For a balanced view of well-being, the EESC agrees with the OECD’s assessment that we need comprehensive dashboards of statistics that reflect what matters to people, covering wide-ranging outcomes such as people’s income, health, social connections, safety and the environment. We need to look beyond country averages to understand not only whether life is getting better, but also for whom. Furthermore, we need to not only measure well-being today, but also the resources that help to sustain it into the future. Finally, structural change can be perceived by people as threatening, despite the results of economic analysis. Election gains by populist parties across the EU but also the Brexit vote can be traced to voters feeling disenfranchised by globalisation, and feeling a loss of control over their life decisions. This cannot be alleviated by statistics. Social partner and civil society organisations need to be much more involved by policy-makers in addressing grievances and fears of social hardship and in formulating and implementing solutions on the ground. The EESC supports a more open and participation-oriented sustainable corporate governance including information, consultation and participation of workers at the company level.
1.5.

The EESC believes that under the scope of the ‘Fit for 55’ legislative package, the FuelEU initiative needs to provide synergies, coherence and consistency between supply, distribution and demand. However, the draft FuelEU Regulation, at the moment, prescribes particular low carbon fuels, with no prior assessment of their global availability and cost, although all alternative fuels should be allowed. This may eventually lead to distortion of competition, while their availability presently and for the near future is negligible. The responsibility for the development and availability of renewable alternative fuels lies with the fuel suppliers and the uptake of cleaner fuels should be encouraged. For this to happen, the price gap between fossil and alternative fuels needs to be bridged and the cleaner fuels need to become more affordable and widely available. Efforts are required, involving the active contribution of all actors in the maritime value chain, especially fuel production and energy providers, engine manufacturers, but also ports, charterers and the workers’ representatives involved in all sectors. This could potentially result in an increase of the demand for alternative fuels as envisaged by the FuelEU Regulation.
2.8.

So, while the aspiration is fully welcomed, there is still room for improvement for the next foresight reports with regard to the following: — the report needs to better tie together the megatrends and strategic cornerstones from the point of view of coherence, probability and relevance; — the foresight process leading up to the next report should provide concrete opportunities to the EESC as well as other relevant actors to learn from, contribute to and enhance its quality; — the EESC in particular has already developed a number of opinions with regard to the upcoming 2022 foresight report, i.e. on the twin green and digital transitions; (2) — in this regard, the EESC would suggest that the Commission, in cooperation with the JRC, develop an annual consultation cycle to contribute to preparing the annual foresight report. The Commission should involve the EESC and the Committee of the Regions, as well as other EU institutions, for example by offering regular, dedicated workshops and by involving EESC members in the underlying foresight activities by DG JRC and the Secretariat-General; — a focus group with social partners/civil society actors should be set up to discuss how this target group can benefit from the Commission’s Strategic Foresight Reports and how future reports could be shaped to offer the most value to them; — Commission-led demand for the ministerial network to involve social partners and civil society representatives in the network’s foresight-related activities.
For end-consumers, there are two ways to immediately relieve themselves of the energy bill: a) save energy and b) use locally renewable energies. The problem: initial investments are necessary for both (e.g. in thermal insulation, more economical new devices, PV systems etc.). Those who suffer most from high energy prices cannot usually afford these investments. State run contracting could provide a remedy: the state finances such investments in advance, and consumers settle, from part of their savings in their electricity and heating bills, the interest and repayment. They can keep the rest of the savings. This model has proven itself in developing countries. It could easily be transferred to Europe. It is important to comply with minimum consumer law standards such as transparent accounting and termination options. Another option is direct investment grants.

For end-consumers, there are two ways to immediately relieve themselves of the energy bill: a) save energy and b) use locally renewable energies. The problem: initial investments are necessary for both (e.g. in thermal insulation, more economical new devices, PV systems etc.). Those who suffer most from high energy prices cannot usually afford these investments.
4.18.

GIs, due to their added value, are particularly subject to fraud practices. The EESC considers it essential to strengthen their protection and improve controls. The proposal includes some interesting elements regarding this aspect such as: the improved collaboration and exchange of information and mutual assistance between Member States as well as with the Commission, the establishment of a certification for GIs producers, or the possibility of revoking or transferring a domain name. Some other proposals more specific to protection of GIs on the internet seem to be lacking ambition or the required tools to enforce such protection. The EESC underlines that producers should be given the right to defend their products, but in no case should they be considered responsible for doing so. The responsibility of protecting GIs should continue to lie with the Commission and the Member States, who should make all the necessary efforts to secure this protection.