Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "Romania on the road to accession"

(2002/C 241/22)

At its plenary session on 1 March 2001, the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on "Romania on the road to accession".

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 27 June 2002. The rapporteur was Mr Bedossa.

At its 392nd Plenary Session of 17 and 18 July 2002 (meeting of 17 July 2002), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 124 votes in favour, one vote against and two abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.1. Romania started European Agreement negotiations in May 1992 and completed them in February 1993. Following the establishment of an interim trade agreement, which came into force in 1993, Romania became an associate member of the EU in February 1995. Romania submitted its application for EU membership on 22 June 1995. After consultation with the Commission, the Council of Ministers decided on 17 July 1995 to apply the procedure set out in Article 49 of the EC Treaty. The European Agreement now provides the legal basis for relations between Romania and the EU.

1.2. In 1997 the Luxembourg European Council instructed the European Commission to draw up regular reports on the progress made by each of the candidate states. These reports are of particular importance to the accession negotiation process which depends upon the reports. In 1997, as part of Agenda 2000, the Commission presented the first official Opinion on Romania's application for EU membership. The latest of the Commission's regular reports on Romania was published in November 2001. The present own-initiative opinion takes account of this report.

2. General comments

2.1. The aim of this opinion is to provide a review of the situation encountered in Romania, presented under a number of socio-economic headings. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) wishes to highlight the role played by the socio-economic interest groups in the process of Romania's accession to the EU and the views of these groups on this issue.

2.2. It is essential for Romania's successful accession to the EU that the vital role of organised civil society in a democratic society be not only recognised in theory but also enshrined in practice, both through social dialogue (involving employers, trade unions and, where appropriate, government) and also through civil dialogue (structured bilateral and multilateral communication between government and NGOs and other interest groups).

2.3. The opinion does not seek simply to list the progress made by Romania since the last regular report published by the Commission in November 2001 nor to reiterate the assessments made by the European Parliament on this matter. The aim is rather to set out the standpoint of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), based on an assessment of the situations which have been encountered.

2.4. The development and behaviour of organised civil society

2.4.1. The 1924 Act authorised the establishment of associations and foundations in Romania. The desire on the part of Romanian society to form associations has been demonstrated over the last few years by the establishment of new associations and foundations and by an increase in the number of NGOs.

2.4.2. The existence of favourable legal provisions and the involvement of a number of players - both public and private - has made it possible for civil society to develop along positive lines in Romania. This positive trend has also been demonstrated by the location of NGOs which, since their first appearance in Romania, tended to be set up more in urban areas but are now also to be found in rural areas. Major progress was also made in the field of the relations between NGOs and public authorities, which are starting to view NGOs as partners who can help resolve real socio-economic problems, rather than as "pressure groups". This demonstrates that society in general in Romania has attained a certain level of civic maturity.

2.4.3. On the negative side, however, there is a considerable shortage of financial, human and material resources, the level of which falls well behind the actual requirements of civil society in Romania. Attention should also be drawn to the reticence of a number of people, who are afraid of any "organised" activity. This reticence is a product of the mentalities encountered during the communist era.

2.4.4. A new general regulatory framework relating to organised civil society was set in place by a 2002 Government Decree, which set out provisions governing the establishment, organisation and operation of associations, foundations, NGOs and other bodies.

2.4.5. The role of the social partners was strengthened by the establishment in 1998 of the Romanian Economic and Social Council (RESC). Social dialogue committees have been set up in all ministries and prefectures; these committees have to be consulted on matters relating to economic restructuring and privatisation.

2.4.6. The EESC highlights the inadequacy of the present framework for civil dialogue in Romania and the fact that NGOs have no possibility of engaging in formal talks with the Romanian government.

2.4.7. The representatives of the RESC have asked the EESC to provide technical support with a view to strengthening organised civil society in Romania and relieving organisational management shortcomings and the resulting difficulties.

2.5. Development of the social dialogue and the role played by the Romanian Economic and Social Committee (RESC) in this development

2.5.1. The Romanian government has recognised the importance of social dialogue in Romania. With a view to promoting social dialogue, the Romanian government decided to sign a Social Agreement with the trade unions and employers' federations, mapping out joint social, economic and legislative priorities.

2.5.2. The presence of the RESC as a partner for the government played a very important role during the transitional period; despite this, only a small number of draft laws having important economic and social implications have been submitted to the RESC.

2.5.3. Under the amended Act 109 of 1997 on the organisation and operation of the RESC, powers and responsibilities are to continue to be transferred to the social partners. Although a declaration has been made on the transfer of powers, no precise date has been set for this to happen.

2.6. Recent events in the accession process

2.6.1. In the course of his visit to Timisoara on 17 December 2001, the European Commissioner with responsibility for enlargement, Mr G. Verheugen, stated that, because of its readiness to speed up its preparations in order to catch up with the candidate states which had reached a more advanced stage, Romania could count on increased support from the EU. Against this background, the Romanian government presented, on 18 December 2001, its strategy for speeding up the accession negotiations.

2.6.2. In April 2002, Mr Verheugen announced that the European Commission intended to put forward a more elaborate pre-accession strategy and a guide for all those candidate states which would be unable to conclude their accession negotiations in 2002. He made reference in that context to Romania and Bulgaria.

2.6.3. On 17 January 2002 the Romanian government adopted a new special national programme with the aim of opening all the chapters of the negotiations in 2002, and completing the negotiations in 2003 or early 2004 at the latest.

2.6.4. In March 2002, the Romanian Minister for Foreign Affairs requested the EU to present a new timetable for the negotiations and to set out precise financial terms in respect of Romania's accession to the EU. The minister highlighted the fact that the failure to include Romania in the financial planning prior to 2006 presented a major obstacle to his country's accession to the EU which would prevent it from joining the EU before 2006, even if Romania was ready for accession before that date.

3. Specific comments

3.1. Democracy and the rule of law

3.1.1. The legislature, which was for a long time in a state of paralysis, was improved following the elections held at the end of 2000 with the reform of the two chambers, with a view to accelerating the procedure for adopting priority legal acts, including the texts relating to Romania's accession to the EU.

3.1.2. The Romanian government has appointed a minister responsible for relations with parliament and the secretaries of state in all the implementing ministries. The government has also cut down on the use of decrees and emergency decrees in order to safeguard legislative procedures.

3.1.3. The reforms carried out since the elections have brought about a major improvement in the operation of the executive branch of government. The structures for managing the accession process have been strengthened and new measures have been introduced in the field of local government and decentralisation. Consultation campaigns aimed at the social partners, NGOs and the world of business have been organised, with a view to improving the coordination of political action, but the level of this consultation still remains very limited.

3.1.4. Despite the measures taken to reform the civil service in Romania, substantial progress has, in the EESC's view, yet to be made. There is still a need to pursue a strategy of across-the-board reform, covering recruitment, wage policies, career structures and measures to ensure the independence and accountability of civil servants.

3.2. Other political concerns of the government: measures to combat corruption

3.2.1. Following a series of official criticisms levelled by the European Commission and the European Parliament, the Romanian Interior Ministry introduced a new bill to combat corruption at the beginning of January 2002. This bill follows the rules set out by the EU, the OECD and the Council of Europe.

At the beginning of March 2002, Romania introduced a further measure to combat corruption: an electronic tendering system.

3.3. Appraisal of the role of the EU-Romania Joint Consultative Committee (JCC)

3.3.1. After three years of experience of cooperation with the JCC, it is possible to conclude that Romania has gained a better awareness of the importance of developing both the social dialogue and the civil dialogue.

3.3.2. The JCC has proved its worth to the Romanian interest groups through the meetings and discussions held throughout this period. This has made it possible for the Romanian interest groups to gain a firm understanding of the role of European organised civil society, as represented by the EESC.

3.3.3. Report on the fact-finding visit to Timisoara(1)

3.3.3.1. At the initiative of the Association of Estates General of European Students (AEGEE), the EESC was invited to address the Association's international conference on "the impact of European Union enlargement on civil society". The students from the candidate states participating at this international conference showed a particular interest in the subject and participated very actively in the debates. The students were of the opinion that dialogue within civil society had barely got off the ground and that there was a lack of awareness of both the existence and the role of the RESC.

3.3.3.2. Contacts were established between the representative of the EESC and representatives of workers from Romanian SMEs, including those in the agricultural sector; these representatives made known their desire to see the creation of a viable market economy in Romania. All the representatives did, however, draw attention to their major concerns over the consequences of establishing such an economy (increased unemployment, lack of social assistance provision by the government, lack of programmes to help the unemployed find jobs, etc.). They also felt that they were not being consulted enough by the current Romanian government on the above issues.

3.3.3.3. The attention of the representative of the EESC was also drawn to the existence of a body known as AID-ONG, a support body for NGOs which pursued the goal of examining, together with other local NGOs, the level of real participation of the various structures in the social dialogue and the civil dialogue. A discussion was held on the need for Group III to be represented on the RESC. It was, however, noted that the parties involved in the current tripartite agreements would have no interest in seeing any change and no motivation to bring it about.

3.3.3.4. It was noted that a further NGO, the Centre for Rural Assistance (CAR), was carrying out to the best of its ability its role of facilitating sustainable and participative development in rural communities by increasing their individual and institutional capacity to manage their development resources.

3.3.3.5. The President of the Resource Centre for Roma Communities, also held talks with the EESC. Those talks focused, in particular, on the implementation of the Romanian government's strategy for improving the situation of the Roma people.

3.3.4. The situation of agriculture in Romania(2)

3.3.4.1. At the beginning of the 20th century Romania was one of the main suppliers of agricultural products to European markets. Over the last 11 years, however, the results achieved by Romanian agriculture have been poor. Agriculture is a sector of substantial importance to Romania. The high percentage of the workforce engaged in agriculture - estimated by the European Commission to be 42 % of the total workforce - can be attributed, amongst other reasons, to the impact of the restructuring of industry and the construction sector.

3.3.4.2. One of the chief problems facing agriculture in Romania is the fact that its export products lack specialisation. Further major obstacles are the delay in carrying out agricultural reforms and the slow pace with which Romanian law is being brought into line with EU law.

3.3.4.3. The EESC expresses its concern over the current situation, in which a very high proportion of the population is employed in the agricultural sector, with a predominance of small family holdings concentrating on subsistence farming. This situation is particularly disturbing as the budget estimates for 2000-2006 set by the Berlin European Council in 1999 made no provision for direct aid to farmers in the future Member States.

3.3.4.4. 62 % of the surface area of Romania is agricultural land; this area represents 15 million hectares, of which 80 % is arable. A large proportion of agricultural holdings are in private hands (85 %). These holdings comprise an average of 2.35 ha. Romanian agriculture is therefore mainly characterised by family farms. Slow progress has been made in privatising the large agricultural holdings, which account for 10 % of the total area of cultivated land. The market for products from small holdings does not operate in a coherent way. The EESC stresses the need for investment and restructuring in the agri-food sector so as to create stable jobs.

3.3.4.5. Whilst farmers' organisations are generally weak, sectoral organisations representing specific branches of production are financially stronger and they have stepped up their drive to influence basic agricultural policy issues.

3.3.4.6. Romania is the second largest beneficiary, after Poland, of the SAPARD pre-accession programme; Romania's share of the programme represents approximately 30 %. Preparations are currently underway to secure the accreditation of the Romanian SAPARD agency.

3.3.4.7. In the conclusions to the EU-Romania JCC documents, a number of observations are made spelling out how the EESC could in future help farmers' organisations in Romania to find their place in organised civil society.

3.3.4.8. With a view to making internal preparations for the negotiations on the agriculture chapter, the Romanian Minister for European Integration and the Minister for Agriculture paid particular attention, during the first half of 2002, to bolstering the administrative capacity of both the Agriculture Ministry and the Department for European Integration and the CAP. The priorities defined by the Romanian government in the field of agriculture include: the translation, adoption and incorporation into Romanian law of the existing body of EU legislation; the inspection of projects funded by PHARE 2000; and the adoption of plant-health and veterinary measures. The Romanian government has underlined its strong determination to bring into effect, in the course of 2002, the measures and commitments yet to be fulfilled. Romania set out its negotiating position on the agriculture chapter on 10 January 2002.

3.3.5. The Danube issue(3)

3.3.5.1. The EU is considering establishing alternative modes of transport to road transport in order to ease road-traffic congestion. Navigation on the Danube was one of the sectors most severely affected by the Kosovo crisis.

3.3.5.2. The EESC shares the view expressed in the White Paper on Transport Policy for 2010 in which it was pointed out that infrastructure was a key parameter in the strategy for bringing about economic development in the applicant states and integrating them into the internal market.

3.3.5.3. Danube inland waterways are included in the trans-European transport networks and form part of Pan-European Corridor VII. The Danube is, nonetheless, at present unable to achieve its full potential because of: on the one hand, practical problems relating to infrastructure (in the wake of the conflict in ex-Yugoslavia, there is a need to restore both the bed and the banks of the Danube and ensure it has the proper depth) and, on the other hand, legal problems (there is no clear and precise legal framework governing the right of navigation on the Danube, access to the Danube transport market and freedom to provide services). There are two existing conventions but it is not clear which of the two will apply in the context of Romanian accession to the EU.

3.3.5.4. There are a number of international conventions governing various aspects of inland waterway navigation on the Danube. Bilateral agreements between EU Member States and Romania also refer to various aspects of navigation on the Danube. The EESC has identified the optimisation of the Danube as a horizontal issue affecting several applicant countries and it is convinced that this new perspective could facilitate optimisation of the Danube so as to equip it for its rightful role as a Pan-European Corridor and symbol of peace.

3.3.5.5. The EESC recommends that the legal status of these provisions be examined in the context of the negotiations on Romanian accession to the EU with a view to ensuring that, once it has joined the Community, Romania will apply only EU laws on inland waterway navigation.

4. Other comments

4.1. Human rights in Romania

4.1.1. Reform of the child-assistance scheme has progressed well and is deemed to be satisfactory. The budget allocated to child assistance has almost doubled since last year and the number of child-assistance services provided as alternatives to placing children in institutions has increased. The presidents of the general councils have been given responsibility for the child-protection institutions. The revised version of the translation of the UN Convention on Children's Rights, which contained a number of serious mistakes, has been completed. The Romanian government has also adopted a revised strategy for protecting children in need, covering the period 2001-2004.

4.1.2. Following pressure exerted by the EU (and, in particular, in a report drawn up by the European Parliament), which compared the practice to human trafficking, Romania banned the international adoption of children in June 2001(4). The European Parliament's rapporteur pointed out recently that Romania had taken basic measures to protect children placed in institutions. The rapporteur also noted that a new report had been drawn up on that matter in March 2002 by an independent group charged with taking a fresh look at international adoption. The EESC takes the view that Romania has made progress with regard to child protection but that guidelines for agencies working with children need to be developed at EU level to ensure consistent standards.

4.1.3. The national strategy for improving the situation of the Roma was formulated in consultation with representatives of the Roma and it has been favourably received by this group. The EESC intends to pay particular attention to the extent to which this strategy is implemented by the Romanian government.

4.1.4. In February 2002, a resource centre for the Roma community was opened jointly by the Romanian government and the European Commission's delegation in Romania in order to develop a partnership between public authorities at local level, the Roma community and NGOs. The centre forms part of the strategy adopted by the Romanian government in 2001, which also includes measures concerning access by Roma to basic and higher education.

4.1.5. Under the Local Public Administration Act, linguistic minorities are entitled to have access to local authority services provided in their mother tongue. Steps are also being taken to set up a private Hungarian-language university, funded with the aid of the Hungarian state.

4.1.6. A major reform, involving the establishment of probation centres, has also been introduced with a view to modernising the penal system. Key points in the penal code have been amended and the legislation classing homosexuality as a crime has been dropped. A new, clearer legislative text has been adopted by the Romanian government with regard to the treatment of asylum-seekers and refugees.

4.1.7. In March 2001, the Council adopted Regulation 539/2001 listing the non-EU states whose citizens needed a visa to enter the EU. Under Article 8(2) of this Regulation, Romanian citizens are exempted from this requirement. The entry into force of this decision was, however, subject to the drafting of a European Commission report on the measures which the Romanian government proposed to take in a number of fields, including: measures to combat illegal immigration, measures providing for the repatriation of persons residing illegally in the EU; and frontier-protection measures. With effect from 1 January 2002, the Council decided to make it no longer necessary for Romanian nationals to have a visa to travel within the Schengen area.

4.1.8. At the beginning of March 2002, the British and Romanian governments decided to set up an intelligence unit to combat illegal immigration between the two countries. From 15 March 2002 the Romanian government provided its police officials with training in EU law relating to justice and home affairs (bearing in mind that, following the enlargement of the EU, these officials will be responsible for protecting the EU's external frontier to the east).

4.2. Macro-economic stabilisation

4.2.1. Following three years of economic slowdown, Romania experienced a growth in GDP in 2000 (1,6 %) and growth quickened in 2001 (4,9 % increase in real GDP). The pre-accession economic programme for Romania, approved by the EU and the IMF, foresees a 5 % growth in GDP in 2002. The Romanian government plans to maintain this pace, with a view to achieving a growth rate of 5,5 % between 2002 and 2005.

4.2.2. Despite the increase in the level of exports(5) in 2002, Romania's current account deficit has been further enlarged by the excessive level of imports(6). Following several years of budgetary reform, the Romanian government set itself the target of bringing down the deficit slightly to a figure of 3,5 % of GDP in 2001. The consolidated budgetary deficit for 2002 has already been set at 3 % of GDP and this target will have to be pursued between 2003 and 2005.

4.2.3. In spite of the fact that inflation has fallen, it remained at a very high level throughout 2001 (30,3 %). The target for 2002 is to reduce inflation to 22 %.

4.2.4. Romania officially presented its negotiating position on economic and monetary union in November 2001; it committed itself to reducing the level of inflation to below 10 % from 2004 and to introducing the euro as the sole reference currency for the Romanian leu (ROL). With this aim in view, representatives of the National Bank of Romania organised a national information campaign on the euro at the end of 2001.

4.2.5. The level of unemployment in Romania in November 2001 was 7,1 %. It has risen following every restructuring measure. The level of unemployment for 2002 has been officially estimated at 12,4 %(7) even though, in its programme, the Romanian government forecast that the figure would stabilise at 9 % in 2002. Over half the people without jobs are long-term unemployed persons. The EESC urges the Romanian government to take concrete measures to improve this situation.

4.2.6. Turning to the field of economic policy, privatisation and the restructuring of large state enterprises are being stepped up 2002: the Commercial Bank of Romania is set to be fully privatised by the end of 2002; and three major loss-making enterprises (Roman, Siderurgica and Nitramonia) are to be divided into "viable entities" and "non-viable entities" in the first half of 2002, with the attendant major economic and social consequences. Major difficulties have also been encountered in restructuring agricultural enterprises.

4.2.7. The EESC underlines the need to monitor the consequences of these restructuring measures. It also calls upon the Romanian government to introduce plausible, concrete measures to promote vocational retraining and to provide more adequate financial support for persons in highly vulnerable situations.

4.2.8. The EESC confirms that Romania needs to pay particular attention to the financial discipline of enterprises by putting a stop to the accumulation of outstanding payments and the granting of state aid to lame-duck enterprises. The EESC does, however, reiterate the need to take measures to deal with the fall-out of the restructuring and privatisation of enterprises.

4.2.9. In conclusion, it may be said that Romania has in general made progress in achieving macro-economic stabilisation. Growth has picked up and exports have increased but the current account deficit and the high level of inflation will have to be reduced in order to mitigate other outstanding economic imbalances. The EESC notes that, whilst much work remains to be done, the Romanian government recognises the need to implement the programme drawn up in collaboration with the IMF and the pre-accession economic programme.

4.3. Development of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)

4.3.1. Romania set out its negotiating position in respect of SMEs on 28 March 2000. It fully accepted the existing body of EU law and made no requests for a transition period or derogations. The Romanian government has introduced a strategy and an action plan to remove obstacles to SMEs by: simplifying registration and licensing procedures; reviewing the legal framework; reducing taxation; simplifying the taxation system and stimulating public contracts.

4.3.2. Training programmes for entrepreneurs have been introduced and a national network of councils for SMEs has been put in place. The Romanian government has set up a National Credit Guarantee Fund with a view to improving access by SMEs to funding. A simplified taxation system has also been introduced for microenterprises. Tax exemptions are also granted to SMEs in respect of certain imports and the reinvestment of profits. The establishment of "one-stop shops" in chambers of commerce should enable new enterprises to be registered and to obtain all the necessary authorisations within a short period of time (20 days) but bureaucratic difficulties remain.

4.3.3. Furthermore, a report published in June 2002 by the Council of Foreign Investors in Romania notes positive changes in prior consultation regarding legislation that affects the business environment, legislation to accelerate privatisation and the establishment of the agency for the promotion of foreign investment.

4.3.4. The Romanian government has also set up a Ministry for SMEs and Cooperatives with a view to giving a shot in the arm to this sector. At the beginning of 2002, this new ministry launched four specific programmes to assist SMEs. These programmes, involving funding of ROL 87 billion, which will be added to the funding provided under the PHARE 2002 programme, are expected to come into operation in July 2002.

4.3.5. The EU-Romania JCC considered several problems relating to the development of SMEs in Romania, in particular progress made on the legislative and regulatory framework for the organisation and development of this sector of activity and matters connected with the relocation of EU SMEs to Romania. The scale of this phenomenon was analysed, as were the economic, regional and social problems facing such enterprises and problems relating to employment conditions(8).

4.3.6. The EESC also notes that the RICOP programme designed to back up structural measures (industrial and social restructuring) has been delayed, because it has so far proved impossible to find a fund manager. This is an important matter as 68 enterprises are involved in this programme, which is funded by the European Commission.

4.3.7. In spite of all the abovementioned measures, the business environment still needs to be improved in a number of areas: the large number of inspections carried out by different bodies gives scope for inspectors to be subject to corruption; the banking system is characterised by high interest rates; and the guarantee procedures remain cumbersome.

4.4. Social policy

4.4.1. The Romanian government opened negotiations on social policy in October 2001; it accepted in full the existing body of EU law in this field, taking the view that Romania would be in a position to apply these laws as soon as it joined the EU. Campaigns have been organised to promote awareness of the opening of the social policy chapter amongst trade unions, employers' associations, civil society and the general public.

4.4.2. The Romanian representatives in Brussels also made known to the EESC their enthusiasm at having been able to take part in the Barcelona European Summit(9) as a fully-fledged candidate state, rather than simply as an observer. At that summit the 15 EU Member States and the 13 candidate states participated actively for the first time in a working meeting held during the summit.

4.4.3. The 2001 Social Agreement was revised in March 2002. This document was signed by the social partners, as represented by seven employers' confederations(10), three trade union confederations(11), and the Romanian government(12). In the EESC's view, this document may be seen as providing proof that the social dialogue has been launched in Romania; it recognises that the document sets out a comprehensive social strategy, but has some reservations about the signatories to the Social Agreement.

4.4.4. The EESC noted that the 2002 Social Agreement had not observed the rules governing social dialogue, which required that only the social partners (employers and trade unions) must be involved. The 2002 Social Agreement was merely the product of social consultation by the Government, which had failed to secure the agreement of all the trade union confederations(13).

4.4.5. A noteworthy development was the adoption of an act providing for a guaranteed minimum income; this act came into force on 1 January 2002. Under this act the poorest people are entitled to receive social assistance but the level of this assistance is regrettably insufficient to meet the actual needs of the persons concerned. Payment of the guaranteed minimum income is dependent upon the beneficiary carrying out work "in the interests of the community". The Romanian government has, however, endeavoured to set aside a budget estimated at 0,4 % of GDP for the application of this act.

4.4.6. The EESC is generally of the opinion that wage-policy measures set out by the Romanian government in the 2002 Social Agreement are out of step with reality. Current wage levels and pensions seem derisory when measured against market prices in Romania.

4.4.7. Two further acts also came into force in January 2002: an act relating to the national social assistance scheme and an act to prevent and combat social marginalisation.

4.4.8. Discussions are taking place on the adoption of a new labour code, but no particular decision has yet been taken in this field. A National Employment Agency has been set up but no further information is yet available as to its effectiveness.

4.4.9. The EESC notes that the implementation of many aspects of the social policy acquis depends in practice on the actions of enterprises and their employees. The full involvement of their organisations in the accession negotiations permits possible problems of legislation and implementation to be identified and resolved at an early stage. The EESC is not convinced that this type of in-depth involvement is widespread in Romania.

4.4.10. In the EESC's view, questions arise in a number of fields relating to: the development of the bipartite social dialogue; the effectiveness of the national employment plan; preparations for administering the European Social Fund (ESF), with a view to Romania's accession to the EU; social security contributions; consumer protection, etc., in addition to matters relating to implementing provisions in respect of the legislation banning all forms of discrimination. The social policy chapter was provisionally closed on 19 April 2002.

4.5. The environment

4.5.1. The Romanian government adopted a negotiating position on the environment at the end of October 2001(14). Before presenting its position on the environment, the Romanian delegation to the negotiations held several discussions with local authorities, the social partners, political parties and other members of civil society, all of whom have an interest in the adoption of the existing body of EU law in the environmental field.

4.5.2. The Romanian government's priorities include measures to finalise the harmonisation of laws and to incorporate into Romanian law the existing body of EU legislation in a number of specific areas, such as: environmental impact assessments, free access to information on the environment, etc.

4.5.3. The EESC has noted a small degree of progress in the development of administrative capacities in the environmental sector, brought about by (a) recent training programmes for civil servants working in this field and (b) the plan for strengthening administrative capacity adopted by the Romanian government in March 2002.

4.6. Regional policy

4.6.1. Some progress has been made in the field of regional policy, particularly as regards improvements to the institutional framework. Romania is finally starting to consider the medium-term regional policy priorities within the framework of the accession partnership.

4.6.2. Romania has introduced some structures for implementing the Structural Funds. Responsibility for regional policy has been vested in, on the one hand, the Secretary of State for Investment and Development (responsible for planning and management) and, on the other hand, the secretary-general of the ministry (responsible for payments). The management of financial control has been slightly improved. The Development Ministry has been entrusted, inter alia, with drawing up the national plan for the development and management of regional development funds and the pre-accession EU funding for economic and social cohesion. The Romanian government has designated 11 industrial restructuring zones which are to be given priority access to EU aid to promote social cohesion. In order to gain access to the preaccession instruments, the social partners should, according to the principle of "enlarged partnership", be represented in the national and regional programme bodies, which are the real applicants for and recipients of EU funding. In the opinion of the EESC, Romania could and should, without delay, engage the social partners and, when appropriate, other NGOs, in its regional and structural policies.

4.6.3. Romania still has, in the EESC's view, a considerable amount of work to do in the context of the European employment strategy and the social integration process.

4.7. EU aid

4.7.1. In making its preparations for joining the EU, Romania receives support from three EU-funded pre-accession instruments. Under the PHARE programme (institution building), Romania will be allocated EUR 242 million(15) in 2002. Under the SAPARD programme, it will receive an annual allocation of EUR 153 million in the period 2000 to 2006(16). Under the ISPA programme, Romania will be granted an annual budget of between EUR 208 million and EUR 270 million(17).

4.7.2. The SAPARD programme is to be implemented on the basis of the National Plan for the Development of Agriculture and the countryside. In this context, the Romanian government has worked very hard to prepare the ground for the accreditation of the SAPARD agency. The EESC draws attention to the cumbersome nature of the administrative procedures introduced by the EU to enable farmers in all the candidate states to gain access to these funds.

4.7.3. Romania is also taking part in multinational and horizontal programmes financed by PHARE, such as TAIEX, the mechanism to promote SMEs and the ACCESS programme relating to civil society, etc.

5. Progress made in adopting and implementing the existing body of EU law

5.1. State of play

5.1.1. At the present time the EU has opened negotiations with Romania on 26 chapters of EU legislation, of which twelve have been closed.

5.1.2. From a general standpoint, the EESC takes the view that Romania has continued to make progress in adopting the existing body of EU law but that this progress has not in all cases gone hand in hand with improvements in respect of administrative capacity and the implementation of EU law.

5.1.3. Turning to the question of internal market legislation, the EESC notes that little progress has been made, with the exception of the adoption of new laws on public contracts. Administrative capacity has been slightly improved in this sector but further efforts are still required.

5.1.4. On the subject of freedom of movement for workers (a theme which has been discussed by the EU-Romania JCC), Romania has signed a bilateral agreement with Portugal and an agreement with Italy is in preparation. A further agreement has been signed with Luxembourg on the exchange of trainees. Romania does, however, need to establish appropriate administrative structures with a view to the future coordination of social security schemes in respect of workers covered by the above agreements. The EESC draws attention to Commission Decision No 93/569/EEC of 22 October 1993 on the free movement of workers as regards the European employment network "EURES", in which the Commission calls on the Member States to develop a synergy between public services, regional authorities and the social partners, in order to make the labour market more transparent and to promote the mobility of workers in cross-border regions. The EESC urges Romania to step up its efforts with a view to enabling Romania to participate in this European network.

5.1.5. The Romanian government has presented an industrial strategy, backed up by an action plan setting out a number of measures for implementing industrial policy. These documents have been drawn up following consultations with the "parties concerned"(18). The EESC underlines the importance of the methods selected for implementing the policy, proper implementation of the policy and supporting measures to offset its social impact.

5.1.6. Turning to the question of the existing body of EU law in the field of small and medium-sized enterprises, the Romanian government has, as pointed out above, made progress in this field. The EESC does, however, draw attention, once again, to the delay in implementing the RICOP Programme and to the extent of the phenomenon of relocation of SMEs from the EU to Romania.

5.1.7. The EESC confirms that Romania has made considerable progress in adopting the existing body of EU law in the field of transport. Account does, however, need to be taken of: the lack of measures to promote fiscal harmonisation in respect of road transport; maritime safety; the restructuring of TAROM (the Romanian national airline); and the Danube issue.

5.1.8. In the agriculture sector, restructuring has hardly started, the supporting measures to be taken by the Romanian government have not been clearly defined and administrative capacity is particularly limited, despite the fact that some progress has been made in adopting the existing body of EU law in this field. Between 2002 and 2004 the Romanian government will have to set about establishing the legal and institutional bases for the framework for applying the CAP.

5.2. Implementation

5.2.1. The EU Member States must not only adapt national legislation to the EU rules, i.e. transpose EU rules. The "acquis communautaire" must also be implemented, i.e. be observed in practice. A large part of the rules governing the internal market are in fact about products and product safety, production processes, the working environment, labour law etc. and can be implemented in practice only in enterprises and by their personnel.

5.2.2. In order to consolidate implementation of the "acquis communautaire", legal technical assistance projects for Romanian judges, lawyers and top civil servants are currently underway, in close cooperation with European experts in the field.

5.2.3. The membership negotiations are thus not only a question for civil servants and politicians. The social partners and other representatives of civil society, such as organisations representing farmers, consumers, environmentalists etc., must also be involved and informed.

5.2.4. The EESC is convinced that the early involvement of the social partners and other NGOs will ensure a better understanding of the EU rules and proper implementation of them.

Brussels, 17 July 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) See the report presented by Tim Papé to the EU-Romania JCC on the visit to Timisoara, Romania, 30 November to 1 December 2001.

(2) See the note on agriculture drawn up by Mr Nilsson and the working document on agriculture drawn up by Mr Neagoe for the fourth meeting of the EU-Romania JCC, held in November 2001.

(3) For further details on this matter see the working document on the Danube drawn up by Mrs A. Bredima-Savopoulou for the fourth and fifth meetings of the EU-Romania JCC (5-6 November 2001 and 23-24 May 2002).

(4) In a communication dated 8 April 2002, the United States Congress pointed out that it might block Romania's accession to NATO if that country did not lift its moratorium on the international adoption of children.

(5) Romanian exports in 2002 have risen by 11,5 % compared with December 2001: exports to industrialised countries are up 2,9 % and exports to EU countries are up 2,6 %.

(6) Although imports fell by 17 % in 2002, compared with December 2001, they still exceed exports.

(7) This level is questionable, as it does not fully reflect the real situation which the EESC was able to observe on its visits around Romania (for instance, the large number of both people who have retired early and highly precarious seasonal jobs in agriculture, etc.).

(8) See working document DI 66/2002 (rapporteur: Mr Kirschen) on SME policy directions in the EU and Romania and working document DI 73/2002 (rapporteur: Mr Bulumete) on recent developments and perspectives as regards SMEs.

(9) The Barcelona European Summit focused mainly on social policy issues.

(10) Conpir, CNPR, CNIMPMNR, CoNPR, PNR, UGIR and 1903.

(11) CNSLR-Fratia, CSDR and Meridian.

(12) The Prime Minister, the Minister for Labour and Social Solidarity and the Secretary of State.

(13) For this reason Block (BNS) and Cartel Alfa, two trade union confederations which were signatories to the 2001 Social Agreement, refused to put their signatures to the 2002 Social Agreement.

(14) In this context, it requested eleven transitional periods, varying in length from three to 15 years.

(15) 30 % of the funding is invested in institution building measures and twinning projects; the remaining 70 % will be used for investments, the co-financing of technical assistance projects, twinning, economic and social cohesion, etc.

(16) This aid is used mainly to promote the development and diversification of the rural economy, human resource development in agriculture, agricultural infrastructure, etc.

(17) This aid is allocated for environmental measures in accordance with major investment directives (covering drinking water projects and waste-water treatment projects) and for transport measures involving the funding of projects relating to the trans-European networks (railways, roads, ports, etc.).

(18) Professional associations, trade unions, employees, ministries, the private sector, universities and other public bodies.