27. 2. 76 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 
hours,  particularly  in view  of the social  background 
of many  migrant  families  and  often  the poor  housing 
conditions  in which  they  live.  In any  case,  outside 
school  hours,  migrant  children  should  be encouraged 
to engage  in those  leisure  activities  which  constitute 
so important  a part  of the process  of assimilation  into 
the new  environment. 
3.3.4.  The  Committee  recognizes  that  many 
migrant  children  will  still  have  language  difficulties 
after  being  placed  in classes  for  native  children. 
Remedial  courses  will  be needed  for  these  children 
and such  courses  should  be provided  free  of charge. 
3.3.5.  The  Committee  also  suggests  that  the 
courses  which  are  provided  for  migrant  children  in 
their  own  language  and  culture  should  be available 
also to the  indigenous  children.  But  the  Committee 
recognizes  the  practical  problems  of  providing 
courses  in a 'second'  language  at the primary  school 
level  in those  countries  where  foreign  languages  are 
not normally  included  in the  curriculum  before  the 
secondary  level  of education. 
3.4. Article  4 
3.4.1.  The  Committee  attaches  very  great 
importance  to the need  for adequate  training  of the 
teachers  who  will  be responsible  for  courses  for 
migrant  children,  and  in particular  for courses  in the 
language  of the  host  country,  which  must  include 
Done  at Brussels,  29 January  1976. No C 45/11 
specialist  training  in teaching  the  language  as a 
foreign  language.  It also  recognizes  that  for 
instruction  in the language  and  culture  of the country 
of origin  of migrant  children  it may  be necessary  to 
make  use  of teachers  from  the  migrants'  own 
countries  But  it is concerned  that  in some  of these 
countries  there  is already  a shortage  of qualified 
teachers,  whereas  in some  host  countries  there  is a 
surplus  of teachers.  To  ensure  continuity  in the 
education  of migrant  children,  there  is therefore  a 
need  for the closest  liaison  between  the host  country 
and the  country  of origin  and  cooperation  must  be 
built  up between  the  host  country  teachers  and  the 
foreign  teachers. 
3.4.2.  The  Committee  stresses  that  teachers  from 
the migrants'  own  country,  should  be employed 
under  the  same  conditions  of service  as indigenous 
teachers  in the  host  country.  They  must  clearly  be 
responsible  to the authorities  of the host  country. 
3.5. Article  5 
3.5.1.  Reference  has already  been  made  to the very 
special  difficulties  which  some  Member  States  will 
face in carrying  out  the  Directive.  The  Committee 
therefore  stresses  the  need  on the  one  hand  to act 
expeditiously  and  effectively  to alleviate  a serious  and 
urgent  problem,  but  on the other  hand  to recognize 
that the problems  which  are posed  by the children  of 
migrants  call  for  very  different  solutions  among 
individual  Member  States. 
The Chairman  of 
the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Henri  CANONGE 
Opinion  on the  proposal  for  a Regulation  on common  measures  to improve  the 
conditions  under  which  agricultural  products  are marketed  and  processed 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 218  of 24 September  1975,  page  4. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 10 September  1975  the  Council  referred  the  abovementioned  proposal  to the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Articles  43 and  198  of the Treaty 
establishing  the European  Economic  Community. 
No C 45/12 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 27. 2. 76 
B. OPINION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  prepared  its opinion  on the above  matter  at its 
136th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 28 and  29 January  1976. 
The full  text  of the opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the 
European  Economic  Community,  and  in particular 
Articles  43 and  198  thereof, 
Having  regard  to the request  for an opinion  made  by 
the Council  of the  European  Communities  on 10 
September  1975, 
Having  regard  to the decision  taken  by its Bureau  on 
23 September  1975,  instructing  the  Section  for 
Agriculture  to draw  up an opinion  on the matter, 
Having  regard  to the  supplementary  opinion  issued 
by the  Section  for  Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and 
Services  at its meeting  on 7 January  1976, consultation  provisions.  In the Committee's  view,  the 
proposed  Regulation  is  of  direct  concern  to 
consumers,  farmworkers,  and  workers  in the  food 
industry  and  the distributive  trade. 
2. The  Committee  welcomes  the submission  of the 
proposal.  It is one  which  has  been  promised  by the 
Commission  for  some  years  and  which  the 
Committee  advocated.  On the whole,  the Committee 
agrees  with  the  proposal  and  the  aims.  The 
Committee  particularly  supports  the  Commission  in 
its evident  concern  to  reach  a comprehensive, 
systematic  policy  on common  measures  to be carried 
out in the relevant  processing  and  marketing  sectors. 
The purpose  of such  a policy  is (a) to heighten  the 
effectiveness  of the measures  and  (b) to bring  about  a 
systematic  coordination  which  will  reduce  the 
possibility  of wrong  decisions. 
Having  regard  to the  oral  report  made  by  the 
rapporteur,  Mr Wick, 
Having  regard  to the opinion  issued  by the Section 
for Agriculture  on 20 January  1976  (section  meeting 
of 19 and  20 January  1976), 3. The  Commission  proposal  is prompted  by two 
considerations:  firstly,  the overall  success  of action 
taken  under  Regulation  No 17/64/EEC;  secondly,  the 
expectation  that  funds  set aside  under  Regulation  No 
17/64/EEC  for  measures  in the  relevant  processing 
and marketing  sectors  will  soon  all  have  been 
disbursed. 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 136th  plenary 
session  of 28 and  29 January  1976, 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
by 30 votes  to eight  and  with  three  abstentions: 
The Committee  has the following  comments  to make 
on the proposal: 
A. General  comments 
1. The  Committee  feels  that  the  proposed 
Regulation  does  not  show  sufficient  regard  for 
consumers'  and  employees'  interests,  either  in the 
conditions  projects  are required  to satisfy  or in the 4. The  Committee  thinks  it necessary  to continue 
the policy  of market-structure  improvement  started 
under  Regulation  No 17/64/EEC.  The  Committee  is 
therefore  in favour  of the Commission's  plan  to give 
market-structure  improvement  a new  and  permanent 
legal  foundation,  by bringing  it under  the  'common 
measures'  system  set up by Regulation  (EEC)  No 
729/70,  and  thereby  assigning  such  improvement  its 
proper  position  in the common  structural  policy. 
5. The  Committee  thinks  that  in some  Member 
States  the  effectiveness  of the  common  measures 
could  be boosted  by the  formation  of producers' 
associations.  It would  therefore  once  again  urge  the 
Council  to adopt  the  proposed  Regulation  on 
producers'  associations  as soon  as possible  (cf.  Com-
mittee  opinions  on this  subject,  in particular  that  of 
28 September  1967  on producer  groups  and  asso-
ciations  of such  groups. 
27. 2. 76 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 45/13 
6. The  Committee  also  broadly  endorses  the  (c)  Financial  provisions 
content  of the  proposed  Regulation,  but  would  like 
the following  points  taken  into  consideration. 
A period  of 10 years  is proposed  for  carrying  out 
the common  measures,  and  the scheme  is expected  to 
cost 400  million  units  of account  over  the first  five 
years. 
(a) Aims 
The Commission  states  that  the  basic  aim  of the 
proposed  Regulation  is to help  farmers  by enabling 
processors  and  distributors  to pay  them  fair  prices, 
by stimulating  a greater  and  more  stable  demand  for 
farm  produce,  and  by increasing  the processing  and 
distributive  sectors'  ability  to (i) export  and  (ii) 
handle  produce  from  remote  areas  of the  common 
market.  The  Committee  endorses  this  aim. The Committee  feels  that  80 million  units  of account 
per year  is not  enough  to solve  all the problems  of 
improvement  of agricultural  product  marketing  and 
processing  facilities,  especially  as costs  will  continue 
to be pushed  up by inflation.  Given  the small  size  of 
the proposed  appropriation,  it will  have  to be 
distributed  with  the utmost  care  to selected  projects  if 
the Regulation  is to have  the desired  guiding  effect. 
However,  the  characteristics  of the  processing  and 
marketing  sectors  must  be taken  into  account  when 
implementing  the  proposed  Regulation.  As  the 
Commission  itself  points  out,  'agriculture  is to a large 
extent  dependent  on  agricultural  products  being 
marketed  and  processed  efficiently'. 
The proposed  Regulation  should  also  help  to (i) 
rationalize  and  develop  processing  and  marketing 
facilities  and  (ii)  benefit  the  consumer  by ensuring 
reliable  food  supplies  and  better  presentation  and 
quality. 
The proposed  Regulation  is to serve  aims  of the 
common  agricultural  policy,  as distinct  from  those  of 
the regional,  social  and  other  policies.  This  does  not 
mean  that  measures  taken  under  the different  policies 
should  not be properly  coordinated;  on the contrary, 
it makes  such  coordination  essential. 
(b) Procedures  for handling  applications 
The procedure  for dealing  with  applications  should 
be as simple  as is compatible  with  the  need  for 
thorough  vetting.  It should  not be allowed  to happen 
that projects  in areas  whose  infrastructure  and 
administrative  apparatus  are  insufficient  to handle 
applications  quickly  and  efficiently  are held  up by 
administrative  delays.  All  the  parties  concerned 
should  be involved  and  take  an active  part  in the 
implementation  of the measures. (d) The  effect  of improvement  and  rationalization  of 
processing  and  marketing  facilities 
Needs  for  processing  and  marketing  capacity  vary 
from  sector  to sector  and  area  to area.  Care  will 
therefore  have  to be taken  to ensure  that  the scheme 
does  not  encourage  the  generation  of  surplus 
processing  and  marketing  capacity. 
Aid should  be concentrated  in the areas  and  sectors 
where  development  of processing  and  marketing 
facilities  is most  urgently  needed.  • 
B. Comments  on individual  Articles 
First  recital 
The Committee  thinks  that  the general  effects  of the 
proposed  Regulation  on  consumers  should  be 
mentioned  in the recticals.  It is suggested,  therefore, 
that the following  additional  recital  be inserted: 
'Whereas  the planned  measures  should  also  serve 
the interests  of consumers  by making  for  an 
improvement  in the  presentation  quality  and 
value  for money  of finished  products;'. 
No C 45/14 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 27. 2. 76 
Fifth  recital 
The Committee  accepts  that  the criteria  laid  down  in 
the Regulation  must  include  the project's  place  within 
the general  context  of the  common  agricultural 
policy.  But  care  must  be taken  to ensure  that  the 
decisions  on specific  projects  are not  influenced  by 
short-term  trends  on the agricultural  markets. 
Ninth  recital 
The following  wording  would  be more  realistic: 
"Whereas  aid from  the fund  ... should  go some 
way towards  solving  the problems  ...' 
Article  1(1) 
In the  German  version,  'im  Absatz  oder  in der 
Verarbeitung  landwirtschaftlicher  Erzeugnisse'  should 
be replaced  by 'in der  Be-  und  Verarbeitung  sowie 
Vermarktung  landwirtschaftlicher  Erzeugnisse'. 
The whole  draft  needs  checking  to ensure  the 
accuracy  and  consistency  of the terms  used  to denote 
the fields  of activity  concerned. 
Article  2(2) 
It should  be clear  from  the wording  that  (a),  (b) and 
(c) are alternative  procedures.  The  following  wording 
is therefore  suggested  for the first  line: 
'Such  specific  programmes  shall  be drawn  up 
either  individually  or jointly  by:'. 
The 'inter-trade  associations'  referred  to  in 
subparagraph  (b) do not exist  in all Member  States. 
The expression  'representative  group  of undertakings' 
in subparagraph  (b) is vague.  It should  be made  clear 
that the 'group'  must  comprise  an adequate  number 
of undertakings,  and  be representative  of the relevant 
sector  and  of the farmers  concerned. 
On Article  2 (c), the Commission  has  explained  that 
by and  large  it will  confine  itself  to drawing  up 
supranational  programmes.  Only  in exceptional  cases 
will it draw  up programmes  concerning  only  one 
Member  State. The word  'particularly'  needs  to be inserted  in the 
Italian  version,  to bring  it into  line  with  the  other 
versions. 
It is necessary  to ensure  that  the  authorities  and 
organizations  referred  to in subparagraphs  (a) to (c) 
cooperate  as closely  as possible  when  programmes 
are drawn  up. 
Article  3 (1) (b) 
For the sake  of clarity,  the first  two  lines  should  be 
amended  to: 
'(b) a description  of the  initial  situation  and  an 
analysis  of the trends  which  can  be inferred 
therefrom  for  the  particular  geographical 
area and the sector  as a whole,  especially  .. 
The third  indent  should  be amplified  to read: 
'the situation  and  outlook  (particularly  with  a 
view to  preventing  the  creation  of  surplus 
capacity)  as regards  the marketing  and  processing 
of agricultural  products  with  which  the 
programme  is concerned.' 
Article  3 (1) (d) 
The end  of this  subparagraph  should  read: 
'for the  production  and  market  sectors 
concerned.' 
Article  3 (1) (f) 
This  should  read: 
'(f) expected  effects  of the  programme  on 
agricultural  practices  and  on the  processing 
and marketing  sector  in the region  or zone  in 
question,  including  its effect  on employment 
in the sectors  concerned.' 
Article  4 (2) 
It is hard  to imagine  how  a programme  drawn  up by 
the Commission  under  Article  2 (2)  (c) could  be 
carried  out  without  having  been  approved  by the 
Member  State  or States  concerned.  Under  Article  13 
27. 2. 76 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 45/15 
(3) the Member  State  has  to approve  projects  to be 
carried  out on its territory,  and  under  Article  19 (2) it 
has to contribute  to their  cost. 'The  provision  of marketing  facilities  at the retail 
level,  where  such  facilities  come  within  the 
domain  of retailing  proper,  is not covered  by this 
Regulation.' 
Article  5(1) 
It is important  that  all the  organizations  concerned 
are consulted.  Because  there  is likely  to  be 
considerable  variety  in the  types  of programme 
submitted,  the Commission  should  have  a degree  of 
discretion  as regards  the choice  of organizations  to be 
consulted,  so that  it can approach  all the appropriate 
organizations  in each  case.  The  latter  half  of the 
sentence  should  therefore  be worded  as 'the  most 
representative  trade  organizations  existing  at 
Community  level'. 
Article  7 (1) 
It is stated  that  investments  only  partly  intended  to 
rationalize  or develop  the processing  or marketing  of 
agricultural  products  will  be eligible  for  subsidies 
under  the Regulation.  It must  be specified  that  such 
eligibility  applies  only  to the part  which  is concerned 
with  processing  or maketing  and  which  relates  to the 
relevant  specific  programme. 
Article  7 (2) (b) 
The concept  of 'Valorisierung'  (translated  in the 
English  version  as 'increasing  the return  obtained')  is 
not usual  in all Community  languages,  e.g.  German, 
and its meaning  should  be spelt  out. 
For the sake  of clarity: 
'from  agricultural  products' 
should  be added. 
Article  7 (2) (d) and  (e) 
It is assumed  that  the 'facilities'  have  to be directly 
related  to projects  coming  under  Article  7 (1),  and 
are not  facilities  for  general  research  or public 
relations  work. 
Article  7 (4) 
This  clause  should  be made  more  explicit: Article  8 (2) 
It needs  to be made  clear  that  the 'value'  referred  to 
is the value  of the basic  products  used  to make  the 
product  being  processed  or marketed. 
It is feared  that  the proposed  wording  might  prevent 
assistance  being  given  to projects  which  at least 
partially  serve  the aims  of the proposed  Regulation. 
In the last  line,  'produced  in the Community'  should 
be added  after  'agricultural  products'. 
Article  9 (1) 
Delete  'in particular'. 
Article  9 (2) 
The Commission  has  stated  that  it does  not propose 
any further  generally  applicable  criteria  for long-term 
supply  contracts,  since  conditions  vary  tremendously 
from  sector  to sector,  Member  State  to Member  State 
and area  to area. 
It is important  that  the  terms  of supply  contracts 
should  be fair  to all contracting  parties.  The  sentence 
should  therefore  end  '...  basic  agricultural  products 
on reasonable  terms'. 
Article  9 (2) should  be amended  to: 
'Compliance  with  this  requirement  may  be 
established  inter  alia  where  an  arrangement 
carrying  force  in law effectively  binds  together  the 
producers  of  the  basic  commodity  and  the 
undertaking  concerned  or where  long-term  supply 
contracts  are concluded  on reasonable  terms.' 
Article  10 (c) 
It is doubtful  whether  the  future  profitability  of a 
project  can  be objectively  demonstrated.  But  it must 
be possible  to count  on long-term  viability.  It is also 
No C 45/16 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 27. 2. 76 
recommended  that  'improvement  of  agricultural 
structure'  be replaced  by 'structural  improvement' 
(meaning  improvement  of  agricultural  market 
structure,  not general  structural  improvement). 
The wording  suggested  for this subparagraph  is: 
'(c) afford  sufficient  guarantee  that  the structural 
improvement  effected  will  have  lasting  economic 
results  and  be economically  viable  in the  long 
term.' 
Article  11 (b) 
See earlier  comments  drawing  attention  to the 
importance  of the  proposal  from  the  consumer's 
point  of view  (A.6  (a)),  and  the suggested  amendment 
ot the first  recital. 
Article  13 (1) 
In the interests  of the Regulation's  effectiveness,  the 
time  allowed  the  Commission  to  deal  with 
applications  should  be no longer  than  is absolutely 
necessary  for  thorough  vetting.  It is suggested  that 
this be fixed  at a maximum  of one  year,  and  that 
Article  13 (1) should  read: 
'1. Applications  for aid from  the Fund  shall  be 
submitted  to the Commission  each  year  before  1 
October.  The  Commission  shall  decide  on the 
merits  of such  applications  within  12 months' 
It might  help  to speed  up the procedure  if there  were 
two closing  dates  each  year  for  the  submission  of 
applications. Article  13 (4) and (5) 
It is presumed  that  applications  relating  to a specific 
programme  can  be made  in a simplified  form.  This 
would  not  make  the discription  and  justification  any 
less thorough. 
Article  IS (c) 
The Committee  refers  to its comments  on the  fifth 
recital,  where  it warned  against  allowing  decisions  on 
projects  which  will  necessarily  only  show  results  in 
the long  term,  to depend  on short-term  developments 
on the agricultural  markets. 
Article  15 
If Article  9 (2) is amended  as suggested  above,  the 
following  new  paragraph  2 should  be added  to 
Article  15: 
'2. Where  a decision  has  to be  taken  on 
alternative  projects,  and  where  those  projects 
meet  the requirements  of Article  15 (1) (a) to (h) 
to a equal  extent,  precedence  shall  be given  to 
any one  of those  projects  which  also  satisfy 
Article  9 (2).' 
Article  17 
This  provision  should  be worded  more  clearly.  The 
steady  implementation  of  improvements  in the 
processing  and  marketing  sectors  must  not  be 
impeded  by EEC  announcements  or policies  with 
respect  to particular  production  sectors  or areas. 
Article  13 (3) 
When  applications  which  have  been  turned  down  by 
the Member  States  concerned  are  communicated  to 
the Commission,  the  reason  for  refusing  approval 
should  also  be given,  as this  will  make  it easier  to 
judge  the  implementation  of programmes.  It is 
therefore  suggested  that  Article  13 (3) be amended  to 
read: 
\ .. the  latter  shall  communicate  the application 
in question,  together  with  the reasons  why  it was 
not approved,  to the Commission  for information 
and so that  the  Commission  can  examine  the 
matter.' Article  18 (3) 
See comments  under  A.6  (c) above.  The  Commission 
has stated  that,  taking  into  account  the  reserves  of 
the EAGGF  Guidance  Section,  the  guidance 
appropriations  pegged  by  Regulation  (EEC)  No 
729/70  will  be sufficient  to fund  the proposed  scheme 
for several  years.  The  Committee  accepts  that  this  is 
necessarily  only  an estimate. 
Article  19 (1) 
It should  be ensured  that  the subsidies  authorized  by 
the Commission  are paid  as quickly  as possible. 
27. 2. 76 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 45/17 
Article  19 (2), last sentence 
It is  feared  that  a minimum  Member-State 
contribution  of 40 % of the  subsidy  granted  by the 
Fund  will  lead  to worthwhile  projects  not  being 
assisted  and  not  being  implemented.  The  Regulation 
should  require  the  Member  State  to contribute  to 
projects  without  specifying  a minimum  percentage,  as 
in Regulation  No  17/64/EEC,  which  has  been 
applicable  hitherto.  The  sentence  'Its  financial 
contribution  . .. granted  by  the  Fund'  should, 
therefore,  be deleted. 
Article  19 (3) 
There  is an inaccuracy  in the  first  sentence.  This 
should  read: 
'Aid from  the Fund  for projects  provided  for in 
Article  12(1)..: 
The first  indent  should  be amended  to: 
'— 25 % in the  case  of projects  financed  under 
provisions  made  for the first  and  second  years 
following  . . .' 
Done  at Brussels,  29 January  1976. The second  indent  should  then  be deleted. 
It is assumed  that  the  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  will  take  decisions  on  programme 
applications  promptly.  Delays  are liable  to seriously 
injure  applicants'  interests. 
Article  21 
The Commission  has explained  that  national  aids  are 
vetted  for possible  infringements  of Articles  92 to 94 
of the  Treaty.  It has  also  been  pointed  out  that  'a 
dominant  position  on the  market  or a substantial 
part of it' is not  the  same  thing  as a dominant 
position  in a given  region  of a Member  State. 
Article  24 
The last  sentence  ('An  application  for  aid ... once 
only')  should  be deleted. 
The Chairman  of 
the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Henri  CANONGE 
ANNEX 
to the opinion  of the Economic  and Social  Committee 
The following  amendments  were  rejected  during  the discussion: 
Article  5 (1) 
Amend  Article  5 (1) to: 
'Heaving  studied  the  programmes,  the  Commission  shall  consult  the  trade  organizations 
existing  at Community  level  which  are  most  representative  of the  producers,  processors  and 
dealers  affected.  It shall  also  consult  consumers'  associations  on  how  to  safeguard 
consumers'  interests,  and  trade  unions  as to the  effects  on  employment.' 
No C 45/18 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 27. 2. 76 
Reason 
This  recommendation  was  inserted,  after  long  discussion,  into  the  supplementary  opinion.  It 
should  also  be put  into  the  Committee  opinion.  Especially  at the  present  time  of high 
unemployment  in the EEC,  it is essential  to consult  the relevant  trade  unions  on rationalization 
measures  affecting  jobs  (and  not  just  consult  farmers  and  management).  It is also  unthinkable 
to ignore  consumers  when  planning  improvements  to food  processing  and  marketing. 
Voting 
for: 10, against:  26, abstentions:  9. 
1. Article  9 (2) 
Replace  the word  'may'  after  'Compliance  with  this  requirement'  by 'must'.  Delete  'inter  alia' 
from  the following  line. 
Voting 
for: 8, against:  16, abstentions:  15. 
2. Article  9 (2) 
Add,  after  'concluded  on reasonable  terms'  the phrase  'between  producers'  associations  and  the 
undertaking  itself'. 
Voting 
for: 8, against:  24, abstentions:  7. 
Reason  (1 and 2) 
If the Regulation  is to achieve  the proposed  benefits  for farm  producers,  producers  must  enjoy 
a minimum  degree  of genuine  preference. 
Article  15 (2) 
Continue  after  'procedence  shall  be given'  with  the words  'to those  projects  which  also  satisfy 
Article  9 (2) and  which  are submitted  by producers  belonging  to producers'  associations'. 
Voting 
for: 8, against:  26, abstentions:  7.