ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
53.

has pressed in its opinions for structural reform of industry and emphasised the importance of society’s and companies’ responsiveness in the competitive environment created by globalisation and digitalisation. These recommendations are also tied to measures raising the level of skills required, and to lifecycle thinking that emphasises overall impact and climate change targets. These statements include: a. Industrial policy needs to be one of the pillars of the European venture, treated as a genuine political priority on the same political footing as cohesion, infrastructure and agriculture; Forward-looking management of skills and change should be viewed as a crucial component of industrial strategy at every level (4). The EU must provide financial support for regions that introduce innovating mechanisms for forward-looking change management; b. A comprehensive approach above all creates great opportunities to develop new sustainable materials and helps meet the CO2 targets enshrined in the EU 2020 strategy. A consistent lifecycle approach already starts in the product [the word ‘car’ is used in the original opinion] design phase. This also covers environmentally relevant effects in the production process, as well as the operational phase and, finally, recycling and/or processing for subsequent re-use as well (5);
19.

reiterates the call made in its opinion on European film in the digital era (1), for an assessment of the country of origin principle as enshrined in the AVMSD, considering in particular questions of legal certainty, which is crucial for the development of European audiovisual stakeholders. The appropriateness of considering the so-called ‘country of destination principle’ as is being done in some Member States, should therefore also be explored, to the extent that this does not empty the country of origin principle of all substance;
7.

considers that the essential role of the regions shall be better reflected in the review of the SACC (e.g. through a dedicated chapter), and their efforts better supported. Indeed, regions play a coordinating/intermediary role in the adaptation process, making sure the priorities defined by Member States correspond to the needs and expectations expressed on the ground and vice versa. They can also act as catalysts, supporting the efforts deployed by local authorities in strengthening their resilience to climate and disaster risks, building capacities and deploying available financing — as demonstrated by the regions already engaged in the Covenant of Mayors as ‘Coordinators’. The CoR invites the European Commission to further recognise the responsibilities taken and the actions carried out not only by local but also regional authorities in the framework of its Covenant of Mayors initiative (e.g. in a similar vein to what the RegionsAdapt initiative is currently doing);
36.

underlines that the fragmentation and complexity of the VAT system cause major compliance costs for SMEs involved in cross-border trade and have a particular impact on border regions; therefore calls for further simplification of rules and procedures linked to different VAT regimes in cross-border trade, for an extension of the mini One Stop Shop principle, currently limited to telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic services, to other distance sales of goods and services, and for a common EU cross-border threshold below which VAT would not be applied;
28.

recognises that local and regional authorities should be helped to gain a clear understanding of climate risks in their own area, in order to be able to take the best possible decisions. Improving socio-economic assessment, reporting and communication would help articulate the impact of climate action on society, informing local decision-making and resource allocation. The map of environmental risks available on the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT) (4) is a positive and useful initiative, even although it is still little-known and made up of fragmented information with regard to regional and local data. There is an overall need to raise awareness of EU action and tools for climate adaptation at local level. For this reason, the Committee would ask the Commission to increase its support for the platform with a view to completing the data collection process and disseminating the results with more attention given to the regional and local level as first responders in crises;
33.

underlines the need to introduce guidelines, reflecting examples of effective strategies in some countries for healthier eating patterns. Progress should be made with regard to free access to drinking water. For example, Andalusia is working on legislation that includes a measure in this area: ‘businesses responsible for setting up or maintaining vending machines selling packaged food and drink, if any, in educational establishments and public recreational spaces for children, shall install and maintain an operational source of drinking water that is free to access, either integrated into the distributor or located at a distance of up to 2 metres from it’. A further such example is Greece, where in order to provide, at a competitive price, a basic good such as water, together with some other staples, rather than other beverages and foodstuffs, maximum prices are set — for example, half a euro for half a litre of bottled water — for standing customers at certain sales points (canteens, snack bars, bars, restaurants and other establishments serving food and drinks, vending machines, etc.), where competition is not feasible (such as airports, sports centres, passenger ships, hospitals, educational establishments, railway stations, museums, recreational areas, etc.);
6.

notes that pastoral livestock farming, which relies on the natural environment as a spontaneous source of feed for livestock, makes use of flexibility and security margins in order to cope with climate risks. Farmers therefore need designated ‘buffer’ areas which may not be used every year, or may be grazed with widely varying degrees of intensity, but which are necessary in the event of seasonal drought; these areas generally consist of heathland, water meadows and woods; the ongoing climate change increases the need for such areas; the provisions for recognising pasture areas in the first pillar should also recognise and ensure legal certainty for the use of these areas, a need that will not arise every year and cannot be predicted at the time of submitting the CAP files. Again, pastoralism develops agro-ecological practices of exchange with ecosystem services by making complementary use of areas allocated for other uses, including vineyards and orchards, something that helps reduce inputs and mechanised practices; European policies should recognise, encourage and find legally sound ways of developing practices enabling livestock farmers to make use of areas declared by other farmers. Furthermore, pastoralism also develops practices associated with silviculture, referred to as ‘silvopastoralism’, of mutual benefit to foresters and farmers alike; European public policies should recognise and encourage mixed use of these areas and practices which, under certain conditions, are particularly useful in protecting forests against fire and adapting livestock farming to climate change, as well as complying with the need for forestry regeneration and products;
2.

wishes to highlight the key role of democratic and inclusive multi-level governance in partnership between all levels, including where appropriate also the levels below the municipal one where different models and entities exist with more or less formalised structures, competencies and resources; involving them in multi-level governance could be very helpful for the development and effective implementation of policies and for the legitimacy of the democratic system itself; notes that this is particularly true for policies in areas which respond to serious concerns of citizens and where both the challenges and the policy responses deeply affect citizens lives, such as environmental matters and climate change;
42.

points out that the digital transformation is drastically altering consumers’ lives. It offers them great opportunities but also presents them with new difficulties. In this regard, it is necessary to combat unfair online commercial practices. Consumer protection interests must be strengthened when establishing rules governing the digital economy and requirements for artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things and robotics; in this regard, takes note of the European Commission’s innovative proposal in its regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and in its communication entitled ‘Fostering a European approach to Artificial Intelligence’, which will be the subject of a separate CoR opinion;
57.

supports the approach of assessing, in the framework of the new CAP, the specific circumstances and needs of the Member States, and in particular the difficult production conditions in the outermost regions, relating to the growth of the organic sector and ensuring that Member States make the best use of the possibilities offered by the new CAP to support the national organic sector. The Commission should pay particular attention to supporting those Member States/regions lagging behind, while providing further guidance for those that have already contribute to attain the 25 % target. Every Member State should contribute to achieving the common target by 2030;
5.

strongly supports the REGI Committee's negotiating team in the trialogue process; in particular, recalls some key positions shared with the EP on the following issues, and hopes they could be kept in the final package: — support for a cohesion policy that includes all regions and focuses equally on the EU's less developed regions; — support for a new category of "transition regions" and the safety net of two-thirds of the current allocation for regions no longer eligible for convergence support; — the need to balance the priorities between the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Treaty objectives as well as the need for more flexibility in the application of thematic concentration; — the effective involvement of local and regional authorities in the design of partnership contracts and operational programmes respecting the multilevel governance principle; — the strong support for the inclusion of a European Code of Conduct on partnership within Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation; — the strong rejection of macroeconomic conditionality; — the need for ex ante conditionalities to be directly related to the implementation of Cohesion Policy; — the rejection of a performance reserve; — the transfer of the Cohesion Fund allocation to the new Connecting Europe Facility, with the strict application of the CF rules and respect of national quotas; — support for the integrated approach to territorial development advocated by the European Commission, as well as the introduction of new tools and forms of governance such as Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI) and local development carried out by local actors for urban matters; — rejection of the urban development platform but call for URBACT to be established on a permanent footing.
2.

highlights the role of the European Union as a major global player in addressing the challenges of food and nutrition security and sustainability, and encourages it to invest in science and innovation as key factors for ensuring that all have access to healthy, nutritious and sustainably produced food; points out that the concept of a shared common agricultural policy designed to secure access to affordable food resources for all EU citizens and an adequate standard of living for farmers dates back as far as the Treaty of Rome; points out that food security, which the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises as a fundamental human right, is a prerequisite for poverty reduction; draws attention to the 122,6 million people (24,5 % of the population) living below the poverty line in the European Union and to the 9,6 % of the population living in conditions of severe material deprivation; reiterates that it is important for the European Union to secure access to sufficient healthy, suitable and nutritious food for its citizens, especially the most deprived;
6.

in this regard, warns that the possible suspension of the European Structural and Investment Funds for Spain and Portugal — or any other Member State — is detrimental to programme implementation. It points out that (a) the CoR is opposed to macroeconomic conditionality as it penalises cities and regions; (b) it would run counter to the cancellations of sanctions that have already taken place under the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area; and (c) it violates the principle of proportionality set out in Article 5 TEU and its Protocol No 2. Therefore calls for any suspension that may be imposed to be set at zero, taking account of the economic and social circumstances, unemployment and the impact of suspension on their economies, as stipulated in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 (Common Provisions Regulation);
9.

emphasises that one of the unique aspects of the European Union is its multi-level governance structure and regrets that this aspect is not recognised in the White Paper; also regrets that the White Paper does not present the territorial implications of the different scenarios presented. Highlights the fact that cities and regions on the whole enjoy greater trust from citizens; therefore believes that citizens and their hopes, expectations and concerns must be at the centre of all political actions and stresses that any discussions about the future of the European Union and reforms resulting from these debates must be bottom-up, involving all levels of governance; points out that in any event, the ‘Community’ method and spirit of working must take precedence over the ‘intergovernmental’ approach in all the EU’s decision-making processes;
4.

welcomes the Commission’s efforts to put in place effective mechanisms to ensure respect for the rule of law, including the most recent blueprint for action based on three pillars (1. Building knowledge and a common rule of law culture; 2. Prevention: Cooperation and support to strengthen the rule of law at national level; 3. Response: Enforcement at EU level when national mechanisms falter); stresses, in this light, that local and regional authorities — as locally elected bodies — can play a key role in promoting the rule of law and in identifying risks to it; by engaging citizens in participatory democracy, building a culture of rule of law and supporting organisations essential to this purpose, including a free and independent media. The role of local and regional authorities in the three pillars’ structure should be, therefore, reinforced. However, while welcoming the Commission’s assurances that it wants to ensure seamless financing for EU final beneficiaries in case an action against a Member State is initiated, the CoR is still opposed to a conditionality which would limit regional and local authorities’ access to funding under the cohesion policy for failures to uphold the rule of law or democratic principles at national level. The CoR therefore expects the Commission to develop further actions to protect final beneficiaries’ interests and reiterates its previous call to set clear criteria to determine what constitutes a generalised deficiency as regards the rule of law;
10.

Calls for a clear focus on the key challenges facing the European Union and a bottom-up debate on the topics of the conference, including, but not limited to the environmental and climate challenges, social justice, sustainable development, the digital transformation, migration, the European community of values, the economy and jobs, territorial cohesion and the changes of the EU’s policies, processes, institutions and resources, including the role of local and regional democracy and self-government, which are necessary to enable the EU to respond to citizens’ needs and expectations on these issues. In order to implement the results of the Conference appropriately, possible changes to the EU Treaties should not be excluded;
Opinion

of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations given at the 75th meeting on 29 February 2000 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.1672 - Volvo/Scania

(2001/C 154/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration according to Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation.

2. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation has a Community dimension as defined in Article 1(2) of the Merger Regulation.

3. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant product market should be defined as the markets for:

(a) Heavy trucks (more than 16 tonnes).

(b) Touring coaches.

(c) Inter-city buses.

(d) City buses.

4. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic markets for heavy trucks are Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Ireland.

5. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic markets for touring coaches are Finland and United Kingdom.

6. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic markets for inter-city buses are Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland.

7. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic markets for city buses are Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Ireland.

8. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the concentration would create a dominant position on the markets for heavy trucks in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Ireland.

9. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the concentration would create a dominant position on the markets for:

- Touring coaches in Finland and United Kingdom.

- Inter-city buses in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland.

- City buses in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Ireland.

10. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the commitments submitted by the parties will not remove all the competitive concerns of the concentration as identified above and in the draft decision.

11. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the operation shall be declared incompatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement.

12. The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take account of all points raised during the meeting, in particular with regards to comments made in relation to the assessment of the relevant geographic market.

13. The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/37.462 - Identrus(1)

(pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001))

(2001/C 263/06)

The draft Decision does not give rise to particular observations. The proceedings took a normal course. The rights of third parties to be heard were fully respected.

Done at Brussels, 22 June 2001.

Helmuth Schröter

(1) OJ L 249, 19.9.2001.
Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/38.044 - NDC Health/IMS Health

(pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision (C(2001) 1461/3 final) of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition procedures)

(2002/C 53/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The proceedings in this case have been initiated upon a complaint under Article 3(2) of Regulation No 17 by NDC, combined with a request for interim measures. The Commission proposes to grant this request, while reserving its final decision with regard to the substance of the case.

The timing of the various measures which were taken to ensure the parties' right to be heard corresponded to the needs of an accelerated procedure. The Statement of Objections was sent on 9 March and received on 12 March 2001. By decision of 19 March 2001 the Hearing Officer extended the initial two weeks' time limit imposed on IMS for its reponse from 26 March to 2 April 2001. The Oral Hearing took place on 6 April 2001. The replies to the Statement of Objections gave rise to a complementary inquiry, mainly on the basis of requests for information under Article 11 of Regulation No 17, which were sent to several German undertakings in the pharmaceutical sector. The written replies to these requests and the records of all further meetings with third parties were communicated to IMS, after certain confidential parts concerning the relationship between other service providers and their clients had been made illegible. They were sent in two packages on 22 May and 7 June 2001. The time for submitting written comments ended on 14 June 2001.

From the above it follows that IMS has been enabled to fully exercise its rights of defence. The draft decision only deals with objections in respect of which the defendant has been afforded the opportunity of making known its views.

Done at Brussels on 18 June 2001.

Emil Paulis
Administrative Commission of the European Communities on Social security for Migrant workers

Rates for conversion of currencies pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 574/72

(2002/C 185/02)

>TABLE>

1. Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 determines that the rate for the conversion into a currency of amounts denominated in another currency shall be the rate calculated by the Commission and based on the monthly average, during the reference period specified in paragraph 2, of reference rates of exchange of currencies published by the European Central Bank.

2. The reference period shall be:

- the month of January for rates of conversion applicable from 1 April following,

- the month of April for rates of conversion applicable from 1 July following,

- the month of July for rates of conversion applicable from 1 October following,

- the month of October for rates of conversion applicable from 1 January following.

The rates for the conversion of currencies shall be published in the second Official Journal of the European Communities ("C" series) of the months of February, May, August and November.