Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 189B(2)(d) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision adopting the 5th Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (1998-2002)
Date: 1998-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU action, EU programme, EU research policy, research and development, technological change

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels,  03.07.1998 
COM(1998) 422  final 

97/119 (COD) 

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION 
pursuant to Article 189 b (2) (d) of the EC Treaty, 
on the European Parliament's amendments 
to the Council's common position regarding the 

proposal for a 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL DECISION 

adopting the 5th Framework Programme of the 
European Community for research, technological development and 
demonstration activities (1998-2002) 

EXPLANATORY  MEMORANDUM 

Pursuant  to Article  189b (2) (d) of the EC Treaty, the Commission  is required  to deliver 
an opinion on amendments proposed by the European Parliament on second reading. 

The  Commission  sets  out  below  its  opinion  on  the  amendments  proposed  by  the 
European Parliament. 

1. 

Background 

30 April 1997 

COM - Initial proposal (EC and EURATOM) 

11 August  1997 

COM - 1st amended proposal (EC and  EURATOM) 

(Supplement concerning the overall amount of  funding) 

18 December 1997 

EP - Opinion on  1st reading (EC and EURATOM) 

14 January  1998 

COM  - 2nd  amended  proposal  (EC  and  EURATOM)  (following 

EP opinion) 

23 March 1998 

COUNCIL - Common position on FP 5 (EC) 

30 March 1998 

2 April 1998 

17 June 1998 

COM  -  Commission  communication  to  Parliament  on  the 
Council's common position 
EP  -  Receipt  by  Parliament  of  the  Council's  common  position 
and  explanatory  memorandum  for  2nd  reading,  and  receipt  by 
Parliament  of  the  political  agreement  on  EURATOM  (for 
information) 
EP  -  Adoption  of  35 amendments  to  the  Council's  common 
position 

2. 

Purpose of the proposal for a Decision 

Based  on  Article  130  i  of  the  Treaty,  the  aim  of  the  Framework  Programme  is  to 
strengthen  the  Union's  science  and  technology  base  and  encourage  its  competitiveness. 
The  5th Framework  Programme  (1998-2002) includes  among  its objectives  the  Union's 
major  socio-economic  needs  and  identifies  the  research  priorities  designed  to  address 
them. 

3. 

Commission opinion on Parliament's amendments on 2nd reading 

Introduction 

In accordance with Article 189b of the EC Treaty, the purpose of this opinion  is to set oui 
the Commission's position  on the amendments adopted  by Parliament  on 2nd  reading on 
17 June 1998. 

The  Commission's  opinion  should  make  it  possible  to  identify  the  essential  points  on 
which there is a convergence of views between Parliament  and Council  and those where 

their respective positions are still different.  Another aim is to ensure that the  co-decision 
procedure results  in a balanced  outcome  within  a time  limit  such  that  the  efficiency  and 
continuity of Community research activities are ensured. 

General assessment 

The  Commission  notes  the  convergence  of  views  between  the  three  institutions  on  the 
structure  and  scientific  and  technical  content  of  the  Framework  Programme.  The  broad 
strategic guidelines set out in the Commission's proposal  are confirmed  by the EP on its 
2nd reading; the need to concentrate efforts  is reaffirmed;  and the key actions, which  are 
essential  components  of the thematic programmes,  are regarded  as appropriate  means of 
mobilising the expertise needed in order to meet the expectations of society. 

The  Commission  also  sees  that  the  European  Parliament  wishes  to  assign  to  the  5th 
Framework  Programme  resources  commensurate  with  the  stated  objectives,  and  that 
Parliament 
for  an  overall  budget  of 
ECU 16.3 billion1 for the 5th Framework Programme, whereas the figure  in the Council's 
common position is much lower, namely ECU  14 billion. 

the  Commission's  proposal 

supports 

In  view  of  this,  the  Commission  has  opted  to  maintain  its  amended  proposal  of 
14 January  1998 and not to incorporate  in it amendments  other  than  the ones that  it had 
already taken over following the 1st reading. 

Analysis of the 2nd reading 

A significant  number of the amendments concern the breakdown of the overall amount of 
funding  and  its  links  with  the  financial  perspective  and  the  budgetary  decisions 
(Amendments 4 to 7, 9, 35). 

•  Parliament's  amendments  on  the  breakdown  of  the  overall  amount  are  indicative  of 
differences  of opinion about the major priorities of the future  Framework  Programme: 

-  Parliament wishes to increase the budget  for the thematic programme  "Quality  of  life 
and management  of living resources". The Commission  had itself assigned  priority  to 
this by nearly doubling the relative share for this area. Any further  increase in this part 
of  the  Framework  Programme  would  result  in  a  corresponding  reduction  in  other 
activities which are equally crucial in order to enhance the Union's competitiveness. 

-  This  is  the  case,  for  example,  with  the  4th  activity  concerning  human  potential: 
Parliament  would  have  to  reduce  the  support  for  the  mobility  of  researchers  and 
training through research. 

•  Parliament  wishes to reduce the constraints  resulting from the  link  with  the  financial 
perspective  in terms of the  implementation  of the  future  specific  programmes.  While 
sharing  the  EP's  concerns  in  this  respect,  the  Commission  finds  that  the  scenario 
envisaged,  namely  the  inconsistency  of  the  overall  amount  with  the  financial 

Parliament wishes  to assign  ECU 15 040 million  to the part covered  by the  EC Treaty  (the  only  one 
that is concerned by this 2nd reading). 

perspective or the absence of a new financial  perspective, is very hypothetical; it also 
considers that this could seriously jeopardise the chances of success  in the final  stage 
of the co-decision procedure. 

Another  series  of  amendments  concern  the  monitoring  and  implementation  of  the 
Framework Programme (Amendments 3, 8,  10 to 14) 

The Commission sees that Parliament wants to be more involved  in the implementation 
of  the  Framework  Programme.  It  notes  in  this  connection  that  Parliament  shares  its 
concern to combine the requirements relating to transparent implementation and efficient 
management. 

The amendments concern four broad types of functions: 

•  Technical  functions.  These  are  linked  to  the  modus  operandi  of  the  consultative 
groups for the key actions and the committees of independent experts to evaluate the 
research  proposals.  The  Commission  has  laid  down  and will  continue  to  lay  down 
internal operating rules to guarantee transparency. 

•  Monitoring.  This  makes  it possible  to  provide,  each  year,  elements  of  guidance  for 
each  programme.  The  monitoring  reports  are  accessible  and  made  available  to 
Parliament,  but  formal  transmission  would  place  an  extra  burden  on  programme 
implementation. 

•  Transmission of information and evaluations to Parliament and the Council. 

The  formal  transmissions  already  established  cover  all  Community  RTD  activities; 
they comprise: 

-  a very detailed annual report on research activities drawn up pursuant to Article 130p 

of the Treaty. 

-  a  five-year  evaluation  exercise  both  for  each  specific  programme  and  for  the 
Framework Programme as a whole, entailing a wide-ranging examination of activities 
in progress and resulting in a series of recommendations. 

•  Mid-term review of the Framework Programme. Given the decision-making rules now 
in force the guidelines adopted following  this exercise may not be adopted before the 
end of the period covered by the Framework Programme. 

Most of the other amendments concern specific  aspects of the content of the Framework 
Programme  and the participation  arrangements (Amendments 2,  15,  17, 22 to 25, 27 to 
29, 31 to 34, 36). 

•  The  Commission  shares  the  EP's  concern  about  the  need  to  facilitate  and  increase 
SME  participation  in  Community  research  activities,  but  this  must  be  achieved 
without  departing  from  the  objectives  of  the  Framework  Programme  or  the 
participation rules. 

•  Parliament wishes to create a new key action "Information society and social context". 
The Commission takes the view that this aspect, which is to a large extent covered by 

3 

the content of theme 2, will be addressed  all the more effectively  if it is tackled  in an 
integrated fashion within the existing key actions of this programme. 

•  Other  amendments  relating  to  the  scientific  and  technological  content  of  the 
Framework  Programme  would  result  in  a  dispersion  of  priorities  that  would  be 
detrimental  to  the  objective  of  targeting  and  concentration  which  is  the  underlying 
principle of the Commission's  proposal; some of them concern points  of detail  that it 
is more appropriate to address at the level of the specific programmes. 

In general, for many of the issues raised, Parliament will find more details, which  should 
broadly satisfy  its expectations, in the proposals concerning the specific  programmes. 

In any case, a significant  number of amendments (Amendments  1, 16,  18 to 21, 30), most 
of  which  make  useful  additions  or  clarifications  to  the  content  of  the  Framework 
Programme, have already been taken up in the Commission's  revised  proposal  following 
the  first  reading:  on  all  these  points  the  Commission  can  only  confirm  its  support  for 
Parliament's amendments. 

Conclusion 

The  Commission  has  opted  to  maintain  its  amended  proposal  without  including  in  it 
amendments  other  than  the  ones  that  it  had  already  taken  up,  as  they  stand  or  in  large 
degree, following the 1st reading. 

The  Commission  is  well  aware  that  further  efforts  to  achieve  convergence  between 
Parliament  and  Council  will  have  to  be  made  on  the  basis  of  the  amendments  arising 
from  Parliament's  2nd  reading  and  it  is  determined  to  work  towards  an  overall 
compromise in the context of the conciliation procedure. 

The  Commission  renews  its  appeal  to  Council  and  Parliament  to  keep  Community 
research  efforts  at  the  appropriate  level,  while  ensuring  the  continuity  of  the  Union's 
research and technological development activities. 

Summary table 

Amendments  accepted  by  the Commission  16, 21; 
(incorporated  in  the  amended  proposal  of 
14 January  1998) 

taken  up  by 

Amendments  the  substance  of  which  has  1, 18 to 20, 30; 
been 
the  Commission 
(incorporated  in  the  amended  proposal  of 
14 January  1998) 

Amendments rejected 

2 to  15,17, 22 to 25, 27 to 29, 31 to 36 

I 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(98) 422  final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

15  06  04 

Catalogue  number  :  CB-C0-98-426-EN-C 

ISBN 92-78-37822-4 

Office  for Official  Publications of the European Communities 

L-2985 Luxembourg 

1