Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "Request by the European Commission for the Committee to draw up an exploratory opinion in anticipation of the Commission Communication on health and safety at work"
Date: 2001-07-11
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: application of EU law, drafting of EU law, employment policy, occupational health, occupational safety

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/97

have to identify, preferably at an early stage, what the fall-back
position will be if their negotiating stance on key elements is
not acceptable to the EU.

derogations and transition periods which are currently being
enjoyed by existing Member States or to expect that the
standard of enforcement in the accession countries should be
higher than in the present Union.

4.10. While it
is generally accepted in Malta that an
application to join the European Union implies a commitment
to adopt the acquis communautaire and that there can be no
question of an ‘à la carte Europe’, there is a belief that it is
unreasonable to refuse to extend to the applicant countries

4.11.
In terms of economic, political and social develop-
ment and in relation to the progress made with the adoption
of the acquis, Malta is well-placed to be in the forefront of
states entering the Union. The question remains of whether
the political will exists to achieve this.

Brussels, 11 July 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘Request by the European Commission for
the Committee to draw up an exploratory opinion in anticipation of the Commission
Communication on health and safety at work’

(2001/C 260/18)

On 12 December 2000, in a letter by Commissioner Diamantopoulou, the Commission requested the
Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community,
to draw up an exploratory opinion in anticipation of the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 June 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Etty and
the co-rapporteur was Mrs Schweng.

At its 383rd plenary session of 11 and 12 July 2001 (meeting of 11 July), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 123 votes to 1, with four abstentions.

1.

Introduction

— to respond to new risks such as work-related stress, by

initiatives on standards and exchanges of good practice;

1.1.
The Nice summit adopted the European social agenda
for the years to come and outlined, under the heading
‘Anticipating and capitalising on change in the working
environment by creating a new balance between flexibility and
security’, that the Commission should develop the Community
strategy on health and safety at work on the basis of a
Communication. The Council also outlined the cornerstones
for this new strategy:

— to promote the application of legislation in SMEs, taking
into account the special constraints to which they are
exposed, to apply them by means of a specific pro-
gramme;

— to develop, from 2001 onwards, exchanges of good
practice and collaboration between labour inspection
institutions in order to satisfy the common essential
requirements more effectively.

— to consolidate, adapt and, where appropriate, simplify

existing standards;

Furthermore, under the heading ‘More and better
1.1.1.
jobs’ it was stated that in its employment policy it wants to
focus more on attaining quality in work and its importance

C 260/98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

for growth as a significant attractive factor and as an incentive
to work. The Commission should pay attention to the
contribution of employment policy to quality of work (in
particular as regards, among others, health and safety).

1.2.
As the European Commission has asked the Economic
and Social Committee to give an own-initiative opinion on a
new strategy of safety and health at work, the Committee
would like to draw attention to its opinion adopted in
December 1999(1), where the following questions were raised:

— How can European health and safety legislation be made

more effective?

— How can the link between employability and health and

safety be strengthened?

— How can new health and safety risks be dealt with?

Answers given to these questions explored in particu-
1.2.1.
lar the way in which the EU’s non-legislative role should be
better promoted and highlighted, without prejudicing the
EU’s legislative role. Information and awareness campaigns,
reference material, training, bench marking, and research have
been addressed in this connection, in particular as regards the
link between health and safety at work and employability on
the one hand, and the way new risks should be addressed on
the other.

1.3. While the Commissioner makes an explicit reference
in her request to the December 1999 Opinion, she asks the
Committee to help her develop ideas on ‘what role legislation
could play alongside other measures such as the social
dialogue, soft
law — interpretative communications and
guides, particularly on new health hazards — information
campaigns, etc.’.

1.3.1.
complementary to the earlier one.

Therefore,

the present Opinion is meant

to be

1.4.
Considering the rate of work accidents as an indicator
of the situation, the most recent statistics published by Eurostat
are quite encouraging.

1.4.1.
The figures show that there has been a clear down-
ward trend in work-related accidents with more than three
days absence between 1994 and 1996: they decreased by
3,3 %. The reduction in fatal accidents by more than 13 % is

even more remarkable. Recent statistics produced by Eurostat
indicate that this trend might be stagnating for the period
1996/1998, and that the increased level of economic activity
did not translate in an increase of work-related accidents.
While noting these trends, the Committee remains worried
over the figures which remain very high in absolute terms:
4,7 million people were victims of work related accidents in
1996, i.e. more than 3,6 % of the working population, and
more than 5 500 people died as a result of a work-related
accident. Another point of major concern is the large difference
found between Member States.

1.4.2.
On the other hand one must take into account that
Eurostat data do not shed much light on the so-called new
risks, like stress, repetitive strain injury (RSI) and musculo-
sckeletal disorders (MSD). The trends measured by Eurostat
must be complemented with the findings of the Foundation
for the Improvement of Living and Working conditions in
their 2000 Third European Survey, based on interviews with
21 000 workers from all Member States (2). While workers’
perceptions of their health and safety being at risk due to
occupational activities has shown an improvement in the
period 1990-2000, an increasing proportion is reporting work
related health problems. Musculo-sceletal disorders and overall
fatigue are on the rise whereas stress remains at the same level,
as in the 1995 survey. The Foundation thinks that it has also
identified a trend, based on three surveys since 1990: working
conditions are not improving. Findings in the Foundation’s
survey have been corroborated by national labour statistics of
certain Member States, e.g. as regards RSI.

2. General remarks

2.1.
The Community’s strategy for health and safety at
work should make a major contribution to the Nice summit’s
objective of creating better jobs as well as more jobs. That
objective requires more to be done to improve the working
environment, in particular by managing those old and new
hazards which are the most risk for workers’ health. It also
requires that the Community’s occupational health and safety
strategy address not only the effects of work on health, but
also the effects of health on work,
for example making
reasonable adjustments to the working environment to enable
disabled people to return to and participate in the labour
market.

(1) OJ C 51, 23.2.2000 — Health and safety in the workplace —

Application of Community measures and new risks.

(2) Ten Years of Working conditions in the European Union.

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/99

2.2.
As new technologies, new products and new industries
develop rapidly, the Community needs to have a strategy in
place, which should look forward as well as back, and should
enable people to manage new risks safely. In addition to
researching into past events and existing illnesses, and manag-
ing traditional hazards through prohibitions, restrictions and
substitution, the Community needs to have a strategy in place
to address the hazards of the future.

To respond more effectively to the views of the citizens
2.3.
of Europe that corporate responsibility for health and safety is
a major issue, the Community ’s strategy needs to focus on
more than just compliance with minimum health and safety
standards as set out in Directives. It should take measures to
encourage employers, workers and others to go beyond
compliance, and put their commitment to better jobs and
healthier working environments into practice, devoting par-
ticular attention to the new risks related to atypical employ-
ment or to work which is contracted out. This objective can
mainly be achieved by raising the awareness of the fact that
‘good health and safety is good business’ (1). Guidance for the
development of mechanisms (including corporate responsi-
bility for health and safety) that stimulate employers to develop
their own procedures for improving the quality of working life
is of utmost importance.

2.4.
The issue of health and safety is too important to be
left only to the experts, professionals and public authorities.
Employers and workers should be given more responsibility
and control over the health and safety system in Europe, and
that should be reflected in the importance which health and
safety has in the thinking and actions of politicians. This
requires mainstreaming of health and safety issues into other
policy areas,
in particular the internal market, as well as
training and awareness raising through the European Social
Fund. There is therefore a need to take a stand on views
expressed in relation to these other fields.

3. Specific remarks

3.1.

Legislative measures

3.1.1.
As regards legislative measures the Committee main-
tains that the European Commission must have a balanced

(1) European Agency for Safety and Health at Work Conference
‘Good safety and health is good business for Europe’ September
1997.

policy combining legislative and non-legislative measures. It
acknowledges that the legislative role of the Commission
continues to be important, and endorses the Commission’s
role of assessing and monitoring the way legislation is
implemented and to suggest improvements.

3.1.2. A s s e s s m e n t

o f

t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n

o f

D i r e c t i v e s

All directives in the field of health and safety
3.1.2.1.
require the member states to notify the measures applied when
implementing European legislation into national
law and
practice and to report after some time (four or five years in
most of the cases) on the implementation of the application of
the Directives.

reports and considers that

The Committee stresses the importance of these
3.1.2.2.
national
they should be an
important starting point for any amendment of directives. In
order to fulfil this function adequately, the Committee con-
siders it to be essential that the national reports include the
views of national workers and employers organisations and
should be discussed with them before being sent to the
European Commission.

3.1.2.3.
The Commission should draw a synthesis report of
the national reports and submit this synthesis report to the
tripartite Advisory Committee on Safety Hygiene and Health
in Luxembourg. The Luxembourg Committee will then be
given the opportunity to adopt an opinion on the content of
the synthesis report. The Economic and Social Committee
wishes to draw the Commission’s attention to the opinion
adopted by the Advisory Committee in 1999 on the implemen-
tation of directives.

3.1.2.4.
This procedure will help to decide if amendments
of existing legislation are necessary, if workers (e.g. domestic
servants, armed forces, police or specific civil protection
services) still excluded from the scope of the framework
directive should be included, or if certain exemptions are still
justified. The Committee wishes to stress, that the legal control
of
the
the implementation measures is just one part of
exercise and that, in order to have an overall picture of the
implementation in the Member States, it is also necessary to
assess in a concrete and practical way the implementation at
the workplaces. The Committee considers that this requires
involvement and commitment of all actors concerned (public
authorities, social partners, management and employee rep-
resentatives) at all levels (EU, national, company, interpro-
fessional and sectoral).

C 260/100

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

3.1.3. M e a s u r e s t o r a i s e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f

l e g i s l a t i o n

3.1.3.1.
The Committee dedicated a large part of its earlier
mentioned Own Initiative Opinion to the question how
European legislation can be made more effective, especially as
regards new risks which require new approaches. The Com-
mittee recalls how responsibility could be shared between
national and European level:

3.1.3.2.

At the European level:

— more focused objectives;

— definition of

the arrangements for monitoring and

assessing the success of the objective;

— establish — with the help of the relevant sectors —
what tools are available (research, practical solutions,
information campaigns);

and in a number of areas, the Commission’s strategy for
securing better jobs will require improvements in the infra-
structure of health and safety, such as rehabilitation and
occupational health services.

Despite the existing legislation on specific hazards,
3.1.4.2.
there are still areas where the legislation needs to be improved
or extended, and areas where specific legislation is needed, in
addition to the general requirements of
the Framework
Directive. As well as assessing the implementation of existing
Directives, the Commission needs to have regard to reports
from the Bilbao Agency, Dublin Foundation, and others, which
indicate where problems exist. Examples of such issues are
asbestos, noise, vibration and harassment, where legislation is
already being prepared, repetitive and monotonous work, and
non-ionising radiation. Here the Committee would refer to its
opinion of 8 December 1999, which calls for a prior social
and economic assessment of proposed legislation.

— decide how to involve the social partners.

3.1.5.

S i m p l i f i c a t i o n
t h e l e g i s l a t i o n

a n d

c o d i f i c a t i o n

o f

3.1.3.3.

At the national level:

— establish — with the help of the relevant sectors — certain
implementation arrangements, according to certain target
groups and activities;

— establish monitoring and inspection arrangements and

procedures;

— inform and educate employers and employees, in cooper-

ation with the social partners.

the identification of

3.1.5.1.
The Committee endorses the Commission’s inten-
tion to codify and simplify, when necessary, the European
directives in the field of safety and health. In this regard, the
Committee considers that
the legal
provisions that should be subject to simplification should
primarily result from the discussions on the assessment of the
concrete application of the directives. As the Commission itself
has stated earlier, codification and simplification must not
change the substance of existing instruments but rather
contribute to improve the structure and transparency of
occupational health and safety legislation as well as to the
reduction of unnecessary red tape.

In this connection, the Committee stresses once
3.1.3.4.
more the importance at all
levels, from primary schools
upwards, of education and training for the raising of risk
awareness and the promotion of a prevention culture.

3.1.5.2.
Simplification and codification should not be
restricted to the European level, but also be undertaken of the
Member State level in order to reach the same objective.

3.1.3.5.
Furthermore, special attention should be paid to
the training of management, in particular of smaller business,
and workers in order to enable them better to fulfil the
responsibilities given to them under the framework Directive.
European Social Fund means could be used for this purpose.

3.2.

Soft law and other non-legislative measures

3.1.4. C o m p l e t i n g t h e l e g i s l a t i o n

As indicated above, there is a need to create
3.1.4.1.
the framework for greater corporate understanding of their
responsibility and therefore commitment to health and safety,

3.2.1.
The Committee stresses the importance of not only
a consolidated European legislative framework but also of
non-legislative measures designated to assist both employers
and employees in the practical implementation of health and
safety at the work place. Particular interest should be paid in
the context to small and medium sized enterprises (SME).

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/101

3.2.2.
Point of departure has always been and continues to
be that there is no reason to exempt SMEs from health and
safety legislation, but that every possible effort must be made
to help them to comply with it and to promote it at their
workplaces. Training for employers and workers is of crucial
importance in this respect. The Committee also considers that
there is a need for a health and safety culture to be established
through awareness training programmes for these enterprises,
which often do require tailor-made help and a sector-specific
approach. The social partners, in particular those organisations
at branch level, have a special role to play in creating such
training programmes, which should be co-financed through
the European Social Fund.

The Committee therefore welcomes the reference to
3.2.3.
a special SME-programme in the Social Policy agenda designed
to promote the application of legislation in SMEs and taking
into account the special constraints to which they are exposed.
The Committee, however, considers that SMEs should not be
seen as a homogeneous category. Optimisation of actions
developed for SMEs require further differentiation according
to the size and the sector. This would allow better identification
of each sub-category, its needs and requirements. One example
of specific assistance to SMEs to fulfil their obligations is the
European Parliament grant of EUR 5 million to the Bilbao
Agency in order to prepare for a multiannual programme on
SMEs. The results of these preparatory measures will provide
the European Commission with useful
information before
drafting the multiannual SME-programme. The Committee
considers that programmes of this nature are the best way
to accompany the concrete implementation of European
legislation and wishes therefore that these EUR 5 million are
not just an isolated measure, but the starting point for a
broader programme.

3.2.4.
One example of good implementation of workers’
responsibilities for health and safety conditions, as established
under the Framework Directive, is the roving and regional
safety representative scheme as established in Sweden. The
choice of the appropriate form would depend on the respective
health and safety systems of Member States.

setting precise targets for all Members States aiming to reduce
work-related accidents and the incidence of occupational
illness. These joint precise targets should be set on the basis of
an evaluation of experiences made so far in the Member States
where such targets have been introduced (including for
instance, problems related to definition, monitoring, how to
ensure compliance, voluntary versus, obligatory systems, etc.),
followed by a pilot study. This could help the proper prep-
aration and operationalisation of the proposed approach. The
way the jointly set targets will be reached could be left
completely to the discretion of the Member States. They should
be jointly monitored, and periodically Member Sates should
report on the substance of their policies so as to allow a joint
assessment of successful and less successful methods, as well
as of progress made. Target setting and monitoring at the
European level allows for adequate tailor-made solutions
where and when needed. The Committee attaches great
importance to the work of the Dublin foundation where
indicators for the quality of work are being drawn up.

3.3.3.
The Committee also calls for measures as regards
risk factors not yet sufficiently reflected in health and safety
statistics, like RSI or psychosocial factors (stress, coping at
fatigue). The formulation of common
work and overall
definitions which allows for benchmarking in these fields
should be done as one of the first measures.

3.4. Actors in the field of health and safety

Each of the actors at European and national level in the field
of health and safety has a special role to play. The Committee
considers that success in this field requires proper involvement
and commitment of all actors concerned in their respective
areas of responsibilities and proper articulation between the
company, local, national and EU levels. In order to fulfil their
tasks properly, all actors at EC level working in the field of
occupational health and safety should be adequately financed
and staffed.

3.3. Towards a new approach for the improvement of health and

safety at work in practice

3.3.1.
In its 1999 Opinion, the Committee already pointed
to the opportunity of including health and safety in the
Employment Policy Guidelines. For the year 2001 Council
decided to do so: guideline 14 makes a reference to this effect.

3.3.2.
The Committee thinks that the method of open co-
ordination in the field of health and safety is appropriate as an
additional device for re-invigorating occupational health and
safety policy in the European Union, in particular, in terms of

3.4.1.

E u r o p e a n C o m m i s s i o n

3.4.1.1.
The Committee observes that occupational health
and safety policy is too often regarded as limited to experts.
The Committee stresses that this field of EU social policy is of
prime importance and should not be confined in a closed
circle of technicians and other insiders. Its political visibility
must be improved and the EU institutions should ensure
proper coordination between safety and health policy and
other relevant EU policies (employment, public health, internal
market, research, environment, etc.)

C 260/102

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

3.4.1.2.
It is obvious that the European Commission’s own
ability to play its initiating role in a satisfactory way is very
much dependent on adequate financing and staffing. In the
recent past, these units have been considerably downsized.
The Committee calls on the relevant institutions adequately to
staff and finance the relevant units of the European Com-
mission, in order to enable them properly to fulfil their present
as well as new tasks, for which it has made a number of
suggestions above. The Committee has addressed this matter
in earlier opinions with some concern.

3.4.1.3.
This is all the more worrying if one considers the
considerable burden of work which will be connected with the
future enlargement of the EU.

3.4.4. D u b l i n F o u n d a t i o n

The Foundation for the improvement of the living and working
conditions carries out important research in the field of health
and safety. The regular monitoring of working conditions
provides useful
information on the perception of working
conditions by the workers themselves. The Committee con-
siders it also essential for the Foundation to develop tools
the efforts developed by
aiming at better evaluation of
companies for the improvement of working conditions, in
particular regarding occupational safety and health.

3.4.2.

E u r o s t a t

Eurostat provides data on work-related accidents. The Com-
mittee considers that further efforts should be developed,
especially at national level, in order to ensure better compara-
bility and accuracy of the data collected. The Committee
attaches great importance to the recent programme developed
by Eurostat aiming at harmonising statistics on the causes of
work-related accidents. This will form a sound basis to better
preventative strategies. There is also a need to extend the
collection and availability of statistical data on occupational
illnesses. Careful attention must also be devoted to the
collection of data on new risks, including those related to the
development of atypical forms of work contract.

3.4.3. B i l b a o A g e n c y

The European Agency for Safety and Health — established in
1995 — has its main task in providing and disseminating
systematic information on health and safety to the European
institutions, the Member States, to social partners, as well as
to employers and workers at workplaces. A recent evaluation
showed clearly that the Agency has succeeded in establishing
a network via national focal points, but that further efforts are
necessary in order to meet the information needs of all target
groups. The Committee believes that the Agency could be of
special importance in identifying and disseminating examples
of good practices, which would help employers and workers
to find solutions to specific health and safety problems. In the
context of the ‘changing world and work’, the Agency should
make a special effort to identify, explore and provide infor-
mation about trends in health and safety. The collaboration
between the Dublin Foundation —especially the Observatory
on Change — and the Bilbao Agency in this respect should be
reinforced.

3.4.5. A d v i s o r y

f o r
H y g i e n e a n d H e a l t h ( A C S H H )

C o m m i t t e e

S a f e t y

The Economic and Social Committee believes that the ACSHH
should play a central role in the implementation of the future
Community strategy in the field of occupational safety and
health and invited the Commission to launch the reform
process as required by the ACSHH itself in an opinion adopted
in 2000.

3.4.6.

S o c i a l d i a l o g u e

3.4.6.1.
The Treaty of Amsterdam incorporated the social
dialogue procedure into the Treaty of the European Union.
Therefore new proposals in the field of health and safety are
submitted to the same consultation procedure of the social
partners as is all social policy. The relation between the
ACSHH and the social partners has to be clarified along the
lines of the social partner agreement on the application of the
Social Chapter to health and safety at work of October 2000.

In this agreement social partners called on the
3.4.6.2.
Commission not to infringe on their prerogatives by consulting
the ACSHH instead of the social partners. The social partners
should be consulted on the direction of a possible new
initiative, but the second consultation could be conferred to
the ACSHH, provided that the social partners decide not to
take up negotiations on the proposal in question.

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/103

3.4.6.3.
The Committee supports the agreement. It believes
that the social partners themselves need to find adequate
solutions to link sectoral European organisations to the
horizontal European organisations in order to guarantee the
maintenance of the right to be consulted.

must provide for reinforced articulation and coordination
between the national and the EU levels. This appears as a key
for the success of all actions to be developed in this field.

convinced that

The Committee remains

3.4.6.4.
the
employers and workers have an important role to play in
addition to the legislator, firstly in the consultative process
concerning the development of the legislation, and secondly
in the development of
tools for the implementation of
legislation.

3.4.7. M e m b e r S t a t e s

3.4.7.1.
Traditionally, the Community’s health and safety
strategy has only required Member States to put obligations
on employers. But Member States themselves have responsi-
bilities for health and safety and these should be emphasised.
Member States should be examples of good practice no less
than the Commission, with the highest standards of health and
safety applying to the staff of the Member States, and also in
public procurement.

3.4.7.2. Member States should also be given clear guidance
(and requested to report back) on the inclusion of measures to
promote risk literacy in public education and training, the
inclusion of rehabilitation opportunities in state compensation
systems, the penalties applied to breaches of health and safety
legislation, and the performance of the agencies responsible
for inspecting health and safety. In particular, Member States
should ensure that their health systems have the objective of
returning people of working age to the labour market when
they suffer an injury, illness or disability (i.e. not just having
the objective of making them well again). It should also be
noted that when allocating public funds for preventive
measures in the workplace, it is important to remember that
this type of expense actually has a positive impact on the
public finances since it helps avoid incurring twice the expense
in terms of healthcare and wasted employment opportunities.

3.5. Articulation EU/National levels

The Committee considers that the implementation of the
future Community strategy on occupational health and safety

3.6.

Enlargement

3.6.1.
The acquis in the field of health and safety is an
important part of the social acquis to be accepted by the
candidate countries during the negotiations. Transitional per-
iods for the implementation should be avoided as far as
possible in order to guarantee for health and safety of workers
in the candidate countries as well as to avoid distortion of
competition between ‘old’ and ‘new’ Member States.

3.6.2.
If transitional periods are inevitable they should be
as short as possible. Exemptions should not refer to the
whole directive but only to these regulations that cannot
be implemented immediately. Such exemptions must not,
however, result in the extension of the transitional periods.

3.6.3.
The Committee recalls that not only the legal
implementation has to be monitored but also the practical
application at the workplaces. This requires the establishment
of well-functioning labour
in the candidate
countries.

inspections

In order to prepare the candidate countries for the
3.6.4.
health and safety acquis, partnership programmes together
with institutions and organisations from the Member States
should be reinforced and adequately financed.

4. EU-ILO relations as regards occupational health and

safety

4.1.
The Committee urges the European Commission to
intensify its cooperation with the ILO in the field of occu-
pational health and safety. It also draws the Commission’s
attention to the fact that ratification by EU Member States of
ILO occupational health and safety Conventions in the past
twenty years has been poor, although the level of protection
provided for by these instruments is generally well below the
EU’s. While the Committee is aware that ratification of ILO
Conventions is the prerogative of Member States, it notes that
the Commission’s competence as regards occupational health

C 260/104

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

and safety policies has, at
the period
mentioned, influenced the ratification behaviour of Member
States.

for part of

least

4.2.
Improving the current state of affairs is in the interest
of employers and workers not only in the EU, but also in
developing countries, whose Governments now withhold
ratification, using the false argument that if highly developed

Brussels, 11 July 2001.

countries such as the EU Member States cannot meet the
standards set by the ILO, they certainly cannot be expected to
do so.

4.3. With a view to the above, the Committee requests the
European Commission to discuss this issue with the Member
States in the near future. It hopes that this initiative will
contribute to an improved ratification of the relevant Conven-
tions in the next few years.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council and the European Parliament on a Community immigration policy’

(2001/C 260/19)

On 1 February 2001 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 June 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Pariza
Castan˜ os and the co-rapporteur was Mr Mengozzi.

At its 283rd plenary session (meeting of 12 July 2001), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the
following opinion by 61 votes to two with 16 abstentions.

1.

Introduction

A number of principles need to be restated if immi-

1.1.
gration issues are to be tackled effectively:

1.1.1.
UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (1).

Emigration is a basic right recognised as such in the

1.1.2.
Sometimes, emigration is a venture freely embarked
upon by individuals in order to fulfil their own personal goals,

family, economic or
whether they be of a professional,
other nature. Often, however, it is a necessity dictated by
unacceptable living conditions and bleak prospects.

1.1.3.
The public authorities are therefore duty-bound to
enable this right to be exercised, promoting consensus among
the host population; they must also manage migratory flows
in a responsible manner.

(1) Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states
that (1) everyone has the right to freedom of movement and
residence within the borders of each state (2) everyone has the
right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his
country.

The history of

1.1.4.
the last 250 years in particular
demonstrates that migration happens regardless of the some-
times violent hostility of those who — convinced that they are
safeguarding their own well-being and identity — reject
integration with others, even when a variety of
factors,
including economics, make integration useful or even essential.