Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the "Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Helping SMEs to GO DIGITAL"
Date: 2001-09-19
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU aid, Structural Funds, information technology, new technology, small and medium-sized enterprises

C 19/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.1.2002

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the
Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions on Helping SMEs to “GO DIGITAL”’

(2002/C 19/05)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Helping SMEs to ‘Go-Digital’
(COM(2001) 136 final);

having regard to the decision of the Commission on 22 March 2001, under the first paragraph of Article
265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult it on this matter;

having regard to the decision of the President of the Committee of the Regions on 10 April 2001 to
instruct Commission 6 (Employment, Economic Policy, Single Market, Industry and SMEs) to draw up an
opinion on this subject;

having regard to the e-Europe 2002 Action Plan: An Information Society for All, endorsed by the Feira
European Council;

having regard to the conclusions of the Lisbon and Stockholm European Councils concerning further
policy actions with a view to making the EU the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based
economy in the world;

having regard to its opinion on the role of local and regional authorities in linking education and training
establishments to enterprises (CdR 346/96 fin) (1);

having regard to its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission — Challenges for Enterprise
Policy in the Knowledge-driven Economy and the proposal for a Council Decision on a Multiannual
Programme for Enterprise and Entrepreneurship (2001-2005) (CdR 185/2000 fin) (2);

having regard to its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and European
Parliament on ‘Innovation in a knowledge-driven economy’ (CdR 468/2000 fin) (3);

having regard to its Opinion on a Report of the Business Environment Simplification Task Force (BEST)
and the Commission Communication Promoting Entrepreneurship and Competitiveness — The
Commission’s response to the BEST Task Force report (CdR 387/1999 fin) (4);

having regard to its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission on a European initiative in
electronic commerce (CdR 350/97 fin) (5);

having regard to the draft Opinion (CdR 198/2001 rev.) adopted unanimously by Commission 6 on
2 July 2001 (rapporteur: Ms Hanniffy, IRL-PPE, Member of Offaly County Council, Member of Midlands
Regional Authority);

whereas SMEs are a key source of economic growth and creation of employment within the European
Union they have a relatively low usage of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) for
commercial transactions and face a number of barriers to capturing the potential that new technologies
have to offer,

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 40th plenary session of 19 and 20 September 2001
(meeting of 19 September).

(1) OJ C 116, 14.4.1997, p. 98.
(2) OJ C 22, 24.1.2001, p. 10.
(3) OJ C 253, 12.9.2001, p. 20.
(4) OJ C 293, 13.10.1999, p. 48.
(5) OJ C 180, 11.6.1998, p. 19.

22.1.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 19/15

1. The Committee of the Regions’ views regarding the

Communication

Digital development in common with adequate infrastructure
is a pre-requisite for socio-economic development.

1.1.
The Committee of the Regions welcomes the Com-
munication as an effort to highlight the barriers that SMEs
experience in maximizing their use of ICT and proposing a
range of actions to overcome these obstacles and helping SMEs
to go digital.

1.8.
The CoR accepts that while the knowledge-based
economy possesses great potential some regions will be in a
position to benefit more than others. The CoR would empha-
sise that the Go-Digital
initiative should address the real
problems that SMEs face, particularly in less-favoured, more
remote areas of the European Union.

1.2.
The Committee acknowledges the work that has been
achieved thus far to provide a more favourable environment
for the development of e-business, not least efforts to establish
a clear and predictable legal framework at the EU level.

2. The Committee of the Regions’ Recommendations

regarding the Communication

The Committee recognizes that quick and effective
1.3.
action is necessary in assisting SMEs to take advantage of ICT.
Given that only 42 % of Europe’s SME’s have access to the
Internet and the rapid pace of change of these technologies,
the CoR would strongly urge that the Go Digital initiative be
given a priority within the work of the Commission, and also
the Member States, as well as sufficient resources to ensure
that it achieves concrete results. The Committee feels that the
success or otherwise of this initiative could have a significant
impact on the EU’s future competitiveness.

1.4.
The Committee of the Regions is concerned that the
Go-Digital campaign will not achieve its broad objectives given
its reliance on a range of separate funding instruments and
supporting actions across a large number of policy areas with
different priorities.

1.5.
The Committee is concerned that individual funds will
promote digital usage at uneven rates between regions and
different sectors. The Committee would also question the
capability of mainstreaming the Information Society in the
Structural Funds and is concerned that such projects will not
secure adequate investment.

1.6.
The CoR is displeased that there is very little reference
to the role of local and regional authorities in the 11 Action
Areas that the Communication sets out. In this regard it draws
attention to the fact that local and regional authorities already
provide direct and indirect support to SMEs and have the
potential to contribute to many of the actions proposed for
the Go-Digital campaign.

1.7.
The Committee is extremely concerned at the possible
widening of the socio-economic gaps between regions, by
creating a digital divide. The Committee is of the view that
reliance on market forces alone may not address this issue.

2.1. Take-up of Digital Technology

2.1.1.
The Committee is concerned at the low take-up by
SMEs and considers that an integrated response addressing
areas such as skills, attitudes, education and support is required.
For this reason the Go-Digital initiative is most welcome but
the CoR has a concern that the synergy necessary to expedite
progress will not be achieved through uncoordinated action
by individual Member States and fund flows from separate
sources.

The CoR emphasises that the upgrading of skills
2.1.2.
Increased
must be addressed within existing programmes.
linkages between the formal educational system and the
activities of SMEs are required. The inclusion of an e-Digital
content in 3rd level curricula should become a norm and this
should apply to all courses including business scientific,
cultural and social. Initiatives such as e-Learning and EICTA
are welcome in this regard.

The Committee would highlight that a particular
2.1.3.
problem is the unavailability of skilled trainers in many
regions. This has resulted in the potential for under-utilisation
of existing hardware and software by SMEs. In addition to a
concentrated effort by the formal education system the CoR
underlines that imaginative solutions are required, for example:

— the development of one-to-one mentoring through exist-

ing networks;

— the expanded role of the ICT service sector in producing
inexpensive customer support systems, such as online
technical and e-learning supports specifically for SMEs;

— the utilisation of skills in existence within the public

service to support SMEs;

— the possibility of tax incentives for expenditure by SMEs

on ICT and e-learning.

C 19/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.1.2002

2.1.4.
The Committee considers that intra-national, inter-
national and in particular inter-regional networks need to be
strengthened and formalised. An increased role for existing
partnership arrangements (e.g. business associations) is necess-
ary. Initiatives similar to the ‘Follow-up on the “Go-Digital”
initiative’, DG Enterprise’s grant theme to organize national
and regional conferences must be repeated. This should
preferably take place at the beginning of 2002 to enhance the
networking process.

The hosting of a conference to discuss regional
2.1.5.
strategies and success stories in e-Business is recommended,
which, the Committee feels, could help accelerate the confi-
dence building process and a demand-led uptake of
ICT
technologies by SMEs.

2.1.6.
The Committee recommends that all support systems
for new start-up business should strongly encourage the
incorporation of e-Technology from the outset.

The small number of trials/best-practice actions to
2.1.7.
be carried out under the IST programme needs to be expanded
and supported in order to reach a wider audience.

2.2. Best use of Structural Funds and other funding instruments

2.2.1.
The Committee recognises the significant potential
offered by the 400 m Euro ERDF funding for the new
Innovative Actions initiative. There is a need to promote digital
technology as a driver of innovation by defining possibilities
previously unknown. This fund should prioritise such projects
as the Committee is concerned that ICT projects will not secure
adequate investment under the Structural Funds.

A more specific targeting of support for smaller
2.2.2.
is required to
SMEs (micro-enterprises of 1-9 employees)
increase their existing low levels of usage and to build on their
potential for job creation.

2.2.3.
The Committee considers that the benchmarking
process, set out in the Communication, should also include an
examination of the effectiveness of and synergy between funds
in relation to supporting SMEs and e-Technology usage.

2.2.4.
The CoR recognises that high cost is an issue for
SMEs, particularly in relation to ongoing maintenance and
support of e-Technology. A guide should be issued summaris-
ing the potential supports available to SMEs through the

Structural Funds and other support programmes. This should
be produced in an accessible user-friendly way to make access
to this information more straightforward for SMEs and
individual entrepreneurs.

2.3. The role of the public sector

2.3.1.
The Committee underlines the crucial role that can
be played by e-government and other public sector initiatives
in promoting the uptake of digital technology by SMEs. Initial
exposure to the knowledge-based economy frequently happens
through interactions with regions and Member States in
licences,
areas such as tax payment, VAT reconciliation,
patents/trademark applications and employee legislation. The
further development and co-ordination of e-government
initiatives can continue to reduce the regulatory burden on
SMEs.

2.3.2.
The attention of Member States’ initiatives should be
focused on the needs of SMEs. Programmes should be
re-prioritised, where relevant, to accelerate government to
business (G2B) activity in areas such as business registration,
state-assistance programmes, statistical returns, invoicing for
supply of goods and payment.

2.3.3.
The Committee sees the further development of local
governance as a key factor in future success. Proactive dialogue
with SMEs, digital democracy, public-private partnerships,
community development initiatives and the development of
local
initiatives which
exhibit the potential to business of the knowledge economy.

information hubs are examples of

2.3.4.
The Committee requests the Commission to advance
concrete proposals to enhance actions in these areas over the
next two years.

2.4. The role of regional and local governments

2.4.1.
The Committee welcomes reference to regional stra-
tegies in the Communication but is concerned that there is an
inadequate reference to the role of local and regional auth-
orities and asks for this to be addressed. Further consideration,
by the Commission, will be necessary to strengthen this role
in the implementing phases of the initiative.

The Committee is of the view that local and regional
2.4.2.
authorities’ role should be articulated in all appropriate
proposed actions. Areas such as benchmarking, information
dissemination, confidence and awareness-raising, the review
of funding mechanisms, public sector activity and monitoring
are proposed areas for concentrated regional and local involve-
ment.

22.1.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 19/17

2.5.

Social cohesion

2.7.2.
level should also be included in this process.

The CoR would also underline that actions at local

2.5.1.
The CoR is concerned by the slow provision of
broadband infrastructure in some isolated/rural regions, and it
would therefore welcome the Commission initiating a sharing
of experiences exercise between regions on supporting the
development of these or alternative infrastructures, such as
wireless technology.

2.7.3.
The Committee is concerned that the establishment
of a ‘benchmarking committee’, composed of a representative
from each Member State, will not have sufficient expertise and
knowledge to include and assess all regional and local actions,
given that in some Member States these national representa-
tives have little contact with local and regional authorities.

2.5.2.
The Committee notes that even where a broadband
infrastructure exists, there are insufficient opportunities in
some regions for firms, households, schools, libraries, etc. to
link up with it. It is often not economically worthwhile for
cable companies to install these connections. Without this
infrastructure it will be much more difficult to promote other
initiatives aimed at boosting internet use. The Committee
would ask that this problem be given greater priority and
financial assistance to provide for such connections.

2.7.4.
The Committee would again regret, as it has in
previous opinions, that local and regional authorities have
not been assigned a formal role in the open co-ordination
In developing and
methodology — the BEST process.
implementing a benchmarking process for regional and local
strategies supporting SMEs to use ICT it seems incomprehen-
sible that
local and regional authorities are not directly
involved.

2.5.3.
Accordingly the Committee recommends that par-
ticular attention should be paid to regional disparities in ICT
up-take during the current data collection/analysis phase and
that consideration should be given to re-prioritising existing
funding during the mid-term review stage should cohesion be
threatened.

2.7.5.
The CoR therefore calls for a systematic bench-
marking process at the regional level, including regional and
local authorities, and SMEs’ representatives, directly in the
process.

2.6.

Security and legal considerations

2.6.1.
The Committee recognises the progress that has been
made in this area. Concerns about cross-border trade that will
inhibit SMEs activities must be addressed. The production of a
user-friendly summary of the current situation and its wide-
spread dissemination to SMEs on a regional basis is rec-
ommended.

2.6.2.
The Committee would also welcome further efforts
to reduce concerns of consumers about exploitation and the
issue of redress. This would in turn ease the concerns of SMEs
that the lack of consumer confidence will cause them to lose
out to bigger and ‘better-known’ competitors.

2.7. Benchmarking

2.7.6.
The CoR would at the very least propose that there
should be an EU workshop on benchmarking local and
regional strategies for assisting SMEs to Go Digital and the
Committee is prepared to co-operate with the Commission in
this exercise.

2.8.

Implementation of the Initiative

2.8.1.
The Committee emphasises that time and the need
for quick and effective action are important in a rapidly
changing digital world. The planned programme of activities
must be accelerated by the Commission to ensure that
competitive advantage is optimised.

The CoR acknowledges the need for adequate moni-
2.8.2.
toring of ICT take-up by SMEs in formulating future actions.
This should not, however, be used as an excuse for postponing
interventions which are urgently required given the identified
low uptake of e-Digital technology by SMEs.

2.7.1.
The CoR considers that ongoing benchmarking will
be crucial to the Go-Digital initiative and welcomes efforts to
benchmark national and regional strategies to identify best
practice as well as helping to establish quantifiable targets for
the Go-Digital initiative, which it feels are essential.

2.8.3.
The monitoring groups being established in each
Member State must be adequately resourced and include
representatives active in the promotion and assistance of SME
development and local and regional authorities.

C 19/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.1.2002

2.8.4.
The CoR believes that in some cases the ability of the
Euro-Information Centres (EIC) to deliver some of the actions
as outlined in the Communication is questionable, given the
experience of these in some Member States. The CoR would
urge that a more interactive means of promoting Go Digital,
such as local authorities, be used in these cases.

Given that many of the barriers highlighted in the
2.8.5.
Communication require action at a number of levels and

across policy fields, the Committee would urge the various
Directorate Generals to develop cohesive and responsive
working relationships to ensure the success of the initiative.

2.8.6.
The CoR is prepared to co-operate, where possible,
with the Commission in the implementation of the Go-Digital
campaign and would urge the Commission to consider the
recommendations that it has made it this opinion.

Brussels, 19 September 2001.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Jos CHABERT

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive concerning
the status of Third Country nationals who are long-term residents’

(2002/C 19/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Proposal for a Council Directive concerning the status of third country nationals
who are long-term residents, (COM(2001) 127 fin — 2001/0074 (CNS));

having regard to the decision of the Bureau of the Committee of the Regions of 13 June 2001 under the
fifth paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to instruct
Commission 7 — Education, Vocational Training, Culture, Youth, Sport, Citizens’ Rights — to draw up
the relevant opinion;

having regard to the Draft Opinion (CdR 213/2001 rev.) adopted by Commission 7 on 29 June 2001
[rapporteur: Mr Panagiotis Rı´gas (EL/PSE)],

adopted unanimously the following opinion at its 40th plenary session on 19-20 September 2001
(meeting of 19 September).

Views and recommendations of the Committee of the
Regions

Recognises the importance of and the need for the
2.
European Commission’s efforts to harmonise the situation of
third-country nationals who are legally resident on a long-
term basis in a Member State.

The Committee of the Regions

1.
Agrees that there is an undoubted need today, and
for skilled and unskilled labour in
particularly in future,
the European Union, because of the constantly worsening
demographic problem. In order to meet that need it supports
the Commission’s idea of transforming the European Union
into an attractive area for third-country nationals to settle in,
by guaranteeing legal, economic and social rights equivalent
to those enjoyed by citizens of the European Union.

3.
Underlines the decisive role played by the local and
regional authorities in the clarification and public promotion
of the common values of ‘European culture’ which are linked
with migration, such as ethnic and cultural diversity and the
need to combat racism and xenophobia.