Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "Romania on the road to accession"
Date: 2002-07-17
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: European Economic and Social Committee, Romania, company constituted under civil law, economic situation, political situation, social dialogue, social situation

C 241/110

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘Romania on the road to accession’

(2002/C 241/22)

At its plenary session on 1 March 2001, the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23 of its
Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on ‘Romania on the road to accession’.

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the
subject, adopted its opinion on 27 June 2002. The rapporteur was Mr Bedossa.

At its 392nd Plenary Session of 17 and 18 July 2002 (meeting of 17 July 2002), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 124 votes in favour, one vote against and two abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
Romania started European Agreement negotiations in
May 1992 and completed them in February 1993. Following
the establishment of an interim trade agreement, which came
into force in 1993, Romania became an associate member of
the EU in February 1995. Romania submitted its application
for EU membership on 22 June 1995. After consultation with
the Commission, the Council of Ministers decided on 17 July
1995 to apply the procedure set out in Article 49 of the EC
Treaty. The European Agreement now provides the legal basis
for relations between Romania and the EU.

1.2.
In 1997 the Luxembourg European Council instructed
the European Commission to draw up regular reports on the
progress made by each of the candidate states. These reports
are of particular importance to the accession negotiation
process which depends upon the reports. In 1997, as part of
Agenda 2000, the Commission presented the first official
Opinion on Romania’s application for EU membership. The
latest of the Commission’s regular reports on Romania was
published in November 2001. The present own-initiative
opinion takes account of this report.

2. General comments

The aim of this opinion is to provide a review of the
2.1.
situation encountered in Romania, presented under a number
of socio-economic headings. The European Economic and
Social Committee (EESC) wishes to highlight the role played
by the socio-economic interest groups in the process of
Romania’s accession to the EU and the views of these groups
on this issue.

It is essential for Romania’s successful accession to the
2.2.
EU that the vital role of organised civil society in a democratic
society be not only recognised in theory but also enshrined in
practice, both through social dialogue (involving employers,
trade unions and, where appropriate, government) and also
through civil dialogue (structured bilateral and multilateral
communication between government and NGOs and other
interest groups).

2.3.
The opinion does not seek simply to list the progress
made by Romania since the last regular report published by
the Commission in November 2001 nor to reiterate the
assessments made by the European Parliament on this matter.
The aim is rather to set out the standpoint of the European
Economic and Social Committee (EESC), based on an assess-
ment of the situations which have been encountered.

2.4. The development and behaviour of organised civil society

2.4.1.
The 1924 Act authorised the establishment of associ-
ations and foundations in Romania. The desire on the part of
Romanian society to form associations has been demonstrated
over the last few years by the establishment of new associations
and foundations and by an increase in the number of NGOs.

2.4.2.
The existence of favourable legal provisions and the
involvement of a number of players — both public and private
— has made it possible for civil society to develop along
positive lines in Romania. This positive trend has also been
demonstrated by the location of NGOs which, since their first
appearance in Romania, tended to be set up more in urban
areas but are now also to be found in rural areas. Major
progress was also made in the field of the relations between
NGOs and public authorities, which are starting to view
NGOs as partners who can help resolve real socio-economic
problems, rather than as ‘pressure groups’. This demonstrates
that society in general in Romania has attained a certain level
of civic maturity.

2.4.3.
On the negative side, however, there is a considerable
shortage of financial, human and material resources, the level
of which falls well behind the actual requirements of civil
society in Romania. Attention should also be drawn to the
reticence of a number of people, who are afraid of any
‘organised’ activity. This reticence is a product of the mentalities
encountered during the communist era.

2.4.4.
A new general regulatory framework relating to
organised civil society was set in place by a 2002 Government

7.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 241/111

Decree, which set out provisions governing the establishment,
organisation and operation of associations, foundations, NGOs
and other bodies.

stage, Romania could count on increased support from the
EU. Against
the Romanian government
presented, on 18 December 2001, its strategy for speeding up
the accession negotiations.

this background,

2.4.5.
The role of the social partners was strengthened by
the establishment in 1998 of the Romanian Economic and
Social Council (RESC). Social dialogue committees have been
set up in all ministries and prefectures; these committees have
to be consulted on matters relating to economic restructuring
and privatisation.

2.4.6.
The EESC highlights the inadequacy of the present
framework for civil dialogue in Romania and the fact that
NGOs have no possibility of engaging in formal talks with the
Romanian government.

2.4.7.
The representatives of the RESC have asked the EESC
to provide technical support with a view to strengthening
organised civil society in Romania and relieving organisational
management shortcomings and the resulting difficulties.

2.5. Development of the social dialogue and the role played by the
Romanian Economic and Social Committee (RESC) in this
development

In April 2002, Mr Verheugen announced that the
2.6.2.
forward a more
European Commission intended to put
elaborate pre-accession strategy and a guide for all
those
candidate states which would be unable to conclude their
accession negotiations in 2002. He made reference in that
context to Romania and Bulgaria.

2.6.3.
On 17 January 2002 the Romanian government
adopted a new special national programme with the aim of
opening all the chapters of the negotiations in 2002, and
completing the negotiations in 2003 or early 2004 at the
latest.

In March 2002, the Romanian Minister for Foreign
2.6.4.
Affairs requested the EU to present a new timetable for the
negotiations and to set out precise financial terms in respect
of Romania’s accession to the EU. The minister highlighted the
that the failure to include Romania in the financial
fact
planning prior to 2006 presented a major obstacle to his
country’s accession to the EU which would prevent it from
joining the EU before 2006, even if Romania was ready for
accession before that date.

The Romanian government has

2.5.1.
recognised the
importance of social dialogue in Romania. With a view to
promoting social dialogue, the Romanian government decided
to sign a Social Agreement with the trade unions and
employers’ federations, mapping out joint social, economic
and legislative priorities.

3. Specific comments

3.1. Democracy and the rule of law

2.5.2.
The presence of the RESC as a partner for the
government played a very important role during the tran-
sitional period; despite this, only a small number of draft laws
having important economic and social implications have been
submitted to the RESC.

3.1.1.
The legislature, which was for a long time in a state
of paralysis, was improved following the elections held at the
end of 2000 with the reform of the two chambers, with a view
to accelerating the procedure for adopting priority legal acts,
including the texts relating to Romania’s accession to the EU.

Under the amended Act 109 of 1997 on the
2.5.3.
organisation and operation of the RESC, powers and responsi-
bilities are to continue to be transferred to the social partners.
Although a declaration has been made on the transfer of
powers, no precise date has been set for this to happen.

The Romanian government has appointed a minister
3.1.2.
responsible for relations with parliament and the secretaries of
state in all the implementing ministries. The government has
also cut down on the use of decrees and emergency decrees in
order to safeguard legislative procedures.

2.6. Recent events in the accession process

2.6.1.
In the course of his visit to Timisoara on 17 Decem-
ber 2001, the European Commissioner with responsibility for
enlargement, Mr G. Verheugen, stated that, because of its
readiness to speed up its preparations in order to catch up
with the candidate states which had reached a more advanced

3.1.3.
The reforms carried out since the elections have
brought about a major improvement in the operation of the
executive branch of government. The structures for managing
the accession process have been strengthened and new
measures have been introduced in the field of local government
and decentralisation. Consultation campaigns aimed at the
social partners, NGOs and the world of business have been
organised, with a view to improving the coordination of
political action, but the level of this consultation still remains
very limited.

C 241/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

3.1.4.
Despite the measures taken to reform the civil service
in Romania, substantial progress has, in the EESC’s view, yet
to be made. There is still a need to pursue a strategy of across-
the-board reform, covering recruitment, wage policies, career
structures and measures to ensure the independence and
accountability of civil servants.

3.2. Other political concerns of

the government: measures to

combat corruption

3.2.1.
Following a series of official criticisms levelled by the
European Commission and the European Parliament, the
Romanian Interior Ministry introduced a new bill to combat
corruption at the beginning of January 2002. This bill follows
the rules set out by the EU, the OECD and the Council of
Europe.

At the beginning of March 2002, Romania introduced a
further measure to combat corruption: an electronic tendering
system.

3.3. Appraisal of the role of the EU-Romania Joint Consultative

Committee (JCC)

3.3.1.
After three years of experience of cooperation with
the JCC, it is possible to conclude that Romania has gained a
better awareness of the importance of developing both the
social dialogue and the civil dialogue.

3.3.2.
The JCC has proved its worth to the Romanian
interest groups through the meetings and discussions held
throughout this period. This has made it possible for the
Romanian interest groups to gain a firm understanding of the
role of European organised civil society, as represented by the
EESC.

3.3.3.2.
Contacts were established between the representa-
tive of the EESC and representatives of workers from Romanian
SMEs, including those in the agricultural sector; these represen-
tatives made known their desire to see the creation of a viable
market economy in Romania. All the representatives did,
however, draw attention to their major concerns over the
consequences of establishing such an economy (increased
lack of social assistance provision by the
unemployment,
government, lack of programmes to help the unemployed find
jobs, etc.). They also felt that they were not being consulted
enough by the current Romanian government on the above
issues.

3.3.3.3.
The attention of the representative of the EESC was
also drawn to the existence of a body known as AID-ONG, a
support body for NGOs which pursued the goal of examining,
together with other local NGOs, the level of real participation
of the various structures in the social dialogue and the civil
dialogue. A discussion was held on the need for Group III to
be represented on the RESC. It was, however, noted that the
parties involved in the current tripartite agreements would
have no interest in seeing any change and no motivation to
bring it about.

3.3.3.4.
It was noted that a further NGO, the Centre for
Rural Assistance (CAR), was carrying out to the best of its
ability its role of facilitating sustainable and participative
development in rural communities by increasing their individ-
ual and institutional capacity to manage their development
resources.

3.3.3.5.
The President of the Resource Centre for Roma
Communities, also held talks with the EESC. Those talks
focused, in particular, on the implementation of the Romanian
government’s strategy for improving the situation of the Roma
people.

3.3.3. R e p o r t o n t h e

f a c t - f i n d i n g v i s i t

t o

T i m i s o a r a (1)

3.3.4. T h e s i t u a t i o n o f a g r i c u l t u r e i n R o m -

a n i a (2)

At

the initiative of

3.3.3.1.
the Association of Estates
General of European Students (AEGEE), the EESC was invited
to address the Association’s international conference on ‘the
impact of European Union enlargement on civil society’.
The students from the candidate states participating at this
international conference showed a particular interest in the
subject and participated very actively in the debates. The
students were of the opinion that dialogue within civil society
had barely got off the ground and that there was a lack of
awareness of both the existence and the role of the RESC.

3.3.4.1.
At the beginning of the 20th century Romania was
one of the main suppliers of agricultural products to European
markets. Over the last 11 years, however, the results achieved
by Romanian agriculture have been poor. Agriculture is a
sector of substantial importance to Romania. The high percent-
age of the workforce engaged in agriculture — estimated by
the European Commission to be 42 % of the total workforce
— can be attributed, amongst other reasons, to the impact of
the restructuring of industry and the construction sector.

( 1) See the report presented by Tim Papé to the EU-Romania JCC on
the visit to Timisoara, Romania, 30 November to 1 December
2001.

(2) See the note on agriculture drawn up by Mr Nilsson and the
working document on agriculture drawn up by Mr Neagoe for the
fourth meeting of the EU-Romania JCC, held in November 2001.

7.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 241/113

3.3.4.2.
One of the chief problems facing agriculture in
Romania is the fact that its export products lack specialisation.
Further major obstacles are the delay in carrying out agricul-
tural reforms and the slow pace with which Romanian law is
being brought into line with EU law.

3.3.4.3.
The EESC expresses its concern over the current
situation, in which a very high proportion of the population is
employed in the agricultural sector, with a predominance of
small family holdings concentrating on subsistence farming.
This situation is particularly disturbing as the budget estimates
for 2000-2006 set by the Berlin European Council in 1999
made no provision for direct aid to farmers in the future
Member States.

62 % of the surface area of Romania is agricultural
3.3.4.4.
land; this area represents 15 million hectares, of which 80 % is
arable. A large proportion of agricultural holdings are in
private hands (85 %). These holdings comprise an average of
2.35 ha. Romanian agriculture is therefore mainly character-
ised by family farms. Slow progress has been made in
privatising the large agricultural holdings, which account for
10 % of the total area of cultivated land. The market for
products from small holdings does not operate in a coherent
way. The EESC stresses the need for investment and restructur-
ing in the agri-food sector so as to create stable jobs.

3.3.4.5. Whilst farmers’ organisations are generally weak,
sectoral organisations representing specific branches of pro-
duction are financially stronger and they have stepped up their
drive to influence basic agricultural policy issues.

3.3.4.6.
Romania is the second largest beneficiary, after
Poland, of the SAPARD pre-accession programme; Romania’s
share of the programme represents approximately 30 %.
Preparations are currently underway to secure the accreditation
of the Romanian SAPARD agency.

3.3.4.7.
In the conclusions to the EU-Romania JCC docu-
ments, a number of observations are made spelling out how
the EESC could in future help farmers’ organisations in
Romania to find their place in organised civil society.

3.3.4.8. With a view to making internal preparations for
the negotiations on the agriculture chapter, the Romanian
Minister for European Integration and the Minister for Agri-
culture paid particular attention, during the first half of
2002, to bolstering the administrative capacity of both the
Agriculture Ministry and the Department for European Inte-
gration and the CAP. The priorities defined by the Romanian

government in the field of agriculture include: the translation,
adoption and incorporation into Romanian law of the existing
body of EU legislation; the inspection of projects funded by
PHARE 2000; and the adoption of plant-health and veterinary
measures. The Romanian government has underlined its strong
determination to bring into effect, in the course of 2002, the
measures and commitments yet to be fulfilled. Romania set
out its negotiating position on the agriculture chapter on
10 January 2002.

3.3.5. T h e D a n u b e i s s u e (1)

The EU is considering establishing alternative mod-
3.3.5.1.
es of transport to road transport in order to ease road-traffic
congestion. Navigation on the Danube was one of the sectors
most severely affected by the Kosovo crisis.

3.3.5.2.
The EESC shares the view expressed in the White
Paper on Transport Policy for 2010 in which it was pointed
out that infrastructure was a key parameter in the strategy for
bringing about economic development in the applicant states
and integrating them into the internal market.

3.3.5.3.
Danube inland waterways are included in the trans-
European transport networks and form part of Pan-European
Corridor VII. The Danube is, nonetheless, at present unable to
achieve its full potential because of: on the one hand, practical
problems relating to infrastructure (in the wake of the conflict
in ex-Yugoslavia, there is a need to restore both the bed and
the banks of the Danube and ensure it has the proper depth)
and, on the other hand, legal problems (there is no clear and
precise legal framework governing the right of navigation on
the Danube, access to the Danube transport market and
freedom to provide services). There are two existing conven-
tions but it is not clear which of the two will apply in the
context of Romanian accession to the EU.

3.3.5.4.
There are a number of international conventions
governing various aspects of inland waterway navigation on
the Danube. Bilateral agreements between EU Member States
and Romania also refer to various aspects of navigation on the
Danube. The EESC has identified the optimisation of the
Danube as a horizontal
issue affecting several applicant
countries and it is convinced that this new perspective could
facilitate optimisation of the Danube so as to equip it for its
rightful role as a Pan-European Corridor and symbol of peace.

3.3.5.5.
The EESC recommends that the legal status of these
provisions be examined in the context of the negotiations on

(1) For further details on this matter see the working document on
the Danube drawn up by Mrs A. Bredima-Savopoulou for the
fourth and fifth meetings of the EU-Romania JCC (5-6 November
2001 and 23-24 May 2002).

C 241/114

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

Romanian accession to the EU with a view to ensuring that,
once it has joined the Community, Romania will apply only
EU laws on inland waterway navigation.

4.1.5.
Under the Local Public Administration Act, linguistic
minorities are entitled to have access to local authority services
provided in their mother tongue. Steps are also being taken to
set up a private Hungarian-language university, funded with
the aid of the Hungarian state.

4. Other comments

4.1. Human rights in Romania

4.1.1.
Reform of the child-assistance scheme has progressed
well and is deemed to be satisfactory. The budget allocated to
child assistance has almost doubled since last year and the
number of child-assistance services provided as alternatives to
placing children in institutions has increased. The presidents
of the general councils have been given responsibility for
the child-protection institutions. The revised version of the
translation of the UN Convention on Children’s Rights, which
contained a number of serious mistakes, has been completed.
The Romanian government has also adopted a revised strategy
for protecting children in need, covering the period 2001-
2004.

Following pressure exerted by the EU (and,

4.1.2.
in
particular, in a report drawn up by the European Parliament),
which compared the practice to human trafficking, Romania
banned the international adoption of children in June 2001 (1).
The European Parliament’s rapporteur pointed out recently
that Romania had taken basic measures to protect children
placed in institutions. The rapporteur also noted that a new
report had been drawn up on that matter in March 2002 by
an independent group charged with taking a fresh look at
international adoption. The EESC takes the view that Romania
has made progress with regard to child protection but that
guidelines for agencies working with children need to be
developed at EU level to ensure consistent standards.

4.1.3.
The national strategy for improving the situation of
the Roma was formulated in consultation with representatives
of the Roma and it has been favourably received by this group.
The EESC intends to pay particular attention to the extent
to which this strategy is implemented by the Romanian
government.

4.1.4.
In February 2002, a resource centre for the Roma
community was opened jointly by the Romanian government
and the European Commission’s delegation in Romania in
order to develop a partnership between public authorities at
local level, the Roma community and NGOs. The centre forms
part of the strategy adopted by the Romanian government in
2001, which also includes measures concerning access by
Roma to basic and higher education.

( 1) In a communication dated 8 April 2002, the United States
Congress pointed out that it might block Romania’s accession to
NATO if
its moratorium on the
that country did not
international adoption of children.

lift

A major reform,

4.1.6.
involving the establishment of
probation centres, has also been introduced with a view to
modernising the penal system. Key points in the penal code
have been amended and the legislation classing homosexuality
as a crime has been dropped. A new, clearer legislative text has
been adopted by the Romanian government with regard to the
treatment of asylum-seekers and refugees.

In March 2001, the Council adopted Regulation 539/
4.1.7.
2001 listing the non-EU states whose citizens needed a visa to
enter the EU. Under Article 8(2) of this Regulation, Romanian
citizens are exempted from this requirement. The entry into
force of this decision was, however, subject to the drafting of
a European Commission report on the measures which the
Romanian government proposed to take in a number of fields,
including: measures to combat illegal immigration, measures
providing for the repatriation of persons residing illegally in
the EU; and frontier-protection measures. With effect from
1 January 2002, the Council decided to make it no longer
necessary for Romanian nationals to have a visa to travel
within the Schengen area.

4.1.8.
At the beginning of March 2002, the British and
Romanian governments decided to set up an intelligence unit
to combat illegal immigration between the two countries.
From 15 March 2002 the Romanian government provided its
police officials with training in EU law relating to justice and
home affairs (bearing in mind that, following the enlargement
of the EU, these officials will be responsible for protecting the
EU’s external frontier to the east).

4.2. Macro-economic stabilisation

Following three years of economic slowdown, Rom-
4.2.1.
ania experienced a growth in GDP in 2000 (1,6 %) and growth
quickened in 2001 (4,9 % increase in real GDP). The pre-
accession economic programme for Romania, approved by
the EU and the IMF, foresees a 5 % growth in GDP in 2002.
The Romanian government plans to maintain this pace, with
a view to achieving a growth rate of 5,5 % between 2002 and
2005.

7.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 241/115

Despite the increase in the level of exports (1)

4.2.2.
in
2002, Romania’s current account deficit has been further
enlarged by the excessive level of imports (2). Following several
years of budgetary reform, the Romanian government set itself
the target of bringing down the deficit slightly to a figure of
3,5 % of GDP in 2001. The consolidated budgetary deficit for
2002 has already been set at 3 % of GDP and this target will
have to be pursued between 2003 and 2005.

4.2.7.
The EESC underlines the need to monitor the conse-
quences of these restructuring measures. It also calls upon
the Romanian government to introduce plausible, concrete
measures to promote vocational retraining and to provide
more adequate financial support for persons in highly vulner-
able situations.

In spite of

it
4.2.3.
remained at a very high level throughout 2001 (30,3 %). The
target for 2002 is to reduce inflation to 22 %.

that inflation has fallen,

the fact

Romania officially presented its negotiating position
4.2.4.
on economic and monetary union in November 2001;
it
committed itself to reducing the level of inflation to below
10 % from 2004 and to introducing the euro as the sole
reference currency for the Romanian leu (ROL). With this aim
in view, representatives of the National Bank of Romania
organised a national information campaign on the euro at the
end of 2001.

4.2.5.
The level of unemployment in Romania in November
2001 was 7,1 %. It has risen following every restructuring
measure. The level of unemployment for 2002 has been
officially estimated at 12,4 % (3) even though, in its programme,
the Romanian government forecast that the figure would
stabilise at 9 % in 2002. Over half the people without jobs are
long-term unemployed persons. The EESC urges the Romanian
government to take concrete measures to improve this situ-
ation.

4.2.8.
The EESC confirms that Romania needs to pay
particular attention to the financial discipline of enterprises by
putting a stop to the accumulation of outstanding payments
and the granting of state aid to lame-duck enterprises. The
EESC does, however, reiterate the need to take measures to
deal with the fall-out of the restructuring and privatisation of
enterprises.

In conclusion, it may be said that Romania has in
4.2.9.
general made progress in achieving macro-economic stabilis-
ation. Growth has picked up and exports have increased but
the current account deficit and the high level of inflation will
have to be reduced in order to mitigate other outstanding
economic imbalances. The EESC notes that, whilst much work
remains to be done, the Romanian government recognises the
need to implement the programme drawn up in collaboration
with the IMF and the pre-accession economic programme.

4.3. Development of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)

Turning to the field of economic policy, privatisation
4.2.6.
and the restructuring of
large state enterprises are being
stepped up 2002: the Commercial Bank of Romania is set to
be fully privatised by the end of 2002; and three major loss-
making enterprises (Roman, Siderurgica and Nitramonia) are
to be divided into ‘viable entities’ and ‘non-viable entities’ in
the first half of 2002, with the attendant major economic
and social consequences. Major difficulties have also been
encountered in restructuring agricultural enterprises.

4.3.1.
Romania set out its negotiating position in respect
of SMEs on 28 March 2000. It fully accepted the existing body
of EU law and made no requests for a transition period or
derogations. The Romanian government has introduced a
strategy and an action plan to remove obstacles to SMEs by:
simplifying registration and licensing procedures; reviewing
the legal framework; reducing taxation; simplifying the tax-
ation system and stimulating public contracts.

( 1) Romanian exports in 2002 have risen by 11,5 % compared with
December 2001: exports to industrialised countries are up 2,9 %
and exports to EU countries are up 2,6 %.

( 2) Although imports fell by 17 % in 2002, compared with December

2001, they still exceed exports.

( 3) This level is questionable, as it does not fully reflect the real
situation which the EESC was able to observe on its visits around
Romania (for instance, the large number of both people who have
retired early and highly precarious seasonal jobs in agriculture,
etc.).

Training programmes for entrepreneurs have been
4.3.2.
introduced and a national network of councils for SMEs has
been put in place. The Romanian government has set up a
National Credit Guarantee Fund with a view to improving
access by SMEs to funding. A simplified taxation system has
also been introduced for microenterprises. Tax exemptions are
also granted to SMEs in respect of certain imports and the
reinvestment of profits. The establishment of ‘one-stop shops’
in chambers of commerce should enable new enterprises to be
registered and to obtain all the necessary authorisations within
a short period of time (20 days) but bureaucratic difficulties
remain.

C 241/116

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

4.3.3.
Furthermore, a report published in June 2002 by the
Council of Foreign Investors in Romania notes positive
changes in prior consultation regarding legislation that affects
the business environment, legislation to accelerate privatisation
and the establishment of the agency for the promotion of
foreign investment.

4.3.4.
The Romanian government has also set up a Ministry
for SMEs and Cooperatives with a view to giving a shot in the
arm to this sector. At the beginning of 2002, this new ministry
launched four specific programmes to assist SMEs. These
programmes, involving funding of ROL 87 billion, which will
be added to the funding provided under the PHARE 2002
programme, are expected to come into operation in July 2002.

4.3.5.
The EU-Romania JCC considered several problems
relating to the development of SMEs in Romania, in particular
progress made on the legislative and regulatory framework for
the organisation and development of this sector of activity and
matters connected with the relocation of EU SMEs to Romania.
The scale of this phenomenon was analysed, as were the
economic, regional and social problems facing such enterprises
and problems relating to employment conditions (1).

The EESC also notes that the RICOP programme
4.3.6.
designed to back up structural measures (industrial and social
restructuring) has been delayed, because it has so far proved
impossible to find a fund manager. This is an important matter
as 68 enterprises are involved in this programme, which is
funded by the European Commission.

4.3.7.
In spite of all the abovementioned measures, the
business environment still needs to be improved in a number
of areas:
the large number of inspections carried out by
different bodies gives scope for inspectors to be subject to
corruption; the banking system is characterised by high interest
rates; and the guarantee procedures remain cumbersome.

4.4.

Social policy

The Romanian government opened negotiations on
4.4.1.
social policy in October 2001; it accepted in full the existing
body of EU law in this field, taking the view that Romania
would be in a position to apply these laws as soon as it joined

the EU. Campaigns have been organised to promote awareness
of the opening of the social policy chapter amongst trade
unions, employers’ associations, civil society and the general
public.

4.4.2.
The Romanian representatives in Brussels also made
known to the EESC their enthusiasm at having been able to
take part in the Barcelona European Summit (2) as a fully-
fledged candidate state, rather than simply as an observer. At
that summit the 15 EU Member States and the 13 candidate
states participated actively for the first time in a working
meeting held during the summit.

4.4.3.
The 2001 Social Agreement was revised in March
2002. This document was signed by the social partners, as
represented by seven employers’ confederations (3), three trade
union confederations (4), and the Romanian government (5). In
the EESC’s view, this document may be seen as providing
proof that the social dialogue has been launched in Romania;
it recognises that the document sets out a comprehensive
social strategy, but has some reservations about the signatories
to the Social Agreement.

4.4.4.
The EESC noted that the 2002 Social Agreement had
not observed the rules governing social dialogue, which
required that only the social partners (employers and trade
unions) must be involved. The 2002 Social Agreement was
merely the product of social consultation by the Government,
which had failed to secure the agreement of all the trade union
confederations (6).

4.4.5.
A noteworthy development was the adoption of an
act providing for a guaranteed minimum income; this act
came into force on 1 January 2002. Under this act the poorest
people are entitled to receive social assistance but the level of
this assistance is regrettably insufficient to meet the actual
needs of the persons concerned. Payment of the guaranteed
minimum income is dependent upon the beneficiary carrying
out work ‘in the interests of the community’. The Romanian
government has, however, endeavoured to set aside a budget
estimated at 0,4 % of GDP for the application of this act.

4.4.6.
The EESC is generally of the opinion that wage-
policy measures set out by the Romanian government in the
2002 Social Agreement are out of step with reality. Current
wage levels and pensions seem derisory when measured
against market prices in Romania.

(2) The Barcelona European Summit focused mainly on social policy

issues.

(3) Conpir, CNPR, CNIMPMNR, CoNPR, PNR, UGIR and 1903.
(4) CNSLR-Fratia, CSDR and Meridian.
(5) The Prime Minister, the Minister for Labour and Social Solidarity

and the Secretary of State.

( 1) See working document DI 66/2002 (rapporteur: Mr Kirschen) on
SME policy directions in the EU and Romania and working
document DI 73/2002 (rapporteur: Mr Bulumete) on recent
developments and perspectives as regards SMEs.

(6) For this reason Block (BNS) and Cartel Alfa, two trade union
confederations which were signatories to the 2001 Social Agree-
ment, refused to put their signatures to the 2002 Social Agree-
ment.

7.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 241/117

4.4.7.
Two further acts also came into force in January
2002: an act relating to the national social assistance scheme
and an act to prevent and combat social marginalisation.

4.4.8.
Discussions are taking place on the adoption of a
new labour code, but no particular decision has yet been taken
in this field. A National Employment Agency has been set up
but no further information is yet available as to its effectiveness.

4.4.9.
The EESC notes that the implementation of many
aspects of the social policy acquis depends in practice on the
actions of enterprises and their employees. The full involve-
ment of their organisations in the accession negotiations
permits possible problems of legislation and implementation
to be identified and resolved at an early stage. The EESC is not
convinced that this type of in-depth involvement is widespread
in Romania.

In the EESC’s view, questions arise in a number of
4.4.10.
fields relating to: the development of the bipartite social
dialogue; the effectiveness of the national employment plan;
preparations for administering the European Social Fund (ESF),
with a view to Romania’s accession to the EU; social security
contributions; consumer protection, etc., in addition to matters
relating to implementing provisions in respect of the legislation
banning all forms of discrimination. The social policy chapter
was provisionally closed on 19 April 2002.

4.5.

The environment

4.5.1.
The Romanian government adopted a negotiating
position on the environment at the end of October 2001 (1).
Before presenting its position on the environment, the Romani-
an delegation to the negotiations held several discussions with
local authorities, the social partners, political parties and other
members of civil society, all of whom have an interest in the
adoption of the existing body of EU law in the environmental
field.

4.5.2.
include
The Romanian government’s priorities
measures to finalise the harmonisation of laws and to incorpor-
ate into Romanian law the existing body of EU legislation in a
number of specific areas, such as: environmental
impact
assessments, free access to information on the environment,
etc.

4.5.3.
The EESC has noted a small degree of progress in the
development of administrative capacities in the environmental
sector, brought about by (a) recent training programmes for
civil servants working in this field and (b) the plan for
strengthening administrative capacity adopted by the Romani-
an government in March 2002.

( 1) In this context, it requested eleven transitional periods, varying in

length from three to 15 years.

4.6. Regional policy

4.6.1.
Some progress has been made in the field of regional
policy, particularly as regards improvements to the insti-
tutional framework. Romania is finally starting to consider the
medium-term regional policy priorities within the framework
of the accession partnership.

structures

Romania has

introduced some

4.6.2.
for
implementing the Structural Funds. Responsibility for regional
policy has been vested in, on the one hand, the Secretary of
State for Investment and Development (responsible for plan-
ning and management) and, on the other hand, the secretary-
general of the ministry (responsible for payments). The man-
agement of financial control has been slightly improved. The
Development Ministry has been entrusted,
inter alia, with
drawing up the national plan for the development and
management of regional development funds and the pre-
accession EU funding for economic and social cohesion.
The Romanian government has designated 11 industrial
restructuring zones which are to be given priority access to EU
aid to promote social cohesion. In order to gain access to the
preaccession instruments, the social partners should, according
to the principle of ‘enlarged partnership’, be represented in the
national and regional programme bodies, which are the real
applicants for and recipients of EU funding. In the opinion of
the EESC, Romania could and should, without delay, engage
the social partners and, when appropriate, other NGOs, in its
regional and structural policies.

4.6.3.
amount of work to do in the context of
employment strategy and the social integration process.

Romania still has, in the EESC’s view, a considerable
the European

4.7.

EU aid

4.7.1.
In making its preparations for joining the EU,
Romania receives support from three EU-funded pre-accession
instruments. Under the PHARE programme (institution build-
ing), Romania will be allocated EUR 242 million (2) in 2002.
Under the SAPARD programme, it will receive an annual
allocation of EUR 153 million in the period 2000 to 2006 (3).
Under the ISPA programme, Romania will be granted an
annual budget of between EUR 208 million and EUR
270 million (4).

(2) 30 % of the funding is invested in institution building measures
and twinning projects; the remaining 70 % will be used for
investments, the co-financing of technical assistance projects,
twinning, economic and social cohesion, etc.

(3) This aid is used mainly to promote the development and
diversification of the rural economy, human resource develop-
ment in agriculture, agricultural infrastructure, etc.

(4) This aid is allocated for environmental measures in accordance
with major investment directives (covering drinking water projects
and waste-water treatment projects) and for transport measures
involving the funding of projects relating to the trans-European
networks (railways, roads, ports, etc.).

C 241/118

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

The SAPARD programme is to be implemented on
4.7.2.
the basis of
the National Plan for the Development of
Agriculture and the countryside. In this context, the Romanian
government has worked very hard to prepare the ground for
the accreditation of the SAPARD agency. The EESC draws
attention to the cumbersome nature of the administrative
procedures introduced by the EU to enable farmers in all the
candidate states to gain access to these funds.

4.7.3.
Romania is also taking part in multinational and
horizontal programmes financed by PHARE, such as TAIEX,
the mechanism to promote SMEs and the ACCESS programme
relating to civil society, etc.

5. Progress made in adopting and implementing the

existing body of EU law

5.1.

State of play

At the present time the EU has opened negotiations
5.1.1.
with Romania on 26 chapters of EU legislation, of which
twelve have been closed.

5.1.2.
From a general standpoint, the EESC takes the view
that Romania has continued to make progress in adopting the
existing body of EU law but that this progress has not in all
cases gone hand in hand with improvements in respect of
administrative capacity and the implementation of EU law.

5.1.3.
Turning to the question of internal market legislation,
the EESC notes that little progress has been made, with the
exception of the adoption of new laws on public contracts.
Administrative capacity has been slightly improved in this
sector but further efforts are still required.

5.1.4.
On the subject of freedom of movement for workers
(a theme which has been discussed by the EU-Romania JCC),
Romania has signed a bilateral agreement with Portugal and
an agreement with Italy is in preparation. A further agreement
has been signed with Luxembourg on the exchange of
trainees. Romania does, however, need to establish appropriate
administrative structures with a view to the future coordination
of social security schemes in respect of workers covered by the
above agreements. The EESC draws attention to Commission
Decision No 93/569/EEC of 22 October 1993 on the free
movement of workers as regards the European employment
network ‘EURES’,
in which the Commission calls on the
Member States to develop a synergy between public services,
regional authorities and the social partners, in order to make
the labour market more transparent and to promote the

mobility of workers in cross-border regions. The EESC urges
Romania to step up its efforts with a view to enabling Romania
to participate in this European network.

5.1.5.
The Romanian government has presented an indus-
trial strategy, backed up by an action plan setting out a
number of measures for implementing industrial policy. These
documents have been drawn up following consultations with
the ‘parties concerned’ (1). The EESC underlines the importance
of the methods selected for implementing the policy, proper
implementation of the policy and supporting measures to
offset its social impact.

5.1.6.
Turning to the question of the existing body of EU
law in the field of small and medium-sized enterprises, the
Romanian government has, as pointed out above, made
progress in this field. The EESC does, however, draw attention,
once again, to the delay in implementing the RICOP Pro-
gramme and to the extent of the phenomenon of relocation of
SMEs from the EU to Romania.

5.1.7.
The EESC confirms that Romania has made consider-
able progress in adopting the existing body of EU law in the
field of transport. Account does, however, need to be taken of:
the lack of measures to promote fiscal harmonisation in
respect of road transport; maritime safety; the restructuring of
TAROM (the Romanian national airline); and the Danube
issue.

5.1.8.
In the agriculture sector, restructuring has hardly
started, the supporting measures to be taken by the Romanian
government have not been clearly defined and administrative
capacity is particularly limited, despite the fact that some
progress has been made in adopting the existing body of EU
law in this field. Between 2002 and 2004 the Romanian
government will have to set about establishing the legal and
institutional bases for the framework for applying the CAP.

5.2.

Implementation

5.2.1.
The EU Member States must not only adapt national
legislation to the EU rules, i.e. transpose EU rules. The ‘acquis
communautaire’ must also be implemented, i.e. be observed in
practice. A large part of the rules governing the internal market
are in fact about products and product safety, production
processes, the working environment, labour law etc. and can
be implemented in practice only in enterprises and by their
personnel.

5.2.2.
In order to consolidate implementation of the ‘acquis
communautaire’, legal technical assistance projects for Roman-
ian judges,
lawyers and top civil servants are currently
underway, in close cooperation with European experts in the
field.

(1) Professional associations, trade unions, employees, ministries, the

private sector, universities and other public bodies.

7.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 241/119

5.2.3.
The membership negotiations are thus not only a
question for civil servants and politicians. The social partners
and other representatives of civil society, such as organisations
representing farmers, consumers, environmentalists etc., must
also be involved and informed.

5.2.4.
The EESC is convinced that the early involvement of
the social partners and other NGOs will ensure a better
understanding of the EU rules and proper implementation of
them.

Brussels, 17 July 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘Services of general interest’

(2002/C 241/23)

On 10 January 2002, in a letter from Mr Prodi, the Commission asked the Economic and Social
Committee to draw up an exploratory opinion, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European
Community, on ‘Services of general interest’.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 19 June 2002. The rapporteur
was Mr Hernández Bataller.

At its 392nd Plenary Session of 17 and 18 July 2002 (meeting of 17 July), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 58 votes to 11, with one abstention.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The concept and characteristics of services of general
interest have been defined in various Community docu-
ments (1), and this definition continues to be essentially valid
today (2). Accordingly:

— service of general interest covers market and non-market
services which the public authorities class as being of
general
to specific public service
obligations;

interest and subject

( 1) Namely Communication from the Commission on Services of
general interest in Europe (OJ C 281/3, 26.9.1996); ESC Opinion
949/99, adopted at the Plenary Session of 20 and 21.10.1999
(Rapporteur: Mr Hernández Bataller).

( 2) See respectively Communication from the Commission of
29.9.2000 (COM(2000) 580 final) and the Commission’s Report
to the Laeken European Council of 17.10.2001 (COM(2001) 598
final).

— service of general economic interest refers to market
services which the Member States subject to specific
public service obligations by virtue of general interest
criteria.

1.1.1.
Services of general interest may also encompass the
following categories, as an integral part of the ‘European social
model’:

— Services that involve the exercise of power by the public

authorities and match the concept of ‘state obligations’.

— Social services provided directly by the public authorities

at local, regional and state level.

— Social services provided by non-profit-making organis-

ations.

— Services of general economic interest, whether provided

by public, private or mixed undertakings.