Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on:the Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting the provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council instruments adopted under the assent procedure,the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council adapting the provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in European Parliament and Council instruments adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty,the Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting the provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council instruments adopted in accordance with the consultation procedure (qualified majority), andthe Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting the provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council instruments adopted in accordance with the consultation procedure (unanimity)(COM(2001) 789 final — 2001/0313 (AVC) — 2001/0314 (COD) — 2001/0315 (CNS) — 2001/0316 (CNS))
Date: 2002-07-17
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: advisory committee (EU), drafting of EU law, power of implementation, powers of the institutions (EU)

C 241/128

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on:

— the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting the provisions relating to committees which
assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council
instruments adopted under the assent procedure’,

— the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council adapting the
provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its
implementing powers laid down in European Parliament and Council instruments adopted
in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty’,

— the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting the provisions relating to committees which
assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council
instruments adopted in accordance with the consultation procedure (qualified majority)’,
and

— the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation adapting the provisions relating to committees which
assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in Council
instruments adopted in accordance with the consultation procedure (unanimity)’

(COM(2001) 789 final — 2001/0313 (AVC) — 2001/0314 (COD) —
2001/0315 (CNS) — 2001/0316 (CNS))

(2002/C 241/24)

On 26 and 27 February 2002, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposals.

The Economic and Social Committee decided to appoint Mr Hernández Bataller as rapporteur-general for
this opinion.

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 41 votes in favour, with four abstentions.

1.

Introduction

Article 211 of the EC Treaty stipulates that, in order to
1.1.
ensure the proper functioning and development of the com-
mon market, the Commission ‘shall exercise the powers
conferred on it by the Council for the implementation of the
rules laid down by the latter’. Application of the article led to
the adoption of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June
1999 laying down the procedures
the exercise of
implementing powers conferred on the Commission (1), the
objectives of which are — inter alia — to adopt non-binding
criteria relating to the choice of committee procedures,
simplify the requirements for the exercise of implementing
powers conferred on the Commission, and involve and inform
the European Parliament more effectively with regard to these
procedures.

for

1.2.
Council and Commission Statement (2) of the Declar-
ations on Decision 1999/468/EC (2) provides that procedures
of type I (advisory procedure); II a) and II b) (management
procedure); and III a) and III b) (regulatory procedure) should

be automatically brought into line, whereas the amendment of
the safeguard procedures should be done on a case-by-case
basis, in the course of normal revision of legislation.

1.3.
The European Councils of Lisbon (23-24 March 2000),
Stockholm (23-24 March 2001), Laeken (14-15 December
2001) and Barcelona (15-16 March 2002) stressed the need to
draw up a ‘coordinated strategy’
to simplify the existing
regulatory environment at Community level and asked the
Commission to draft an action plan on the matter.

The White Paper on European Governance (3) contains
1.4.
a number of proposals on the issue, most of which are included
and developed in the recent Commission communications
on Better lawmaking (4) and Action Plan. Simplifying and
improving the regulatory environment (5), as requested by the
European Council.

( 1) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.
( 2) OJ C 203, 17.7.1999.

(3) COM(2001) 428 final.
(4) COM(2002) 275 final, 5.6.2002.
(5) COM(2002) 278 final, 5.6.2002.

7.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 241/129

In this context, the proposed legislation under examination
here is particularly relevant.

2. The Commission proposal of 27 December 2001 (1)

The proposal concerns the comitology procedure of a

2.1.
considerable number of legislative acts in force:

1.

Two acts adopted under the assent procedure.

2. One hundred and fifty two acts adopted under the co-

decision procedure.

3.

4.

Seventy-eight acts adopted under the consultation pro-
cedure (qualified majority).

Seventy-two acts adopted under the consultation pro-
cedure (unanimity).

However,

it does not affect either the substantive
2.2.
provisions of the amended legislative acts or the application of
the latter, or the nature of the committees provided for by the
basic act.

2.3.
The aim of the proposal is merely to bring into line
the legislative acts which establish the committees and the
legislative acts which refer to these committees, and does not
therefore apply to the legislative acts which have already been
brought into line by an act amending the basic act.

3. General comments

3.1. We welcome the proposal in question since, as well as
the expected improvements to the decision-making machinery
currently in force at Community level, it enriches the current
political debate of constitutional scope about the institutional
and legislative reform of the EU.

3.2.

However, there is a need to discuss its content.

The legislative acts affected by the proposal seem to
3.2.1.
have been chosen on the basis of strictly formal considerations,
while ignoring other significant considerations that affect the
Community legislative procedure and, in particular, the ESC’s
role as an advisory body in this process. There is a need for
criteria relating to the choice of committee procedures, in
order to achieve greater consistency and predictability when
choosing the type of committee.

3.2.2.1. More specifically, the list of procedures was drawn
up on the basis of the list of committees which assist the
Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers,
published at the time in accordance with Article 7(4) of
Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 (2).

3.2.2.2.
This list was drawn up according to the criteria of
publication and registration of a long list of comitology
procedures, but fails to clearly establish the constitutional
criteria according to which the Commission assigns a com-
mittee to a given type of procedure.

3.2.2.3.
The most immediate consequence of this is that
only thirty-five of the more than three hundred acts covered
by the proposal have been referred to the consultative
committees for discussion.

3.3.1.
Of course, owing to their very composition and
objectives, the only comitology framework in which the views
of socio-economic sectors affected by a legislative proposal
can be represented is that of the Consultative Committees.

3.3.2.
Furthermore, this residual role to which the Consulta-
tive Committees may be definitively confined is even more
paradoxical given that,
in its White Paper on European
Governance, the Commission itself proposes abolishing the
regulatory and management committees (p. 32).

3.4.1.
Institutional commitments have already been made,
in accordance with the objective of transparency laid down in
the aforementioned Council Decision 1999/468/EC, to involve
and inform the European Parliament more effectively on how
comitology operates (3). However, the fact that the act in
question involves purely technical codification means that the
Commission steers clear of any commitment to inform the
Economic and Social Committee, although this would be
desirable.

This would be particularly useful as — even in
3.4.2.
the case of new implementing acts — their content and
implementation may sometimes be of interest to the objective
and functioning of the ‘single market observatory’.

3.5.1.
The Committee is aware of the limited and immediate
nature of the proposal in question, which only addresses 304
acts out of the 1 400 acts that provide for the comitology

( 1) COM(2001) 789 final.

(2) OJ C 225, 8.8.2000, p. 2.
(3) Agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission

of 17.2.2000, OJ L 256, 10.10.2000, p. 19.

C 241/130

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

7.10.2002

procedure. However, while considering that this is a consti-
tutional matter, the Committee stresses the need to address
certain unresolved issues in the short term — either in the
context of the Convention or in a future legislative proposal
from the Commission.

3.5.3.
In addition, criteria should be established to ensure
that the decision-making procedure matches the nature of the
committee responsible, giving preference to criteria such as
efficiency, transparency and participation over and above inter-
institutional disputes about the exercise of responsibilities.

Inter alia, the Committee calls on the main players in
3.5.2.
the Community legislative procedure to address the aforemen-
tioned questions and issues such as the role of agencies in
executive decision-making procedures and, more specifically,
its compatibility with the range of comitology procedures
currently in force.

3.5.4.
Finally, guarantees of transparency should be pro-
vided in order to ensure that, whenever legally applicable,
ancillary bodies are fully informed about the forecasts and
progress of legislative procedures with implications for comito-
logy, and to encourage the dissemination of their decisions
and — if possible — the involvement of civil society represen-
tatives in these bodies.

Brussels, 17 July 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Green Paper on the Review of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89’

(COM(2001) 745 final)

(2002/C 241/25)

On 13 December 2001 the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the ‘Green Paper
on the Review of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89’.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 26 June 2002. The rapporteur was Mr
Lagerholm.

At its 392nd Plenary Session on 17 and 18 July 2002 (meeting of 17 July) the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 32 votes to eight.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
Since the adoption of the Merger Regulation, the
European Union has expanded from 12 to 15 Member
States, whose markets are becoming increasingly integrated.
Moreover, the European Commission’s exclusive competence
for concentrations meeting the thresholds has been extended
to cover the whole territory of the European Economic Area
(EEA). European cross-border corporate reorganisation has
received further impetus from the introduction of monetary
union in 1999.

1.2. We are now facing the prospect of a European Union
with significantly more Member States as of 2004, and the
completion of the monetary union with the final phase of the
introduction of the euro. At the same time the trend towards
internationalisation, or even globalisation, of companies and
markets is continuing at an increasing pace.

1.3.
In a parallel development, an ever-greater number of
pre-merger control regimes are being introduced across the
globe, with a consequent increase in the costs associated with
multiple filing requirements.