Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the "Proposal for a Council Decision adopting a multi-annual programme (2003-2005) for monitoring of eEurope, dissemination of good practices and the improvement of network and information security (MODINIS)"
Date: 2003-02-12
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU programme, action programme, data protection, information society, project evaluation

29.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/19

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Decision adopting a
multi-annual programme (2003-2005) for monitoring of eEurope, dissemination of good practices
and the improvement of network and information security (MODINIS)’

(2003/C 128/04)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a multi-annual programme (2003-2005)
for monitoring of eEurope, dissemination of good practices and the improvement of network and
information security (MODINIS) COM(2002) 425 final — 2002/0187 (CNS);

having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 26 July 2002 to consult it on this subject,
under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

having regard to the decision of its Bureau 14 May 2002 to instruct its Commission for Culture and
Education to draw up an opinion on this subject;

having regard to its Opinion on the Information society and regional development — ERDF interventions
2000/2006: criteria for programme assessment, rapporteur: Mr Tögel (CdR 124/2000 fin) (1);

having regard to its Opinion on the Commission Communication — Network and Information Security:
Proposal for a European Policy Approach, rapporteur: Mrs Barrero-Florez (CdR 257/2001 fin) (2);

having regard to its Opinion on the follow-up to the Action Plan on promoting a safer use of the Internet
and the Proposal amending Decision No 276/1999/EC adopting a multiannual Community action plan
on promoting safer use of the Internet by combating illegal and harmful content on global networks,
rapporteur: Mr Luigi Sergio Ricca (CdR 140/2002 fin) (3);

having regard to its draft opinion adopted on 28 November 2002 by its Commission for Culture and
Education CdR 252/2002 rev. 2 (rapporteur: Mr Dieter Schiffmann, Member of the Rhineland —
Palatinate Landtag (D/PES)),

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 48th plenary session, held on 12 and 13 February
2003 (meeting of 12 February).

1. The Committee of the Regions’ views

The Committee of the Regions

1.2.
reiterates the belief expressed in its Opinion on the
information society and regional development (4) that it is
above all local and regional authorities which plan, carry out,
guarantee and in particular finance the actual work involved
in setting up the information society throughout Europe, e.g.
by developing appropriate regional initiatives;

reiterates its belief

1.1.
in the need to implement the
eEurope action plan 2005, and stresses the importance of the
priorities assigned to e-government, e-learning, e-health and
an e-business environment, as well as the security of the
information infrastructure and the development of broadband
access, and it particularly advocates a programme to support
the implementation of, and to monitor compliance with, the
objectives of the action plan;

1.3.
therefore, in view of the importance of these tasks,
calls for the regional and local level to be integrated into the
procedures for monitoring and observing eEurope more closely
than provided for in the programme;

( 1) OJ C 22, 24.1.2001, p. 32.
( 2) OJ C 107, 3.5.2002, p. 89.
( 3) OJ C 73, 26.3.2003, p. 34.

(4) CdR 124/2000 fin.

C 128/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.5.2003

1.4.
shares the view that comparisons must be made of the
progress in implementing eEurope, particularly with regard to
the promotion of services, applications and content, as well as
to the development of broadband infrastructure and the
monitoring of safety issues, and that to this end a procedure
needs to be developed;

1.13.
particularly stresses its positive assessment of the
need for widespread availability of broadband connections,
and shares the view that this will have a positive impact on
economic activity, and that eEurope should also place particu-
lar emphasis on the objective of providing broadband access
for public administrations, schools and medical establishments;

1.5.
underlines the need for the establishment of a mechan-
ism for monitoring and exchange of experience which enables
the Member States to compare and analyse performances, and
calls for this mechanism to have a strong local and regional
component, as successful implementation at regional and local
level is an important precondition for the success of eEurope;

1.6.
particularly stresses the importance of the bench-
marking process for keeping track of, and promoting progress
in, the implementation and comparison of individual pro-
cedures;

1.7.
considers that a uniform method of benchmarking
should be used for eEurope 2005 in all Member States, that
data should be up-to-date, and that existing sources of data in
the Member States should be used, and suggests that, to
facilitate evaluation, data from the USA be used for compara-
tive purposes;

considers that,

in addition to national

1.8.
initiatives,
those of the regions and local authorities undertaken in
the framework of eEurope should also be included in the
benchmarking;

stresses the need to support

the Member States’
1.9.
measures aimed at the implementation of the eEurope pro-
gramme by comparing performance and disseminating good
practice, and calls for inclusion of the local and regional level
of government in the measures;

1.10.
considers the programme important with a view to
reducing regional disparities in bringing about the information
society, and is convinced that the dissemination of good
practice by the regions will in particular benefit disadvantaged
regions and regions whose industrial development is lagging
behind;

1.14.
stresses the particular importance of network and
information security for economic and social development,
and in this connection draws attention to the conclusions of its
Opinion on the Communication — Network and Information
Security: Proposal for a European Policy Approach (1) and its
Opinion on the Communication on the follow-up to the
Action Plan on promoting a safer use of the Internet and the
Proposal amending Decision No 276/1999/EC adopting a
multiannual Community action plan on promoting safer use
of the Internet by combating illegal and harmful content on
global networks (2);

1.15.
in particular stresses the need for support for actions
in the Member States designed to increase network and
information security;

1.16.
at the same time, however, stresses the responsibility
of the local and regional authorities for the development of
political measures in the area of network and information
security;

1.17.
against this background argues that the objectives of
the programme should also include the improvement of
regional and local measures to enhance network and infor-
mation security and step up the development of broadband
networks;

stresses that support should also be to given to
1.18.
awareness-raising actions at regional and local level designed
to increase network and information security;

1.19.
stresses the need to analyse the economic and social
implications of the information, e.g. with a view to regional
and local developments;

1.11.
stresses that the collection and analysis of data should,
in view of the need to take account of the regional level, also
include regional indicators;

1.20.
argues that the committee which is to support the
Commission in implementing the programme and coordinat-
ing it with other Community programmes should include local
and regional representatives among its members;

1.12.
considers the participation of the Member States in
the financing of local projects for the development of local
broadband infrastructure to be worthwhile, and calls on the
Commission to support the local and regional exchange of
experience on the dissemination of good practice;

(1) CdR 257/2001 fin.
(2) CdR 140/2002 fin.

29.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/21

1.21.
considers it doubtful whether the budgetary resources
earmarked for implementation of the programme are suf-
ficient, and feels that this question should be considered in the
light of experience, and that the involvement of the applicant
countries should also be considered;

1.22.
advocates in general terms that the measures be
extended to the applicant countries, as the whole area is of

high importance with a view to bringing the applicant
countries up to the EU level;

1.23.
calls for the planned evaluation report on the results
of the programme also to be submitted to the Committee of
the Regions.

2. The Committee of the Regions’ recommendations

Recommendation 1

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

(8)
There is a need for the establishment of a mechan-
ism for monitoring and the exchange of experiences
which enables Member States to compare and analyse
performances and review progress in relation to the
eEurope Action plan. Such a mechanism will allow
Member States to better exploit
industrial potential of the technological development, in
particular in the area of the Information Society.

(8)
There is a need for the establishment of a mechan-
ism for monitoring and the exchange of experiences
which enables Member States, regions and local auth-
orities to compare and analyse performances and review
progress in relation to the eEurope Action plan. Such a
the economic and mechanism will allow Member States, regions and local
authorities to better exploit the economic and industrial
potential of the technological development, in particular
in the area of the Information Society.

Reason

A mechanism of this type must also take account of the regional and local dimension. The success of the action plan
depends on the effective implementation of the measures at regional and local level.

Recommendation 2

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

(9)
Benchmarking allows Member States to assess
whether the national initiatives that they have taken in
the framework of the eEurope Action Plan are producing
results comparable to those in other Member States and
are fully exploiting the potential of the technologies.

(9)
Benchmarking allows Member States, regions and
local authorities to assess whether the national and
regional and local initiatives taken in the framework of
the eEurope Action Plan are producing results compar-
able to those in other Member States and are fully
exploiting the potential of the technologies.

C 128/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.5.2003

Reason

This takes account of the importance of the regions and local authorities for the implementation of the programme.

Recommendation 3

Recital 10, first sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Action by Member States in the framework of the
eEurope Action Plan can be further supported by dissemi-
nating good practices

Action by Member States and their local and regional
levels of government in the framework of the eEurope
Action Plan can be further supported by disseminating
good practices

Reason

Regional and local level measures should in particular be supported in this way.

Recommendation 4

Recital 12, second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The complex nature of network and information security
implies that,
in developing policy measures in this
field, local, national and where appropriate European
authorities should take into account a range of political,
economic, organisational and technical aspects, and be
the decentralised and global character of
aware of
communication networks.

The complex nature of network and information security
implies that, in developing policy measures in this field,
local, regional, national and where appropriate European
authorities should take into account a range of political,
economic, organisational and technical aspects, and be
the decentralised and global character of
aware of
communication networks.

Reason

Appropriate account should be taken of the regional authorities.

Recommendation 5

Recital 13, second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

Support should be given to the awareness raising actions
of Member States designed to increase network and
information security,
in particular by organising at
European level the data collection, analysis and the
dissemination of good practices on forward-looking
responses to existing and emerging security threats.

Support should be given to the awareness raising actions
of Member States, regional and local authorities designed
to increase network and information security, in particu-
lar by organising at European level the data collection,
analysis and the dissemination of good practices on
forward-looking responses to existing and emerging
security threats.

29.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/23

Reason

The necessary support for awareness-raising measures must also include the regional and local level.

Recommendation 6

Article 1(c)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

to analyse the economic and societal consequences of
the Information Society with the view to appropriate
policy responses particularly in terms of
industrial
competitiveness and cohesion;

to analyse the economic and societal consequences of
the Information Society with the view to regional and
local developments and appropriate policy responses
particularly in terms of industrial competitiveness and
cohesion;

Reason

The effects of the information society are thrown into sharp relief by comparing developments in the regions and
local areas.

Recommendation 7

Article 1(d)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

to enhance national and European efforts for improving
network and information security and to foster the
development of broadband rollout.

to enhance national, regional, local and European efforts
for improving network and information security and to
foster the development of broadband rollout.

Reason

Regional and local-level measures are particularly important.

Recommendation 8

(Article 1, fourth paragraph)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The programme should also provide a common frame-
work for complementary interaction at European level
of the various national, regional, local levels.

The programme should also provide a common frame-
work for complementary interaction at European level
of the various national, regional, local levels. The pro-
gramme should involve the applicant countries.

C 128/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.5.2003

Reason

The information society is highly important for preparations for EU accession and the applicant countries should
therefore be involved at an early stage.

Recommendation 9

Article 2(a)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

data collection and analysis on the basis of a new set of
benchmarking indicators including regional
indicators
where appropriate. A special focus should be laid on
data related to the key targets of the eEurope 2005
Action plan;

data collection and analysis on the basis of a new set of
benchmarking indicators including regional indicators
where appropriate. A special focus should be laid on
data related to the key targets of the eEurope 2005
Action plan; data collection and analysis should also
include the applicant countries;

Reason

The importance of the information society for the applicant countries needs to be taken into account at an early
stage.

Recommendation 10

Article 6(1)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

The Commission shall be assisted by a Committee
composed of representatives of the Member States and
chaired by the representative of the Commission.

The Commission shall be assisted by a Committee
composed of representatives of
the Member States,
regions and local authorities and chaired by the represen-
tative of the Commission.

Reason

This takes account of the importance of the local and regional measures for the successful implementation of the
programme.

Recommendation 11

Article 7(4)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

At the end of the programme, the Commission will
submit to the European Parliament, to the Council and
to the Economic and Social Committee an evaluation
report on the results obtained in implementing the
actions referred in the article 2.

At the end of the programme, the Commission will
submit to the European Parliament, to the Council, to
the Committee of the Regions and to the Economic and
Social Committee an evaluation report on the results
obtained in implementing the actions referred in the
article 2.

29.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/25

Reason

Given the importance of the regional and local levels for successful implementation, the CoR must be involved.

Brussels, 12 February 2003.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Albert BORE

Report of the Committee of the Regions on ‘Community action for mountain areas’

(2003/C 128/05)

CONTENTS

1.

1.1.

General context

Definition of mountain areas

1.1.1.

Objectives of Directive 75/268/EEC

1.1.2.

Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999

1.1.3.

Own-initiative opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (CES 461/88)

1.1.4.

United Nations Environment Programme

1.2.

1.3.

1.4.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

2.3.

2.4.

2.5.

2.6.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Importance of mountain areas in Europe

Economic aspects

Impact of Community and national policies

Institutional stances regarding mountain areas

Convention on the Protection of the Alps

European Charter of Mountain Regions

Second Report on Economic and Social Cohesion

International Year of Mountains

Chapter 13 of Agenda 21 and the World Summit in Johannesburg

World Charter of Mountain Populations

Legal situation of the EU’s mountain areas

Mountain regions and the future of Europe

Mountains and cities

Concluding remarks and proposals