Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the "Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Strengthening the social dimension of the Lisbon strategy: Streamlining open coordination in the field of social protection" (COM(2003) 261 final)
Date: 2003-10-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, European Employment Strategy, European social policy, political cooperation, social security

C 32/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.2.2004

The EESC is strongly in favour of an Advisory Forum
4.9.
(Article 18), emphasising that its members should be selected
with extreme care and rigour and should be drawn not only
from similar national bodies because, alongside the Director,
the forum is the key element in the structure underpinning the
Centre, which is essential for a wider EU public health policy.

The EESC is convinced that there will be many more such
threats in future on a range of fronts — chemical, toxic,
climatological, viral or microbial — and that these will be
aggravated by resistance to treatment, such as in the case of
tuberculosis, AIDS, malaria and fast-acting hemorrhagic fevers.

5. Conclusions

The European Commission has reacted quickly in the

5.1.
wake of the international health crisis caused by SARS.

The creation of this Centre is a boost to the EU’s public
5.2.
health policy as defined in Treaty Article 152 and provided for
in the draft EU constitution, now on the table before the IGC.

Brussels, 29 October 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions Strengthening the social dimension of the Lisbon
strategy: Streamlining open coordination in the field of social protection’

(COM(2003) 261 final)

(2004/C 32/12)

On 28 May 2003, the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 6 October 2003. The rapporteur was
Mr Beirnaert.

At its 403rd plenary session of 29 and 30 October 2003 (meeting of 30 October), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 62 votes in favour, two votes against
and no abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
In its Spring Report of 2003, the Commission under-
took to adopt a communication on ‘the streamlining of current
disparate actions linked to social inclusion and pensions and,
in time, cooperation in relation to healthcare and “making
work pay” into a single Open Method of Coordination’.
Furthermore, the Brussels European Council asked the Com-
mission in March of 2003 ‘to report on the advisability of
simplifying and streamlining the various strands of work on

social protection into a coherent framework within the Open
Method of Coordination’.

1.2.
In March 2000, the Lisbon European Council outlined
its vision of an integrated socio-economic strategy for Europe,
bringing cooperation in the field of social protection into the
picture alongside the coordination of economic policies within
the framework of the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines
(BEPGs) and of employment policies within the framework of
the European Employment Strategy.

5.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/61

This cooperation is based on the application of the
1.3.
open method of coordination to two aspects of social protec-
tion: social inclusion and pensions. The essential elements of
this method are common objectives, National Action Plans
for social inclusion (NAPs/inclusion) with a two-year cycle,
National Strategy Reports on pensions covering a period of
three years and a joint report drawn up by the Commission
and the Council to summarise and analyse all such NAPs/
inclusion and National Strategy Reports on pensions.

1.4.
Health and long-term care currently use a less advanced
system of cooperation involving exchanges of information and
knowledge. Three broad objectives have been identified in this
area and the Member States have completed a questionnaire
on the manner in which they include these objectives in their
policies. A joint report by the Commission and the Council
outlines the main conclusions drawn from the analysis of the
Member States’ answers.

the NAPs/inclusion and the National Strategy Reports on
pensions and which will cover a period of three years. In the
intervening years, the Member States will submit reports
outlining any measures taken thus far.

2.4.
The national reports will be followed up at European
level by a joint report on social protection issued by the
Commission and the Council which will assess progress made
towards the common objectives in the Member States.

Indicators will be jointly agreed and used to monitor

2.5.
progress made towards the common objectives.

2.6.
The communication also outlines a timetable for the
inclusion of the new Member States in the streamlined process.

1.5.
The Social Protection Committee is currently con-
ducting a study into the concept of ‘making work pay’ in order
to determine the exact contribution that could be made to this
overall objective by social protection systems. The different
aspects of this issue have been and will continue to be dealt
with within the framework of the BEPGs and the Employment
Guidelines.

3. General comments

2. Content of the communication

2.1. With a view to strengthening the social dimension of
the Lisbon strategy, the Commission communication puts
forward suggestions for the streamlining of policy coordi-
nation on social protection, followed by the synchronisation
of the latter with the coordination process for economic and
employment policies from 2006. A synchronised timetable
has already been drawn up for both for the period 2003-2005.

2.2.
The Commission suggests streamlining social protec-
tion coordination by means of a single set of common
objectives organised into three pillars: social inclusion, pen-
sions, and health and long-term care. These would replace the
existing distinct sets of objectives and would be adopted by
in 2006 to coincide with the guidelines for
the Council
economic and employment policies. In principle, they would
then remain in place for a duration of three years. They would
also include a limited number of cross-cutting issues, such as
the notions of gender mainstreaming and making work pay.

3.1. On the principle of open coordination in the field of social

protection

‘initiatives aiming at

3.1.1.
The Committee notes the inclusion of the principle
of coordination of Member States’ social policies in the
first part of the draft European Constitution (Article 14(4)),
reiterated in part III which states that in the social field this
principle will take the form of
the
establishment of guidelines and indicators, the organisation of
exchange of best practice, and the preparation of the necessary
elements for periodic monitoring and evaluation’ (Article 107,
paragraph 2). Both texts form the basis for the so-called ‘open
coordination method’. But over and above the significance of
this legal basis, it is equally important for it to be supported
by a real political will
to develop concrete coordination
strategies. The Committee feels that this coordination is all the
more necessary in view of the slowdown in economic growth.

3.1.2.
In this respect, the Committee would call to mind
how important it considers the open communication method
to be for social protection, as can be seen from its opinions on
inclusion (1) and the suitability and
indicators for social
feasibility of pension systems (2) and its appeal for an open
coordination method for healthcare (3).

2.3.
Furthermore, the Member States will be expected to
draw up a single report on social protection to replace both

(1) OJ C 221, 17.9.2002.
(2) OJ C 48, 21.2.2002.
(3) CESE 928/2003, 17.7.2003.

C 32/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.2.2004

The Committee notes that the Commission com-
3.1.3.
munication focuses on the streamlining and simplification of
the various coordination processes in the field of social
protection and not on the objectives, guidelines and indicators
that form part of these processes.

3.1.4.
The latter are to be developed in greater depth at a
later stage in the social protection coordination process.
Accordingly, the Commission work programme provides for
the following before the launch of the new process in 2006:

— a Joint Social

Inclusion Report

to be submitted in
the spring of 2004 subsequent to the NAPs/inclusion
presented by the Member States in July 2003 for the
period 2003-2005;

— a healthcare and long-term care communication to be

presented in spring 2004;

— a report on making work pay to be submitted in spring

2004;

— a consolidated set of

indicators together with new
demographic and financial projections prior to the intro-
duction or updating of the national strategy reports on
pensions in 2005;

— an evaluation of all cooperation undertaken with respect

to pensions, social inclusion and healthcare.

3.1.5.
each of these key stages.

The Committee insists that it must be consulted on

3.2. On the Commission communication on streamlining open

coordination in the field of social protection

3.2.1.
The Committee agrees with the aims of the com-
munication, i.e. to streamline and simplify open coordination
in the field of social protection. The Committee particularly
welcomes the following positive aspects of this new approach:

— the reinforcement of the social dimension of the Lisbon
strategy lending greater political weight to the goals
of modernisation and general
improvement of social
protection;

— the extension of the Lisbon strategy on the basis of
positive interaction between the economy, employment
and social protection; this necessary synergy will bring
benefits to all three sides of the triangle, i.e. sustainable
economic growth, more and better quality jobs and
greater social cohesion, with the latter constituting a
fully-fledged strand of the process;

— the improved structure of the pillars social inclusion,
pensions and healthcare achieved by streamlining and
simplifying the related process;

— the progressive integration of the new Member States
into the process of coordination of social protection.

3.2.2.
The Committee welcomes the enthusiasm shown in
the communication for an open approach. The communi-
cation stresses ‘the high degree of organisation of civil
society in relation to social exclusion’, and the need for ‘the
involvement of a range of actors — the involvement of social
partners and consultation with NGOs and representatives of
sub-national branches of government’. Governments and
public authorities must also demonstrate a real desire to open
up the processes involved and include both the social partners
and all other organisations concerned so that they might make
an effective contribution. The Committee is of course aware
that the partners involved vary according to the case at hand.

3.2.3.
mittee has some reservations and concerns.

However, despite this positive evaluation, the Com-

3.2.3.1.
The Committee fears that the processes used at the
moment will lose steam during the transition period prior to
the launch of the new system in 2006 and may even peter out
entirely or stagnate. This applies in particular to the process of
social inclusion, but also to pensions (the aim being both
adequate provision and a feasible retirement system) and
healthcare, which has thus far been unsuccessful in adopting
the open coordination method as underlined by the Committee
in its opinion (1).

3.2.3.2.
The Committee also fears that bringing the various
processes together into one global mechanism to be introduced
in 2006 will damage the specific nature of the individual
pillars of social inclusion, pensions and healthcare. Each of
these faces quite distinct challenges. For example, the goal of
social inclusion not only raises the issues of minimum earnings
and employment, but also accommodation, education, health,
access to justice, etc. Similarly, the healthcare sector faces
challenges specific to patients requiring long-term care, the
elderly and people with a disability. Each of these areas
involves a different set of players,
in particular the social
partners and relevant NGOs and other organisations, such as
social economy organisations, patients’ and care-providers’
associations, etc. This concern is expounded in further detail
below.

(1) CESE 928/2003, 17.7.2003.

5.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/63

4. Specific comments

The Committee insists that the common objectives
4.1.
must be more clearly defined. The proposal made by the
Commission to replace the existing distinct sets of objectives
in the fields of social inclusion, pensions and healthcare and
long-term care with a set of common overall objectives raises
a number of questions and leads to confusion. It is not evident
in what way these objectives are ‘common’. Is this because
they apply to all three pillars? The Committee is concerned
that any objectives that are common to the pillars of social
inclusion, pensions and healthcare all at once will necessarily
be very general in nature and that this would be out of sync
with the specific nature of the problems at hand. Accordingly,
the Committee feels that specific objectives relating to each
individual pillar must be added to the common objectives.
Otherwise, the entire process would be weakened. The Com-
mittee would like this issue to be dealt with as a priority and
would ask the Commission to provide firm guarantees in this
respect. The Committee further insists that the new objectives
must not damage any progress already made, above all in
terms of social inclusion, and demands that the continuity of
work already undertaken must be maintained. Lastly, the
Committee calls to mind its desire for objectives to be set by
the Member States at national level in addition to the European
objectives.

4.2.
The Committee shares the Commission’s view that it is
necessary to consider a limited number of cross-cutting issues.
However, should specific objectives be added to the common
objectives, as advocated by the Committee, a large number of
further, horizontal
issues could render the process more
complex, contrary to the desired simplification and stream-
lining.

The Committee welcomes the inclusion of the par-
4.2.1.
ticularly important notion of gender mainstreaming in the
cross-cutting issues. The Committee asks that concrete projects
relevant to gender mainstreaming be clearly identified within
each individual field and that details concerning the implemen-
tation of these projects be included in the annual national
reports and closely followed up at European level.

4.2.2.
The principle ‘to make work pay and provide secure
income’ is one of the four broad objectives of the modernis-
ation and improvement of social protection cited by the
Commission in its communication of 1999 (1). As this topic is
also dealt with as part of the BEPGs and the Employment
Guidelines, coordination of activities is, in the Committee’s
view, in any case necessary given the importance of this issue.

The Committee agrees that by requesting that the
4.3.
Member States submit a single report on social protection, the
synergy between the activities undertaken in each pillar could
be enhanced and any overlapping prevented. However, the
Committee is also aware of the risks inherent in a minimalist
approach in terms of taking account of the specific problems
related to each issue. It will be difficult to achieve the same
depth of content in a report covering all three topics as in
separate reports for each. Hence it is essential that the single
report should correctly follow up any undertakings made in
the NAPs/inclusion and the strategy reports on pensions and
thus maintain the momentum.

4.4.
As the Member States are to draw up annual reports
focussing on progress made in attaining the common objec-
tives, the Committee approves of the three-year cycle chosen
for the national programming reports. The annual national
reports will be necessary to ensure that any progress made is
correctly followed up at European level and to assist the
Commission and the Council in drawing up their annual Joint
Social Protection Report, which is therefore a key instrument
in the new process.

As the communication stresses, the greatest challenge
4.5.
for the new process will be to monitor progress made in all of
the areas concerned in a both transparent and effective manner.
It is essential that a set of indicators be developed. The
Committee understands the Commission’s concern to ensure
that the overall number of indicators remains concise, but
stresses that it will only be possible to assess the extent to
which objectives and guidelines have been met if the indicators
used are sufficiently valid and detailed. The Committee calls to
mind its earlier comments in this respect (2) and its request to
be consulted on new proposals.

The Committee is satisfied that the new process will
4.5.1.
lead to greater visibility of EU-level social statistics in that it
will require more reliable, comparable and up-to-date data.

5. Conclusions

The Committee notes the inclusion in the draft European
constitution of the principle of coordination of the social
policies of the Member States, but feels it to be equally
important for this principle to be based on a real political will
to draw up concrete strategies.

(1) Communication from the Commission on A concerted strategy

for modernising social protection COM(1999) 347 final.

(2) OJ C 221, 17.9.2002.

C 32/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.2.2004

The Committee finds it particularly positive that the communi-
cation aims to reinforce the social dimension of the Lisbon
strategy,
to the goals of
lending greater political weight
modernisation and improvement of social protection.

fields of social inclusion, pensions and healthcare does not
become lost. Each of these sectors faces distinct challenges,
involves a different set of players and calls for specific
objectives.

The Committee feels that particular attention must be paid to
ensuring that by bringing the different processes together into
one global mechanism the specific nature of the individual

It is essential that the single report should correctly follow up
any undertakings made in the NAPs/inclusion and the strategy
reports on pensions and thus maintain the momentum.

Brussels, 30 October 2003

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council
Regulation introducing a scheme to compensate for the additional costs incurred in the marketing
of certain fishery products from the Azores, Madeira, the Canary Islands and the French
departments of Guiana and Réunion as a result of those regions’ remoteness’

(COM(2003) 516 final — 2003/0202 (CNS))

(2004/C 32/13)

On 11 September 2003, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

On 23 September 2003, the Bureau of the European Economic and Social Committee instructed the
Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment to prepare the Committee’s work on
the subject.

Given the urgent nature of the work, at its 403rd plenary session of 29 and 30 October 2003 (meeting
of 29 October), the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Sarró Iparraguirre as
rapporteur-general and adopted the following opinion by 76 votes in favour and two abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The outermost regions of the Community (the Portu-
guese autonomous regions of the Azores and Madeira, the
Spanish autonomous community of the Canary Islands and
the French overseas departments of Guadeloupe, Guiana,
Martinique and Réunion) are lagging behind in socio-economic
terms, which is why the Community provides assistance for
promoting their economic and social development, and their
smooth integration in the dynamics of the internal market.

The difficulties faced by the fisheries sector in the
1.3.
outermost regions of the Community are exacerbated,
in
particular, by the cost of transporting fishery products to the
markets as a result of their remoteness and isolation.

Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty recognises the need to
1.4.
adopt special measures to assist the outermost regions and
mentions the fisheries sector explicitly.

1.2.
In this context, the Council has set up programmes of
specific options for alleviating the remoteness and insularity
of these outermost regions.

1.5.
In response to this situation, in 1992 the Community
introduced a scheme to assist producers in these regions in the
marketing of certain fishery products. The scheme was renewed