Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission — A stronger partnership for the outermost regions (COM(2004) 343 final)
Date: 2005-07-13
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU regional policy, European neighbourhood policy, economic and social cohesion, peripheral region, regional integration

25.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/21

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the
Commission — A stronger partnership for the outermost regions

(COM(2004) 343 final)

(2005/C 294/05)

On 27 May 2004 the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the Communication
from the Commission — A stronger partnership for the outermost regions

The Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion, which was responsible
for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 22 June 2005. The rapporteur
was Ms López Almendáriz.

At its 419th plenary session, held on 13-14 July 2005 (meeting of 13 July), the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 62 votes to 1 with 8 abstentions.

1. Introduction

2. Gist of the Commission document

1.1
In June 2002, the Seville European Council asked the
European Commission to submit a report presenting a global,
coherent approach to the special characteristics of the situation
of the outermost regions and to ways of addressing them; in
response, the Commission adopted a Communication entitled
A stronger partnership for the outermost regions (1) on 26 May
2004.

1.2
This request from the European Council, which came on
the eve of EU enlargement and in the context of globalisation,
represented a decisive initiative for drawing up a global strategy
for development in the outermost regions, based on pressing
ahead with the implementation of Article 299(2) of the Treaty.

On 29 May 2002,

the European Economic

just before the Seville European
1.3
Council,
and Social Committee
adopted an Own-initiative opinion on the Future strategy for
the European Union (2), which
the outermost
these
proposed the development of a global strategy for
regions, specifying principles, objectives, available resources
and a timetable for the adoption of measures.

regions of

1.4 With the objective of
launching a comprehensive,
coherent policy for the outermost regions, in June 2003 the
regional governments and the countries concerned submitted
memorandums, all stressing the importance of recognising the
specific characteristics distinguishing these regions from other
European regions.

2.1
The Commission is proposing a stronger partnership
with the outermost regions of the Union. The new strategy
forms part of the reform of EU cohesion policy for 2007-13.
The Communication identifies three priorities:

— Competitiveness: improve the competitiveness of the outer-
most regions by creating and developing a business envir-
onment which will attract new companies.

— Accessibility: step up cohesion efforts in the outermost
regions in order to reduce the difficulties connected with
their remoteness, such as fragmentation among a group of
islands or enclosure in areas with poor access. The reduc-
tion of
the additional costs of
production in the outermost regions is one of the main
priorities of the Union's activities to help these regions.

these handicaps and of

— Regional

integration:

the outermost regions and neigh-
bouring non-member countries exist in a common regional
environment which should facilitate trade among them in
goods and services. This is why it is important to encourage
their integration into their surrounding geographical area.

2.2
The Commission proposes two specific solutions aimed
at helping the outermost regions to develop their full potential:

Articles III-424 and IV-440(2) of

the Constitutional
1.5
Treaty confirm specific legal recognition of
the outermost
regions, and a new objective of territorial cohesion is added to
the objectives of economic and social cohesion.

(1) COM(2004) 343 final.
(2) OJ C 221 of 17.9.2002, p. 10, rapporteur: Ms López Almendáriz.

— A specific programme to compensate for handicaps: this
programme would be financed by the ERDF over the
period 2007-13.
It would be dedicated to reducing the
specific handicaps faced by the economies of the outermost
regions which are listed in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty:
remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult topography and
climate and economic dependence on a few products.

C 294/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.11.2005

— An action plan for a wider neighbourhood: the aim would
be to enlarge the natural sphere of influence of the outer-
most regions in socio-economic terms (including as regards
migration-related issues) as well as in terms of culture. This
means reducing barriers which limit the scope for trade
within the geographical area of these regions, which are far
from the European mainland but very close to the regional
markets of the Caribbean, America and Africa. The action
plan for a wider neighbourhood will consist of measures
concerning both trade and customs matters and also trans-
national and cross-border cooperation.

— lack of economies of scale in the production sector and the

need for firms to stock large quantities of goods;

— faster depreciation of goods, and the consequent need for
equipment to comply with higher safety standards or be
replaced more often (problems caused by the difficult
climate and terrain);

— problems caused by the use of production infrastructure
geared to larger-scale production and distribution systems;

3. General comments

The Committee welcomes the fact that Articles III-424
3.1
the draft Constitutional Treaty confirm
and IV-440(2) of
the
specific legal recognition of
highest level of legislation, recognising their exceptional nature
and providing for the adoption of cross-sectoral laws and regu-
lations to ensure flexible application of common policies in
these regions.

the outermost regions at

3.2
The Committee is pleased to note the EU's ability to
respond to regions' specific needs and, in particular, its recogni-
tion of the specific characteristics of the outermost regions and
of the way they differ from other regions with geographical or
demographic constraints.

— shortage of skilled labour because of

labour
market and the difficulty of gaining access to the rest of the
European labour market;

the small

— the additional costs of energy supply, affecting farming

products for the local market;

— lack of access to high-speed connections and telecommuni-
cations networks, the additional costs of electronic commu-
nications services;

— the difficulty of promoting local products outside a region;

— obstacles created by the need to comply with environ-

mental regulations;

— twofold insularity, i.e. the fact that some outermost regions
are themselves broken down into a number of islands.

3.3
The Committee welcomes the fact that the Commission
has accepted the recommendation it made in its Opinion on
the Future strategy for the outermost regions of the European
Union to reinforce the Commission's interdepartmental group
for the outermost regions, creating a specific unit in DG Regio
to give it more human resources, and hopes that its role of
interdepartmental coordination will not be obstructed.

3.6
The Committee shares the Commission's concern to
integrate the outermost regions into the Lisbon and Gothen-
burg strategy with a view to creating jobs and boosting
economic reform and social cohesion, and therefore proposes
that their potential be harnessed in the area of the knowledge-
based society.

the
the special status of

recognition in the
3.4
The Committee welcomes
Commission Communication that
the
outermost regions is based on the principles of equality and
proportionality. The special status allows differing treatment to
take account of the distinct situation of those regions, so that
their inhabitants can enjoy the same opportunities as people
living in other regions of Europe.

3.7
The Committee feels that the vigorous growth of the
tourism sector represents considerable added value, helping to
increase the competitiveness of the outermost regions' econo-
mies. However, the sector must not grow too fast because of
the imbalance that would be created and the detrimental
impact on the environmental sustainability of those regions.

3.5
The Committee welcomes the Commission's recognition
that the combination of permanent constraints on the outer-
most regions gives rise to additional costs, in terms of energy
supply in general, and primarily, where farm products for local
consumption are concerned, owing, inter alia, to the following
difficulties:

— small markets;

4. Specific comments on the Commission Communication

The Committee welcomes the fact that the Commission
4.1
Communication takes into consideration a number of
the
recommendations made in its own-initiative opinion (3) but
regrets that others have not been taken into due account.

— isolation from main markets;

(3) OJ C 221 of 17.9.2002

25.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/23

The Committee wishes to point out that the common
4.2
position of
the outermost regions and the Member States
concerned on future cohesion policy rules applying to these
regions proposed automatic eligibility for the former objective
1 — now the ‘convergence’ objective — as the best way of
addressing their specific situation, thereby guaranteeing that
they receive uniform treatment and the necessary funding to
tackle their permanent constraints.

The Committee notes that the Commission has opted
4.3
for an alternative proposal, combining the application of
general cohesion policy rules to the outermost regions with the
creation of specific instruments: a programme to compensate
for the specific constraints on the outermost regions and an
action plan for the ‘wider neighbourhood’.

The Committee notes that there is no explicit reference
4.4
to the legal scope of the new Article III-424 of the draft Consti-
tutional Treaty (4).

4.5
The Committee regrets that the Commission's strategy
for the outermost regions is chiefly and almost exclusively
concerned with cohesion policy, hardly making any provision
at all for action in other spheres.

The Committee hopes that the progress made in identi-
4.6
fying the specific characteristics of the outermost regions and
noting the inadequacy of certain sectoral policies will result in
a cross-sectoral strategy for these regions which takes account
of their specific, anomalous situation within the Community.

4.7
The Committee therefore thinks that the lack of consid-
eration given to the role of other Community policies means
that,
this cannot be called a genuinely
comprehensive, coherent strategy for the outermost regions as
required by the Seville European Council.

strictly speaking,

(4) ‘Article III-424: Taking account of the structural economic and
social situation of Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Réunion,
the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands, which is compounded
by their remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult topography and
climate, economic dependence on a few products, the permanence
and combination of which severely restrain their development, the
Council, on a proposal from the Commission, shall adopt European
laws, framework laws, regulations and decisions aimed, in particular,
at laying down the conditions of application of the Constitution to
those regions,
shall act after
consulting the European Parliament.
The measures referred to in the first paragraph concern in particular
areas such as customs and trade policies, fiscal policy, free zones,
agriculture and fisheries policies, conditions for supply of raw mate-
rials and essential consumer goods, State aids and conditions of
access to structural funds and to horizontal Union programmes.
The Council shall adopt the measures referred to in the first para-
graph taking into account the special characteristics and constraints
of the outermost regions without undermining the integrity and the
coherence of the Union legal order, including the internal market
and common policies.’

including common policies.

It

4.8
The Committee regrets this oversight, particularly where
agriculture is concerned, in that no response is given to many
of
regions which
urgently require solutions to be found.

raised by the outermost

the questions

4.9
Similarly, the Committee regrets the lack of provisions
on immigration policy seeking to provide solutions to urgent
problems constantly besetting some of the outermost regions
and calls for the specific characteristics of these regions to be
taken into account in future immigration policy.

reservations

The Committee

4.10
regarding
expresses
whether it is appropriate and sufficient to apply the general
cohesion policy eligibility criteria to the outermost regions,
considering that they have insufficient basic infrastructure and
lack the conditions for competitiveness which are necessary if
the goals of the Lisbon and Gothenburg strategies are to be
achieved.

4.11
The Committee notes that the Commission's strategy
for the outermost regions is based almost exclusively on two
specific instruments: the programme to compensate for the
specific constraints they face, and the ‘wider neighbourhood’
action plan (5).

4.12
The Committee welcomes the fact that, under the new
ERDF objective 3, ‘European territorial cooperation’, the outer-
most regions are to be eligible for funding for both cross-
border cooperation and transnational cooperation, as this is
essential if they are to be able to interact with their respective
neighbours.

5. Recommendations

5.1
The Committee believes that the Commission should
draw up a comprehensive strategy for the outermost regions,
providing the resources necessary to implement it in accord-
ance with the commitments made in its March 2000 report
and called for in the June 2002 Seville European Council
Conclusions. To this end,
the
current Article 299(2) of the Treaty (the future Article III-424
of the Constitution) is the sole, common legal basis for all
measures applying to the outermost regions, whether they
involve derogation from the actual Treaty or amendment or
adaptation of secondary legislation.

it must be made clear that

5.2
For these reasons, the Committee considers it right and
necessary to make a number of recommendations urging the
Commission to:

(5) See footnote 1.

C 294/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.11.2005

5.2.1
consider not applying the general cohesion policy elig-
ibility criteria to the outermost regions, as the best way of
enabling them to tackle their permanent constraints, while, in
addition, ensuring that they continue to receive uniform treat-
ment;

adopt new measures to boost the competitiveness of
5.2.8
farm products such as tomatoes,
fruit, plants and flowers,
which have to compete in the same markets as similar products
from other countries with which the EU has association agree-
ments, such as Morocco, or which have preferential systems,
such as the ACP countries;

5.2.2
allocate the two proposed specific instruments suffi-
cient funding to enable them to meet the needs and resolve the
problems of all the outermost regions;

5.2.9
take the necessary measures to ensure that all the
outermost regions continue to benefit from the current levels
of funding and aid, where both the future Rural Development
Fund and the future European Fisheries Fund are concerned;

5.2.3
spare no effort or resources to give practical effect to
the ‘wider neighbourhood’ action plan through effective,
coherent coordination with EU development policy and, in par-
ticular, with the provisions of the Cotonou Agreement, the
MEDA (southern Mediterranean and the Middle East) and ALA
(Latin America and Asia) programmes and other future Com-
munity programmes and initiatives launched with specific
regions of the world;

safeguard the interests of

the Community banana
5.2.4
sector as a whole in the impending changes to the rules
governing the COM in bananas, improving the current market
equilibrium so that growers from the less developed countries
can have access to the Community and global markets while, at
the same time, Community growers' incomes and jobs can be
safeguarded, by setting an appropriate tariff which is suffi-
ciently high to secure the future of the Community banana
sector;

5.2.5
respond to the final outcome of the WTO negotiations
with regard to the setting of the flat tariff rate by proposing,
where necessary, appropriate measures to ensure continued
employment and income guarantees for Community growers in
the banana sector. These could include measures to improve
the mechanisms of the internal support system;

5.2.10
strengthen the European Social Fund's role in the
outermost regions, with a view to bringing down the unem-
ployment rate, which is particularly high in most of these
regions, and ensuring that the people of these regions have the
same opportunities as other EU citizens;

5.2.11
support the creation or, where appropriate, consoli-
dation of economic and social councils, which will convey the
views of economic and social stakeholders and civil society
organisations in general more effectively;

5.2.12
revise its proposals on state aid, taking into account
the provisions of the draft Constitutional Treaty, and continue
and step up the special treatment of the outermost regions as
regards state aid in the agricultural and fisheries sectors and in
the freight sector;

introduce

to ensure

appropriate measures

5.2.13
that
proper provision is made for the outermost regions in all
common transport policy instruments which affect their devel-
opment, and that the specific characteristics of these regions
are taken into account in Community legislation on public
service obligations so that quality and prices can be assured
which are geared to the needs of their inhabitants;

5.2.6
when amending the Posei agricultural programmes,
ensure that their potential is fully exploited. This has not been
the case so far, mainly because some of the measures are very
recent. The ceilings established for the programmes should be
respected, allocating sufficient funding to enable the goals set
to be achieved;

5.2.7
address the specific needs of the outermost regions as
regards rural development policy, not least by abolishing provi-
sions which restrict or prevent access to structural aid; compen-
sating farmers for increased costs; setting aid levels which are
commensurate with the needs of these regions; and increasing
Community coverage by introducing support measures in the
following and other fields: specific production systems, use of
appropriate machinery, agricultural insurance schemes, promo-
tion of the setting-up of associations, and programmes for
combating harmful organisms;

5.2.14
build on and improve the competition system in the
sea and air transport sectors in the outermost regions, particu-
larly in regions suffering from ‘twofold insularity’;

5.2.15
give practical effect to the specific references to the
outermost regions made in the Commission proposal on the
Seventh RTD Framework Programme, in order to facilitate their
participation in Community R&D initiatives in the fields of
climatology,
and
natural risks, among others;

volcanology, oceanography, biodiversity

5.2.16
take into account the specific situation of the outer-
most regions when liberalising the internal gas and electricity
in order to avoid penalising consumers in these
markets,
regions in terms of regularity of supply, quality of services and
prices; that means taking a more flexible approach to estab-
lishing public service obligations and state aid;

25.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/25

5.2.17
urgently adopt measures ensuring sustainable devel-
opment in the outermost regions, particularly in the fields of
protection of biodiversity, the Natura 2000 network and waste
management;

5.2.18
be imaginative when establishing specific mechan-
isms and procedures for the outermost regions, to ensure that
the benefits of the single market do not pass them by, e.g.
encouraging the use of renewable energies and access to broad-
band networks;

Brussels, 13 July 2005.

5.2.19
special
economic development;

ensure that the outermost regions continue to enjoy
their

tax arrangements, as these are essential

for

5.2.20
envisage the active participation of the outermost
regions in the negotiation of the EU-ACP economic partnership
agreements (EPAs),
facilitating the creation of a permanent
channel
for ongoing dialogue between regional — and/or
national — authorities and regional bodies with which the EU
is negotiating the EPAs, in order to make the agreements more
effective, compatible and consistent.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council on market access to port services

(COM(2004) 654 final — 2004/0240 (COD))

(2005/C 294/06)

On 2 December 2004 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 80(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

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 May 2005. The rapporteur was
Mr Retureau.

At its 419th plenary session of 13 and 14 July 2005 (meeting of 13 July), the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 91 votes to 49 with 17 abstentions.

1. Introduction

Following the Green Paper on seaports and maritime
1.1
the White Paper on a
infrastructure of 1997, and whilst
in its drafting phase, the
common transport policy was still
Commission,
in its first proposal for a Directive on market
access to port services in 2001, reiterated that the key elements
of the Ports' package were as follows:

— integration of maritime transport in the TEN-T category;

— regulation of access to port services;

1.2
The objectives of the Ports' package were extensively
developed in the first proposal for a Directive on the second
key issue of market access (1), which was finally rejected after a
third reading in Parliament.

The Commission, exercising its prerogative as the only
1.3
institution with the right of initiative, has now returned to the
issue with a new proposal for a Directive on market access to
port services (2).
the Commission asserted its
conviction that, under the Treaty, it has the right and duty to
legislate in this matter.

In so doing,

1.4
It affirms at the outset that the philosophy, general prin-
ciples and objectives outlined in its 2001 Communication
remain unchanged. However, specific proposed amendments
were taken into account because they enhanced the original
proposal.

— public financing for seaports and port infrastructure.

(1) COM(2001) 35 final.
(2) COM(2004) 654 final, published on 13 October 2004