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 — A European initiative for the development of micro-credit in support of growth and employment COM(2007) 708 final/2
Date: 2008-09-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, EU initiative, European Committee of the Regions, economic growth, employment aid, employment policy, micro-enterprise, microloan

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/23

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council,
the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A European initiative for the development of
micro-credit in support of growth and employment’

the European Parliament,

COM(2007) 708 final/2

(2009/C 77/04)

On 13 November 2007 the 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 to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A European initiative for the development of micro-credit in support of
growth and employment.

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 15 July 2008. The rapporteur was Mr Pezzini.

At its 447th plenary session, held on 17 and 18 September 2008 (meeting of 18 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee unanimously adopted the following opinion.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

The Committee welcomes the Commission's moves to
1.1
increase support for the setting-up and growth of micro-enter-
prises and fostering the entrepreneurial spirit, so as to expand
the Community's production and employment base with a view
to greater competitiveness, greater cohesion and a higher-quality
knowledge-based economy in line with the renewed Lisbon
objectives.

1.2 While the Committee welcomes the initiative to set up a
new Community support structure for micro-credit, it feels that
merely encouraging Member States is not enough, given that the
non-bank sector, which is not covered by the EC bank directives,
is regulated inadequately in many Member States and by widely
differing basic provisions.

1.3
The Committee believes that a pilot project for socially
responsible micro-investment bringing together bank and non-
bank micro-credit
in a European network —
through the implementation of memorandums of understanding
for socially responsible investment with individual institutions
and support from trade associations — should target in particu-
lar those unlikely to obtain bank credit:

institutions

— to develop projects for genuine, productive, decent work;

— to enhance and expand the production, cooperation and

employment base;

— to reactivate individuals'

‘empowerment’ capacity, building
processes for integrating, supporting and enhancing the abil-
ities of people in danger of economic and social exclusion.

In addition,

1.5
for
the Committee feels
micro-credit must go hand in hand with training credits for
applicants, facilitating their development and success on the
market, to prevent social exclusion and continually enhance the
implementation of the Lisbon Strategy.

support

that

frameworks

The Committee accepts that any changes to the institu-
1.6
tional
are
and legal
primarily a matter for the Member States, to be implemented by
means of
the annual Lisbon governance cycle. Nevertheless,
action is needed to boost the European reference system, parti-
cularly by:

supporting micro-credit

— establishing a network of agreements on socially responsible
investment (MOUs), between the European micro-credit fund to
be set up and individual micro-credit institutions on the
ground, so that
the micro-credit network is based on
compatible standards of soundness, solvency, portfolio diver-
sification (1), transparency and combating usury;

— establishing an EU rating system for bank and non-bank
MFIs, to increase their quality and reliability, as well as the
information on risk and performance, by
availability of
adopting a common format to enable dialogue and best-
practice exchange, as well as the provisional awarding of an
EU MFI quality label that will help to attract funds and
increase the confidence of potential micro-credit recipients;

— launching EU information and training measures

for
micro-credit
stakeholders on the available options and
means of operation and, from the point of view of potential
beneficiaries, on the requirements and method of preparing
a draft business plan — using a simplified, standardised
format;

The Committee is convinced that an innovative use of
1.4
new technologies in the field of micro-credit could help extend
the reach of micro-finance, by means of a network, while also
increasing competition and reducing costs for users.

(1) Cf. the studies by the Nobel prize-winner Harry Markowitz on the rela-
tionship between portfolio diversification, risk reduction and compen-
sation in fluctuations in investment return (efficiency curve) stabilising
the economic cycle.

C 77/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

— introducing EU measures aimed at the ongoing training and
capacity building of management and staff of bank and
non-bank MFIs, based on common technical expertise, and
as a way of dealing with changes in micro-finance, new
customer requirements and the need for a common basis to
facilitate EU-wide dialogue and best-practice-exchange; and

1.12
A social view of credit, which could also be the basis
for setting up a micro-credit fund, ties in closely with corporate
social responsibility principles and the values of better, more
widespread employment.

— establishing an EU data base network on the basis of harmo-
nised criteria, enabling the collation and processing of stan-
dardised data on transactions and related risk, inter alia to
reduce the cost of risk assessment inherent in individual
micro-credit transactions.

The Committee has misgivings about the proposal to set
1.7
up a dedicated Community support structure within the Jeremie
department of the EIF. It would not give the initiative optimal
visibility and would limit the scope it ought to have for coordi-
nating other existing initiatives, while also preventing it from
assistance. The
taking on activities other
Committee therefore thinks that an independent department
should be set up, which could act as a micro-credit fund.

than technical

Support

for EMAS environmental certification can
1.13
provide an excellent means to encourage social growth of busi-
nesses and facilitate informed dissemination of a micro-credit
fund.

2. Introduction

the
In April 2007 the SME Observatory noted that
2.1
greatest barrier to more product and process innovation lay for
European SMEs in gaining access to credit, followed by the diffi-
culty of finding skilled human resources, while for larger busi-
nesses human resources were the main problem.

1.8
The funding and technical assistance provided by the
new support structure should not be directed solely at new
non-bank MFIs, but rather should cover all such institutions so
as not to distort competition.

2.2
The market's main shortcomings are insufficient seed
capital, available funds and demand. These issues are addressed
by the Commission Communication Implementing the Com-
munity Lisbon Programme: Financing SME Growth — Adding
European Value (3), on which the Committee has commented on
several occasions (4).

1.9
The EU MFI initiative should include measures to increase
social dialogue, as well as dialogue between the various civil
society players and to make optimum use of EU best-practice-
exchange networks,
the European Microfinance
Network, the Microfinance Centre and the European Microfi-
nance Platform.

such as

In particular, the Committee noted that ‘Policies to assist
2.3
to start up and develop should be intensified
businesses
lower-cost start-ups, measures to improve
including quicker,
access
training
capital, more
risk
to
programmes, measures to improve access to public networks
and utility services and a denser network of support services for
small enterprises’ (5).

entrepreneurial

the MFI

The Committee feels that

1.10
initiative should
enhance the role of employers' associations in ascertaining the
reliability and competence of applicants, building up strong rela-
tionship and trust potential and providing training, advice and
other kinds of support, to bring out the autonomous capacities
of beneficiaries and cut red tape, particularly as regards drawing
up business plans.

1.11
Setting up a micro-credit fund, operating in conjunction
with financial institutions, state administrations (2), trade asso-
ciations and guarantee cooperatives and credit consortia could
play a major role in directing financial engineering towards
forms of ‘social credit management’.

(2) In many Member States, regional and local administrations support the

development of SMEs by providing funding for credit consortia.

The Committee stresses, as in previous opinions (6),
2.3.1
that ‘Cooperatives, consortia, mutuals, innovative start-ups and
microenterprises can also help boost competitiveness and inno-
vative capacity within the EU’.

It has also noted that ‘A main issue is to ease access to
2.4
finance markets’ and that
‘banks and other financial stake-
holders, such as venture capital funds, should be encouraged to
adopt a more positive attitude to risk-taking’ (7).

(3) COM(2006) 349 final of 29.6.2006.
(4) Opinion CESE 599/2007, OJ C 168/1 of 20.7.2007 — rapporteurs:

Mr Van Iersel and Mr Gibellieri.

(5) Opinion CESE 982/2007, OJ C 256/8 of 27.10.2007 — rapporteur:

Ms Faes.

(6) Opinion CESE 1485/2005 on the Competitiveness and Innovation
Framework Programme (2007-2013); rapporteurs: Mr Welschke and
Ms Fusco.

(7) Cf. footnotes 4 and 5.

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/25

initiatives

In autumn 2007 the Commission announced that a set
2.5
of
including a
for SMEs was being discussed,
European initiative setting up a new support structure for
micro-credit (8).

2.6 Micro-credit is generally acknowledged to be a financial
impact on entrepreneurship,
instrument which has great
economic development and productive social
inclusion but
where there are still many shortcomings and much room for
improvement. This relates to difficulties in obtaining seed capital
investment, especially when the applicant is unemployed, has
recently immigrated, belongs to an ethnic minority, or is based
in a convergence region.

2.7
Another problem arises from the fact that for financial
institutions economies of scale come into play, linked to fixed
transaction costs such as information-gathering, assessment, and
the follow-up to loans. This is particularly the case with
micro-loans to the self-employed and to SMEs that are insuffi-
ciently transparent, with a limited capacity for providing the
necessary information to financial institutions.

The international definition of micro-credit is ‘making
2.8
loans — below EUR 25 000 in Europe (9) and below
small
USD 100 000 in the United States — to low-income earners
who usually have no access to bank loans because they are
insufficiently solvent and/or because the cost of managing such
loans is considered too high’ (10). The definition of micro-credit
does not include consumer credit.

The Committee

2.9
agrees with the Commission that
micro-credit has an important role to play in implementing the
Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs and promoting social inclu-
sion. It is essential that micro-credit preserves its main role of
encouraging growth of self-employment and development of
micro-enterprises, and is not reduced to mere social aid.

2.10
The Committee believes that micro-credit should be
used in the EU to address problems revealed by market failures,
giving entrepreneurs access to credit, which is necessary to start
including in the
up or expand economically viable activities,
area of development aid and cooperation policy (11).

At Community level, the EIF's (12) CIP — Micro-Credit
2.11
Guarantee provides a set of guarantees for micro-credit finan-
to microenterprises (13).
institutions
cing granted by local

(8) Back in 1997, the Commission provided support for micro-credit, in

conjunction with the EIF, through the SME-Guarantee facility.

(9) SEC(2004) 1156; Competitiveness

Programme, 1639/2006/EC.

and Innovation Framework

(10) Cf. Eurofi Francia website: eurofi.net.
(11) Cf. Regulation No 1905/2006 of the Parliament and of the Council
establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation.

(12) EIF, European Investment Fund.
(13) For

the definition of microenterprises

see Recommendation

2003/361/EC.

However, there is currently no specific Community legislation
on micro-credit
bank
from that
micro-credit sector, which is subject to European banking regu-
lations (14), and the references
included in
various Community programmes and initiatives (15).

to micro-credit

governing

apart

the

2.12
Furthermore, the micro-credit sector is regulated and
managed differently according to the Member State. Only two
Member States have specific legislation governing the non-bank
microfinance sector (16), although four other Member States do
have anti-usury legislation (17).

The Spring European Council pointed out, inter alia, the
2.13
urgent need for
to finance,
including through existing EU financial instruments’ (18) and to
‘promote higher overall
labour force participation and tackle
segmentation in order to ensure active social inclusion’.

facilitation of access

‘further

that a broader

The Committee believes

2.14
legal and
support framework could help to provide greater stimulus to set
up new production businesses and facilitate their consolidation,
preventing risks of marginalisation and exclusion from the
production system which can exacerbate social and criminal
scourges such as usury.

3. The Commission proposal

3.1

The Commission sets forth two lines of action:

improving

— launch of a programme of reform by the Member States,
aimed at
for micro-credit
according to national circumstances and priorities, with the
possibility of Community assistance in establishing quantita-
tive targets and good practices;

conditions

the

— setting-up of a new Community support structure for
micro-credit within Jeremie, to develop technical assistance
and support for consolidation of micro-credit bodies/institu-
tions,
and communication
measures.

and appropriate publicity

(14) Directive 2006/48/EC — CRD (Capital Requirement Directive).
(15) Cf. the Jeremie initiative; the Growth and Employment Initiative
(Decision 98/347/EC); the Multiannual Programme for SMEs; the
Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (Decision
1639/2006/EC);
the
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (1927/2006/EC).

the EAFRD (Regulation 1698/2005/EC);

(16) France and Romania. In addition, the legal systems of the United
Kingdom and Finland provide for some exemptions on the subject,
although there is no specific legislation.

(17) Belgium, Germany, Italy and Poland.
(18) 13-14 March 2008, point 11.

C 77/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

4. Framework for the development of micro-credit

in

support of growth and employment

European Conferences of Crafts and Small Businesses (25), European
financial institutions have promoted and supported a culture of
financial engineering in the Member States (26).

4.1 Micro-credit can be a lever for social
inclusion and
enable less well-off people and businesses that are excluded
from the conventional banking system to gain access to the
crucial funds needed to start up and develop income-generating
activities.

At EU level,

the Small Business Act

for Europe (19) —
4.2
whose explicit objective is to establish concrete measures and
principles for improving the European SME environment —
should make it possible to identify and remove the barriers to
unlocking the potential of small businesses, by stepping up the
drive for
increasing access to credit, and
framing appropriate rules on energy and the environment.

simplification,

4.4.2
The need to take practical steps to ease access to credit
and help establish financial engineering prompted the Commis-
sion and the EIB, under pressure from European small business
organisations, to set up the EIF (27). After an initial, brief diver-
sion into supporting communications networks (28),
the EIF
turned its attention to providing various forms of guarantee to
support measures assisting micro-businesses and SMEs, often
involving financial engineering.

of

By means

Commission's multi-annual
4.4.3
programmes
for micro-businesses, SMEs, cooperation and,
latterly, through Axis 1 of the CIP (29), financial engineering has
been developed through:

the

4.3
The Committee feels that there should be better coordi-
nation of the array of relevant existing instruments, taking on
board the experience of past and present instruments pertaining
to micro-credit, as pointed out in the Commission Communica-
tion itself (20), i.e.:

— guarantees for loans granted to SME cooperatives and credit

consortia;

— the Jeremie initiative;

— securitisation (30) of the risk capital of credit consortia;

— the CIP Micro-credit Guarantee (21); the EMN and MFC (22)
under the Community action programme to combat social
exclusion;

— capital guarantees through mezzanine credit (31);

— the European Social Fund's initiatives;

— venture capital

investments, support

for eco-innovation,

technology transfer;

— the rural development programmes under the EAFRD (23).

— business angels.

The Committee believes that when devising new Com-
4.3.1
munity micro-credit initiatives, the successes achieved in the
development and practical implementation over several years of
DG Europaid's EU-ACP Microfinance Framework Programme
should be taken into due account.

4.4 Financial engineering and the European micro-credit fund

Since the early 1980s (24), and particularly as a result
4.4.1
of the ideas and proposals arising from discussions during the

(19) Cf. also in this
Mr Cappellini.

regard Opinion CESE 977/2008;

rapporteur

(20) Cf. COM(2007) 708, Annex 3.
(21) CIP, Competitiveness and Innovation Programme 2007-2013.
(22) EMN: European Microfinance Network; MFC: Microfinance Centre for

Central and Eastern Europe.

(23) EAFRD: European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development.
(24) 1982: European Year of SMEs and the Craft Industry.

(25) Held in Avignon in 1990, Berlin in 1994 and Milan in 1997.
(26) Financial engineering is based on the principle that financial support
to a small-scale entrepreneur who wishes to start up a new business or
invest in new products or processes should extend beyond the rela-
tionship between the small entrepreneur and the financial institution,
but — given the social function of the business — must involve other
parties, absorbing various degrees of liability and sharing part of the
risk and cost.

(27) EIF: European Investment Fund, established in 1994, driven by the
then DG XXIII (the directorate-general set up to support small business
and the craft sector, which was behind the related European confer-
ences …), and by DG II (Economy and finance). The EIF had an original
budget of ECU 1 billion from the EIB, ECU 800 million from the
Commission and ECU 200 million, made up of shares of ECU
2 million each, from European financial institutions. More than fifty
such institutions signed up to the initiative from the outset.

(28) Cf. Lille metropolitan area.
(29) CIP, Axis 1: support for entrepreneurship; Axis 2: support for ICT;

Axis 3: support for Intelligent Energy Europe.

(30) Debt securitisation works by ceding part or all of the amount owed to
a credit consortium (or bank) to specialised financial institutions in
order to enable credit consortia in particular to boost the credit guar-
antees they can offer to undertakings.

(31) Mezzanine credit is based more on beneficiary companies' expected
cash flow than on real guarantees.
It can work in two ways:
(1) subordinate debt (loans at a fixed rate or index-linked rate);
(2) equity kicker (the lender/investor is entitled to a percentage share of
the increased worth of the property to which the loan refers). Mezza-
nine finance matures at between four and eight years.

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/27

4.4.4
On several occasions, the Committee has welcomed the
action taken by the Commission, EIB and EIF, particularly in the
last fifteen years, to support small businesses. The Committee
acknowledged the broadening and modernisation of the EIB
group financial support
it believes that
efforts could be stepped up, inter alia through programmes
agreed jointly with:

to SMEs (32) but

— the EIB as regards capital, and the EIF as regards guarantees;

— the financial institutions in the individual Member States;

— micro-business and SME representative bodies; and

— credit consortia already engaged in financial engineering,
acting as guarantors for between 50 and 80 % of business
loans.

A micro-credit

4.4.5
fund network could be set up at
Member State level, drawing on EIB rotating funds and with
additional EIF guarantees operating at various levels. At regional
levels, credit consortia
(NUTS II) and provincial
(where they exist) (33) could provide the structure for granting
the loans. Credit consortia have already gained considerable
experience in the area of seed capital and, with sufficient risk
capital, counter-guaranteed by the EIF, could provide the loan
guarantees.

(NUTS III)

this

aim of

This new proposal should be clarified with respect to
4.4.5.1
the micro-fund by the EIB group and the
the creation of
Commission. The
to support
initiative
micro-finance institutions across Europe through the provision
of funding (grants, loans, mezzanine or equity instruments) as
well as technical assistance. This micro-fund is being established
by the EIF with an initial capital of around EUR 40 million for
support activities (of which EUR 20 m from the EIB). The
Committee believes that the EIF should also, in future, admin-
ister the fund.

is

4.4.6
A micro-loan could be sufficient to cover the purchase
of the supplies and basic equipment needed to start up a busi-
ness, or to replace equipment, which is always necessary in a
micro-business (34).

that particular

The Committee

4.4.6.1
attention
thinks
should be paid to micro-credit for women entrepreneurs. Here
there needs to be greater attention to flexibility and to the prac-
tical arrangements and criteria for granting loans, in order to be
responsive to situations where social or psychological difficulties
come into play; these can be aggravated if the person:

(32) http://www.eib.org/projects/publications/sme-consultation-2007-

2008.htm.

(33) The credit consortia system is well-established in many European

countries and has an active European federation.

(34) Micro-businesses account for 94 % of all non-agricultural private

companies in Europe.

— is a member of a minority,

— faces a difficult family situation,

— or is being pushed into social self-exclusion.

4.4.6.2 When designing and managing microcredit
in
support of female entrepreneurship, one must keep in mind the
priority need to enable women to take on or resume a produc-
tive socio-economic role in society, with a view to boosting
their self-esteem, building a culture of entrepreneurship and
helping them to assume greater responsibilities and risks.

4.4.7 Micro-loans should also provide an opportunity for
young people wishing to set up their own business, who have
sufficient
financial
wherewithal.

professional

training

lack

but

the

4.4.7.1
The initial guarantee for the loan, which in any case
must be granted by a financial institution (which may or may
not be a bank), consists of the equipment purchased. However,
the existence of a European micro-credit fund would encourage
financial institutions to be less stringent in offering loans (35): as
well as having its own funding and expertise and the ability to
intervene from time to time, via the EIF, credit consortia and
trade associations, to help pay off any debts, the Fund should
also be willing and able to promote exacting standards of
soundness, production enhancement and diversification, trans-
parency, and combating usury (36).

4.4.8
Studies on micro and small-business insolvency have
found that in the major EU countries over the last ten years,
loan-related insolvencies have not exceeded 4 % (37). Thus, with
a rate of less than 5 %, a multiplier of 20 can be used to guar-
antee the loan granted by the financial institution.

4.4.9 With a multiplier of 20 and a guarantee covering 50 %
of the insolvency of each individual debtor, a credit consortium
with risk capital of EUR 1 million could guarantee loans to a
large number of entrepreneurs (38)
for a total of up to
EUR 40 million.

(35) By removing a significant proportion of their risk, financial engi-
neering makes it easier and less costly for financial institutions to grant
loans, especially to new and little-known entrepreneurs.

(36) Joint measures implemented by banks and trade associations to
improve financial management of microenterprises were referred to in
the documents of
the first European Crafts Conference, held
in Avignon in 1990, and in the second conference, held in Berlin
in 1994. They were developed in particular by the network of
Raiffeisen-Volksbank (German people's banks) together with trade asso-
ciations (German Confederation of Skilled Crafts — ZDH).

(37) Cf. FedartFidi UE, European federation of craft-sector credit consortia

(of the States in which the credit consortium system operates).

(38) 5 % of EUR 40 million is EUR 2 million; however, as credit consortia
are responsible for only 50 % of a defaulted loan, only EUR 1 million
of risk capital is required. Securitisation of this risk fund could allow
credit consortia to grant new loans up to a new ceiling of
EUR 40 million.

C 77/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

4.4.9.1
By granting guarantees, the credit consortium system
enabled some EUR 6 billion to be loaned to Italian craft firms
in 2007.

4.5.6
EMAS environmental certification would be the most
appropriate certification to require in a financial engineering
process in connection with the social role of credit (41).

4.4.10
There are approximately 500 000 business start-ups
per annum in the EU-27. The number of businesses that fail is
slightly lower (39). SMEs account for 99 % of each year's business
start-ups and, of
least 240 000 are one-person
businesses (40).

these, at

4.4.11
Using the example in point 4.4.9, EUR 1 million of
risk capital coupled with financial engineering could guarantee
loans amounting to EUR 25 000, via a European micro-credit
fund, to 1 600 small businesses.

4.5 Social credit management

4.5.1
As has already been stated, credit is a key instrument
for economic and social development and building a ‘social
market economy’.

4.5.2
That is why new concepts of credit have gradually
emerged and gained ground, with credit no longer being seen
merely as a relationship between client and financial institution
but as an instrument with high social value because of
its
connection with better-quality, more secure jobs and with
economic development.

4.5.3
granting credit need to be spread more widely.

In this new, wider perspective,

the risks related to

4.5.4

Sharing credit risk between a number of bodies:

— increases guarantees for financial institutions;

— lowers interest rates on the credit granted;

— makes it easier to grant loans to applicants.

4.5.5
In keeping with the inherent social value, granting
loans must increasingly be made subject to corporate social
responsibility and employers must adjust and adhere to sustain-
able development values.

Brussels, 18 September 2008.

(39) Source: Corporate Europe Observatory.
(40) In the EU, 49 % of micro-businesses have no employees and are thus

one-person businesses.

In recent years, only a few tens of thousands of busi-
4.5.7
nesses have been able to use Community financial
instru-
ments (42), revealing the yawning gap between the way the issue
is presented and the practical results. This prompts considera-
tion of the practical possibilities of intervening with systems
which can boost the involvement of financial institutions and
amplify the results.

On 20 and 21 November 1997,

4.5.8
the Luxembourg
Extraordinary European Council, whose agenda contained a
single item — employment — launched three practical initia-
tives to help businesses stay competitive in the markets, and
called upon the Commission to put forward proposals that
would boost the business sector and promote employment in
that field. The three initiatives were: the ETF Start-Up Facility,
the JEV (Joint European Venture) and SME-Guarantee Facility.
Two of
these initiatives — the ETF Start-Up Facility and
SME-Guarantee Facility — were aimed at easing access to credit.

Over 277 000 SMEs had availed of the growth and
4.5.8.1
employment programme and MAP (multiannual programme)
facilities by the end of 2005 (43).

4.5.8.2
European programmes for SMEs (44).

The SME Guarantee Facility is one of

the key

4.5.9
There are around 23 million micro enterprises and
1.1 million small businesses in the EU of which 90 % are sole
traders or partnerships. Only 5 or 6 % of them make use of
venture capital.

4.5.10
The Committee therefore believes that new forms of
support for credit must be devised, aimed also at partnerships,
as has been the case with financial engineering tools. Failing
thus creating a
this,
barrier to the financial growth of micro and small enterprises.

take-up will continue to be negligible,

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(41) Cf. Regulation 1836/93/EEC and Regulation 761/2001/EC.
(42) Consultation document on the Community programme on enterprise
and competitiveness, 2006/2010, DG Enterprise, 2004, point 118.
(43) Source: COM(2007) 235 — Report to the Council and the European
Parliament on the
the multiannual
programme for enterprise and entrepreneurship, and in particular for
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (2001-2006).

instruments of

financial

(44) At 31.12.2005, the average utilisation reached 67 % for the Loan
Guarantee window, 66 % for the Micro-credit window and 65 % for
the Equity window.