Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the 2018 National Reform Programme of Belgium and delivering a Council opinion on the 2018 Stability Programme of Belgium
Date: 2018-05-23
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Belgium, budget deficit, economic policy, economic reform, educational reform, employment policy, stability programme, tax reform, transport infrastructure

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 23.5.2018 COM(2018) 401 final  Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the 2018 National Reform Programme of Belgium  and delivering a Council opinion on the 2018 Stability Programme of Belgium  
 
 
Recommendation for a 

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION 

on the 2018 National Reform Programme of Belgium 

and delivering a Council opinion on the 2018 Stability Programme of Belgium 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Articles 121(2) and 148(4) thereof, 

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of 
the  surveillance  of  budgetary  positions  and  the  surveillance  and  coordination  of  economic 
policies1, and in particular Article 5(2) thereof, 
Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission2, 
Having regard to the resolutions of the European Parliament3, 

Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Social Protection Committee, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

On 22 November 2017, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking 
the start of the 2018 European Semester of economic policy coordination. It took due 
account  of  the  European  Pillar  of  Social  Rights,  proclaimed  by  the  European 
Parliament, the Council and the Commission on 17 November 2017. The priorities of 
the  Annual  Growth  Survey  were  endorsed  by  the  European  Council  on  22  March 
2018.  On  22  November  2017,  on  the  basis  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1176/2011,  the 
Commission  also  adopted  the  Alert  Mechanism  Report,  in  which  it  did  not  identify 
Belgium as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried 
out. On the same day, the Commission also adopted a recommendation for a Council 
recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area, which was endorsed by the 
European  Council  on  22  March  2018.  On  14  May  2018,  the  Council  adopted  the 
recommendation  on  the  economic  policy  of  the  euro  area  (‘recommendation  for  the 
euro area’). 

1 
2 
3 

OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1. 
COM(2018) 401 final. 
P8_TA(2018)0077 and P8_TA(2018)0078. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

As a Member State whose currency is the euro and in view of the close interlinkages 
between the economies in the Economic and Monetary Union, Belgium should ensure 
the full and timely implementation of the recommendation on the economic policy for 
the euro area, as reflected in recommendations (1) to (3) below.  
The  2018  country  report  for  Belgium4  was  published  on  7  March  2018.  It  assessed 
Belgium’s  progress  in  addressing  the  country-specific  recommendations  adopted  by 
the Council on 11 July 2017, the follow-up given to the recommendations adopted in 
previous years and Belgium's progress towards its national Europe 2020 targets. 

On  27  April  2018,  Belgium  submitted  its  2018  National  Reform  Programme  and  its 
2018 Stability Programme. To take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes 
have been assessed at the same time. 

Relevant country-specific recommendations have been addressed in the programming 
of  the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  for  the  2014-2020  period.  As 
foreseen in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament 
and  of  the  Council5,  where  it  is  necessary  to  support  the  implementation  of  relevant 
Council  recommendations,  the  Commission  may  request  a  Member  State  to  review 
and propose amendments to its Partnership Agreement and relevant programmes. The 
Commission has provided further details on how it would make use of that provision 
in  guidelines  on  the  application  of  the  measures  linking  the  effectiveness  of  the 
European Structural and Investment Funds to sound economic governance6.  

Belgium  is  currently  in  the  preventive  arm  of  the  Stability  and  Growth  Pact  and 
subject  to  the  debt  rule.  In  its  2018  Stability  Programme,  the  government  plans  a 
gradual improvement of the headline balance from a deficit of 1.0 % of GDP in 2017 
to a surplus of 0.1 % of GDP in 2021. The medium-term budgetary objective, set at a 
balanced  budgetary  position  in  structural  terms,  is  planned  to  be  reached  by  2020. 
However, the recalculated structural balance7 still points to a deficit of 0.2 % in 2020. 
After having peaked at almost 107 % of GDP in 2014 and decreasing to around 103 % 
of GDP in 2017, the general government debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to decline to 
94.6 %  by  2021  according  to  the  2018  Stability  Programme.  The  macroeconomic 
scenario underpinning those budgetary projections is plausible. At the same time, the 
measures  needed  to  support  the  planned  deficit  targets  from  2019  onwards  have  not 
been  specified,  which  contributes  to  the  projected  deterioration  of  the  structural 
balance in 2019 under unchanged policies according to the Commission 2018 spring 
forecast.  

(7) 

On 23 May 2018, the Commission issued a report under Article 126(3) of the TFEU, 
as  Belgium  did  not  make  sufficient  progress  towards  compliance  with  the  debt 
reduction benchmark in 2017. Following an assessment of all the relevant factors, as 
there  is  currently  not  sufficiently  robust  evidence  to  conclude  on  the  existence  of  a 
significant deviation in Belgium in 2017 and over 2016 and 2017 together, the report 

4 
5 

6 
7 

SWD(2018) 200 final. 
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 
laying  down  common  provisions  on  the  European  Regional  Development  Fund,  the  European  Social 
Fund, the  Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the  European 
Maritime  and  Fisheries  Fund  and  laying  down  general  provisions  on  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund,  the  European  Social  Fund,  the  Cohesion  Fund  and  the  European  Maritime  and 
Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320). 
COM(2014) 494 final. 
Cyclically-adjusted  balance  net  of  one-off  and  temporary  measures,  recalculated  by  the  Commission 
using the commonly agreed methodology. 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(8) 

(9) 

(10) 

could not fully conclude as to whether the debt criterion as defined in the Treaty and in 
Regulation  (EC)  No  1467/1997  is  or  is  not  complied  with.  The  Commission  will 
reassess compliance on the basis of the ex-post data for 2018 to be notified in Spring 
2019. 

The  2018  Stability  Programme  indicates  that  the  budgetary  impact  of  the  security-
related measures in 2017 is significant, and provides adequate evidence of the scope 
and  nature  of  these  additional  budgetary  costs.  According  to  the  Commission,  the 
eligible  additional  expenditure  in  2017  amounted  to  0.04 %  of  GDP  for  security-
related measures. The provisions set out in Articles 5(1) and 6(3) of Regulation (EC) 
No  1466/97  cater  for  this  additional  expenditure,  in  that  the  severity  of  the  terrorist 
threat are unusual events, their impact on Belgium's public finances is significant and 
sustainability would not be compromised by allowing for a temporary deviation from 
the  adjustment  path  towards  the  medium-term  budgetary  objective.  Therefore,  the 
required adjustment towards the medium-term budgetary objective for 2017 has been 
reduced to take into account these additional costs.  

On  11  July  2017,  the  Council  recommended  Belgium  to  ensure  that  the  nominal 
growth  rate of net primary  government expenditure8 does  not  exceed 1.6 %  in  2018, 
corresponding to an annual structural adjustment of 0.6 % of GDP. At the same time, 
it  was  stated  that  the  assessment  of  the  2018  Draft  Budgetary  Plan  and  subsequent 
assessment  of  2018  budget  outcomes  will  need  to  take  due  account  of  the  goal  of 
achieving  a  fiscal  stance  that  contributes  to  both  strengthening  the  ongoing  recovery 
and  ensuring  the  sustainability  of  public  finances.  Following  the  Commission's 
assessment of the strength of the recovery in Belgium while giving due consideration 
to its sustainability challenges, carried out in the context of its opinion on Belgium's 
Draft  Budgetary  Plan,  no  additional  elements  in  that  regard  need  to  be  taken  into 
account. Based on the Commission 2018 spring forecast, there is a risk of a significant 
deviation from the recommended adjustment path towards the medium-term budgetary 
objective in 2018 and over 2017 and 2018 taken together.  

In 2019, in view of Belgium's general government debt ratio above 60 % of GDP and 
projected  output  gap  of  0.4 %,  the  nominal  growth  rate  of  net  primary  government 
expenditure should not exceed 1.8 %, in line with the structural adjustment of 0.6 % of 
GDP stemming from the matrix of requirements under the Stability and Growth Pact. 
Under  unchanged  policies,  there  is  a  risk  of  a  significant  deviation  from  that 
requirement in 2019 and over 2018 and 2019 taken together. Belgium is prima facie 
not forecast to comply with the debt rule in 2018 and 2019. Overall, the Council is of 
the opinion that the necessary measures should be taken as of 2018 to comply with the 
provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact. The use of any windfall gains to further 
reduce the general government debt ratio would be prudent. 

(11)  Sustainability of public finances remains a challenge. The pension reforms enacted in 
2015 were a significant step to address risks related to the long-term of ageing, yet the 
2018 Ageing Report points to larger than previously expected increase in age-related 
long-term  expenditure  for  both  pensions  and  long-term  care.  Pension  expenditure  is 
projected to increase by 2.9 pps of GDP in 2070, compared with an increase of 1.3 pps 

8 

Net  primary  government  expenditure  comprises  total  government  expenditure  excluding  interest 
expenditure,  expenditure  on  Union  programmes  fully  matched  by  Union  funds  revenue  and  non-
discretionary  changes  in  unemployment  benefit  expenditure.  Nationally  financed  gross  fixed  capital 
formation  is  smoothed  over  a  4-year  period.  Discretionary  revenue  measures  or  revenue  increases 
mandated by law are factored in. One-off measures on both the revenue and expenditure sides are netted 
out. 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
                                                 
in the previous update and a decrease of 0.1 ppt of GDP on average for the euro area. 
In  this  respect  the  full  implementation  of  the  government's  reform  roadmap  could 
contribute  to  address  those  risks.  In  addition,  expenditure  on  long-term  care  is 
projected to increase, going from an already above EU average level of 2.3 % of GDP 
to 4.0 % of GDP by 2070.  Reducing the fragmentation in the organisational landscape 
the  distribution  of  competences  across  different 
of 
administrative  levels,  has  the  potential  to  increase  the  efficiency  of  spending  in  this 
area. 

long-term  care,  due 

to 

(12)  Effective  budget  coordination  is  essential  in  a  federal  Member  State  like  Belgium, 
where  a  large  part  of  the  spending  power  has  been  devolved  to  sub-national 
governments. To improve internal coordination and to transpose the fiscal component 
of  the  Treaty  on  Stability,  Coordination  and  Governance  in  the  Economic  and 
Monetary Union (the ‘Fiscal Compact’), the federal government and the regional and 
community governments concluded a cooperation agreement in 2013, with the aim to 
define  overall  and  individual  multiannual  fiscal  paths,  to  be  monitored  by  the  High 
Council of Finance. An agreement on individual fiscal targets to be achieved by 2020 
has  been  reached,  which  is  a  positive  step.  However,  a  formal  agreement  on  annual 
fiscal  targets  at  all  levels  of  government  is  still  missing.  Progress  has  been  made  in 
relation  to  establishing  sufficient  safeguards  regarding  the  independence  of  the  High 
Council of Finance. 

(13)  There  is  scope  to  give  spending  restraint  a  larger  role  in  fiscal  consolidation.  Total 
public expenditure as a percentage of GDP is above the euro area average. Despite its 
potential  to  stimulate  growth  in  the  long  run,  public  investment  is  low  by  European 
standards,  particularly  in  relation  to  total  public  spending.  Not  only  is  the  public 
capital stock low, the quality of public infrastructure has also been eroded. Spending 
reviews  can  contribute  to  a  smarter  allocation  of  expenditure  and  support  growth-
friendly  consolidation.  At  regional  level,  only  Flanders  is  planning  to  introduce  a 
spending  review  approach  in  its  budgetary  process.  In  addition,  no  level  of 
government  in  Belgium  is  currently  bound  by  domestic  expenditure  rules,  with  the 
exception  of  a  ceiling  for  healthcare  spending.  This  contrast  with  the  increasing 
adoption of such rules across the EU and prevents spending-based fiscal consolidation. 
Furthermore, contributions to the Belgian Deposit Guarantee Scheme are not invested 
in a separate portfolio of low-risk assets.  

(14)  The distribution of debt and assets across Belgian households reveals some pockets of 
vulnerability, despite their overall favourable wealth position. A prolonged period of 
house  prices  increasing  faster  than  households'  disposable  income  has  made  the 
financial situation of households more fragile through an almost mechanical increase 
in  their  debt.  Although  measures  have  been  adopted  to  address  an  increase  in 
macroprudential risk, the complex national macro-prudential decision-making process 
may  leave  financial  stability  risks  unaddressed.  House  prices  appear  currently  to  be 
slightly overvalued. 

(15)  As  indicated  in  the  2018  euro  area  recommendation,  the  fight  against  aggressive  tax 
planning is essential to impede distortions of competition between firms, provide fair 
treatment of  taxpayers and safeguard public finances. Spill-over effects of taxpayers' 
aggressive tax planning strategies between Member States call for a coordinated action 
of  national  policies  to  complement  EU  legislation.  The  former  Notional  Interest 
Deduction  system  that  was  based  on  the  stock  of  equity  has  been  replaced  by  an 
incremental  system.  The  new  system,  which  shares  an  incremental  baseline  with  the 
Allowance  for  Growth  and  Investment  proposed  in  the  common  corporate  tax  base, 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
will  be  limited  to  incremental  equity  capital  calculated  on  the  basis  of  a  5-year 
average.  This  change is  meant to  contribute to  the budget-neutrality  of  the corporate 
tax reform while addressing the potential use of the system in aggressive tax planning 
and still alleviating the debt/equity bias issue. While the absence of some specific anti-
abuse rules was a cause of concern, a reform of the anti-abuse framework is now being 
prepared.  This  is  a  positive  step.  It  will  be  closely  monitored  to  ensure  that  the  new 
rules address all relevant forms of abuse. Based on recent exchanges, the Commission 
will continue  its constructive dialogue to  fight against  taxpayers aggressive planning 
strategies. 

(16)  Recent  economic  growth  has  been  job-rich.  Employment  growth  was  robust  in  2017 
and the unemployment rate is now close to pre-crisis level.  Nevertheless, with regards 
to the employment rate of the population aged 20 to 64 (68.1 % in 2017) Belgium is 
not on track to achieving its Europe 2020 target of 73.2 %. Limited progress has been 
made on the participation in the labour market of disadvantaged groups, as inactivity 
and  unemployment  are  largely  concentrated  among  the  low-skilled,  people  with  a 
migrant  background  and  older  workers,  suggesting  that  both  structural  and  group-
specific  factors  hinder  integration  in  the  labour  market.  In  particular,  people  with  a 
migrant background, which are a large share in the working-age population, continue 
to face unfavourable labour market outcomes and thus represent a significant untapped 
labour  market  potential.  In  2016,  the  employment  rate  of  non-EU  born  was  49.1 %, 
which is more than 20 percentage points lower than for native born (the gap was even 
more pronounced for women) There is some evidence that activation measures are not 
equally effective for all population groups. While some measures have been taken to 
help  newly  arrivals  integrate  and  to  tackle  discrimination,  there  is  still  a  lack  of 
coordination  across  policy  domains  and  political  levels  to  address  the  challenge  of 
integrating  people  with  a  migrant  background  in  the  labour  market.  Strong  regional 
disparities in labour market performance persist.  

(17) 

In spite of efforts to reduce the tax wedge on labour, disincentives to work remain high 
for  some  groups,  such  as  single  households  earning  the  average  wage  and  second 
earners. Despite previous measures the tax wedge for a single household earning the 
average wage remained among the EU's highest in 2016. The unemployment trap for 
low wage earners (67 %  of the average  wage for a single household)  is also  one the 
EU's highest. High tax disincentives for second earners – mainly women – remain.  

(18)  The vacancy rate is  among the highest in  the EU indicating major  skills mismatches 
related  to,  among  other  factors,  low  mobility  and  inadequate  language  skills  in  the 
Brussels  region.  Participation  in  life-long  learning  is  low.  More  commitments  by 
individuals  and  employers  to  continuous  life-long  learning  is  important  to  enable 
people to handle employment transitions.  

(19)  Some progress has been made as regards equal opportunities to participate in quality 
education  and  vocational  training  as  communities  are  phasing  in  school  reforms. 
However,  despite  good  average  performance  in  international  comparison,  long-
standing  high  educational  inequalities  remain.    Educational  outcomes  of  15  year-old 
pupils  show  significant  variation  linked  to  the  socio-economic  background  and 
migrant  status.  The  performance  differences  between  communities  as  well  as  the 
underrepresentation of disadvantaged groups among top achievers in science, reading 
and  mathematics  are  raising  concerns.  Wide  performance  gaps  between  schools  go 
hand-in–hand  with  unequal  educational  opportunities.  Although  the  proportion  of 
tertiary education graduates is high, inequalities in access to quality education, skills 
shortages  and  regional  disparities  are  seen.    The  proportion  of  graduates  in  science, 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
technology  and  mathematics  is  one  of  the  lowest  in  the  EU  and  shortages  in  these 
fields could become a major barrier to growth and innovation. Teachers’ shortages are 
raising  concerns,  yet  teachers'  reforms  progress  slowly.  There  is  a  need  to  adapt 
teachers'  continuous  professional  development.    Both  the  Flemish  and  the  French-
speaking  Communities  have  embarked  on  major  reforms  of  their  education  systems. 
Their  implementation  is  planned  over  the  next  decade  and  beyond.  However,  at  the 
end of 2017, the decision was taken to postpone the entry into force of key measures. 
The  impact  of  the  reforms  and  measures  will  very  much  depend  on  their  effective 
implementation and monitoring.  

(20)  Only  limited  reforms  have  been  undertaken  to  address  the  restrictive  regulatory 
framework in services. Flanders abolished the establishment act for a selected number 
of  craft  professions.  Nevertheless,  regulation  remains  high  in  some  professional 
services. As a  result, competition is subdued  in  these  sectors with  low entry  rates of 
new  companies  coming  into  the  market.  In  the  construction  sector,  horizontal 
authorisation schemes for access to the construction market are imposed and building 
permits remain complex despite measures adopted in recent years. The churn rates in 
the  Belgian  construction  sector  are  substantially  below  the  EU  average,  which  may 
indicate  that  the  sector  suffers  from  insufficient  competition.  This  also  impacts  the 
delivery  of  important  infrastructure  projects.  There  are  also  important  restrictions  in 
the area of rail and road transport services. The low productivity growth of the Belgian 
economy  is  largely  driven  by  low  productivity  growth  in  the  services  sector. 
Regulatory restrictions also have adverse spill-over effects on users of these services, 
notably  the  manufacturing  sector.  More  in-depth  structural  reforms  of  key  services 
sectors would help boost productivity growth, essential to ensure future growth as well 
as the sustainability of public finances. 

(21)  Limited progress has also been made in improving the functioning of the retail sector. 
Despite recent reforms, regulatory restrictions still weigh on the sector's performance 
and deter investment. Prices for many product categories continue to be higher than in 
the neighbouring countries. More effort is needed to render the business environment 
competition  and  investment-friendly  to  allow  consumers  enjoy  a  greater  choice  of 
products  and  lower  prices.  In  April  the  Commission  has  proposed  best  practices  to 
guide Member States' reforms of the retail sector9. 

(22)  Entrepreneurship  performance  in  Belgium  remains  low,  despite  some  reforms  in  the 
recent  years  and  recent  measures  whose  impact  has  yet  to  be  assessed.  Business 
dynamism is low, as the business creation rate remains among the lowest in Europe, 
far lower than the EU average, accompanied by a low destruction rate. Moreover the 
administrative burden for firms remains heavy, characterized by complex procedures 
and low level of regulatory certainty.   

(23)  Belgium  is  an  average  performer  in  digital  public  services.  In  contrast  to  its  good 
overall position on development of its digital economy, it ranks only average in digital 
public  services.  Belgium’s  federal  structure  poses  specific  challenges  in  establishing 
coherent  and  nationwide  e-government  services.  Diverse  systems  that  are  not 
necessarily interoperable systems create friction losses. Serious concerns remain about 
the justice system notably as regards delayed actions, digitalisation, and the reliability, 
comparability  and  uniformity  of  court  data.  The  roll-out  of  initiatives  to  digitalise 
certain  court  services  to  all  courts  such  as  e-box  or  e-deposit  are  behind  schedule. 

9 

COM(2018) 219 final. 

EN 

6 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(24) 

However, as long as this uniform coding system is not applied across all courts,  data 
on efficiency of court proceedings will remain of limited reliability and comparability.  

In spite of recent reforms, the Belgian tax system remains complex. The reform of the 
corporate  income  tax  will  lower  statutory  rates  and  contribute  simplify  the  system. 
Nevertheless, many exemptions and distortionary incentives remain, as the rising trend 
in the total amount of tax breaks shows. The opportunity to shift taxes to more growth-
friendly bases could be further used. Revenues from environment related taxes are still 
among  the  lowest  in  the  EU.  Indeed,  there  is  considerable  potential  for  a  genuine 
'green'  tax  shift  dealing  inter  alia  with  the  favourable  treatment  of  company  cars, 
which contribute to air pollution, congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. 

(25)  There  has  been  limited  progress  in  dealing  with  traffic  congestion.  Mobility  suffers 
from insufficient public investment in infrastructure, distortive tax incentives and lack 
of  competition  in  transport  services,  causing  major  congestion  and  hindering 
productivity  growth.  Road  traffic  congestion  is  worsening  year  by  year  deterring 
foreign investment and incurring high social, economic and environmental costs. The 
most  urgent  challenges  are  to  complete  and  upgrade  rail  and  road  transport 
infrastructure  especially  around  and  inside  Antwerp  and  Brussels.  There  are  also 
substantial  restrictions  in  the  area  of  rail  and  road  transport  services.  The  authorities 
can  encourage  a  more  efficient  use  of  existing  infrastructure  and  modal  shift  away 
from individual transport use towards more collective and low emitting alternatives. 

(26) 

In  the  context  of  the  2018  European  Semester,  the  Commission  has  carried  out  a 
comprehensive  analysis  of  Belgium’s  economic  policy  and  published  it  in  the  2018 
country  report.  It  has  also  assessed  the  2018  Stability  Programme  and  the  2018 
National  Reform  Programme  and  the  follow-up  given  to  the  recommendations 
addressed  to  Belgium  in  previous  years.  It  has  taken  into  account  not  only  their 
relevance  for  sustainable  fiscal  and  socioeconomic  policy  in  Belgium  but  also  their 
compliance with Union rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the Union’s 
overall  economic  governance  by  providing  Union-level  input  into  future  national 
decisions.  

(27) 

In  the  light  of  this  assessment,  the  Council  has  examined  the  2018  Stability 
Programme and its opinion10 is reflected in particular in recommendation 1 below. 

HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Belgium takes action in 2018 and 2019 to: 

1. 

2. 

Ensure that the nominal growth rate of net primary government expenditure does not 
exceed 1.8 % in 2019, corresponding to an annual structural adjustment of 0.6 % of 
GDP. Use windfall gains to accelerate the reduction of the general government debt 
ratio.  Pursue  the  envisaged  pension  reforms  and  contain  the  projected  increase  in 
long-term care expenditure. Pursue the full implementation of the 2013 Cooperation 
Agreement  to  coordinate  fiscal  policies  of  all  government  levels.  Improve  the 
efficiency and composition of public spending at all levels of government to create 
room for public investment, notably by carrying out spending reviews. 

Remove  disincentives  to  work  and  strengthen  the  effectiveness  of  active  labour 
market policies, notably for the low-skilled, people with  a migrant background and 
older  workers.  Pursue  the  education  and  training  reforms,  including  by  fostering 
equity and increasing the proportion of graduates in science, technology, engineering 
and mathematics. 

10 

Under Article 5(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97. 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

Reduce the regulatory and administrative burden to incentivise entrepreneurship and 
increase  competition  in  services,  particularly  retail,  construction  and  professional 
services. Tackle the growing mobility challenges, in particular through investment in 
new  or  existing  transport  infrastructure  and  reinforcing  incentives  to  use  collective 
and low emission transport. 

Done at Brussels, 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

8 

  EN