Newsletter. September 2021.
Date: 2021-10-05
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU energy policy, European Social Fund, business policy, energy saving, estuary, reduction of gas emissions, serial publication, small and medium-sized enterprises, withdrawal price

© Shutterstock/ eames bot 

A  few  weeks  after  the  presentation  of  the 
legislative  proposals  for  the  "fit  for  55"  package  – 
the  set  of  measures  linked  to  the  Recovery  Fund 
through which the European Commission proposes 
meeting  the  target  of  reducing  CO2  emissions  by 
55%  by  2030  –  European  employers,  who  are 
currently analysing the measures announced, fully 
support  the  direction  taken  but  nevertheless 
wonder about many practical points.  

 Will  the  social  fund  of  EUR  72.2  billion  be  enough  to  enable 
businesses and individuals to reduce their fossil fuel consumption? 
Will  nuclear  energy  be  recognised  as  an  alternative?  Will  the 
Carbon  Border  Adjustment  Mechanism  protect  us  from  unfair 
imports and what tool will support our exports that have become 
uncompetitive?  What  is  the  Commission's  objective  in  terms  of 
forest  management  when  Europe  is  the  only  continent  where 
forests  are  growing?  How  can  carbon  leakage  resulting  from  the 
loss of production caused by the Farm to Fork Strategy be avoided? 
Will new plant breeding techniques be authorised? 

These  questions  highlight  the  haste  with  which  our  three  major 
co-legislators set their objectives. 

With  the  aim  of  becoming  the  world's  first  climate-neutral 
continent,  Europe  wants  to  make  a  significant  contribution  to 
achieving the global climate goals. As its industry is very innovative 
and  attracts  a  lot  of  investment,  and  as  its  technologies  are 
economically viable, Europe is also well placed to do so, even to an 
extent that goes well beyond its own emission levels. 

European  industry  is  already  at  the  forefront  of  investments  in 
energy efficiency  and  renewable  energy,  in  hydrogen  and  in  CO2 
capture  and  storage.  For  this  reason,  it  is  essential  to  avoid  an 
ideological  approach  at  all  costs.  Such  an  approach  has  already 
frequently  been  taken  in  a  bipartisan  manner  with  regard  to 
climate  and  energy  issues  linked  to  the  Green  Deal,  which  risks 
irreversibly damaging entire production sectors, posing great risks 
to  employment  and  society,  as  well  as  the  economic  recovery, 
which could be undermined. 

In particular, it should be noted that, according to some estimates, 
the  55%  target  could 
investments  of  more  than 
EUR  3.5  trillion  by  2030,  while  the  available  public  resources  are 
under EUR 1 trillion, or less than a third of the amount needed. 

involve 

It  is  important  to  understand  that  European  industry,  with  its 
technological innovation in products and production processes, is 
the solution and not the obstacle to achieving the decarbonisation 
objectives. It is therefore surprising that, in many national reform 
programmes linked to the recovery, limited funds are earmarked to 
accelerate the sustainability objectives in industrial sectors. 

As such, it is vital to take action by setting out a harmonised and 
flexible regulatory framework to achieve a truly integrated energy 
market, by ensuring a level playing field vis-à-vis countries that do 
in  particular  for 
not  share  the  Commission's  climate  goals, 
emission-intensive  sectors,  and  by  implementing  investment  and 
innovation policies to make European industrial ecosystems more 
resilient and technologically dynamic. 

Entrepreneurs know that targets must always be reduced in order 
to achieve better results in the long term. The fact that this has not 
been taken into account does not inspire confidence, even though 
this is what matters the most. Well done is better than well said, as 
managers will tell you. 

The legislative texts presented on 14 July will now be amended by 
the Council and the European Parliament, and the EESC has made 
them a priority, as has France, which will hold the presidency of the 
EU  in  the  first  half  of  2022.  Negotiations  are  not  expected  to  be 
concluded  before  the  end  of  2022  at  the  earliest.  Some  texts  will 
then  have  to  be  transposed  in  the  Member  States  and  industries 
will have little time to adapt before 2030.  

© Shutterstock/ Elnur 

Carbon pricing will be the key factor in the transition 

Frans Timmermans emphasised the rationale behind the adoption 
of  this  legislative  package:  "Concrete  efforts  must  be  made  to 
combat  climate  change.  This  will  be  done  through  the  carbon 
price and by rewarding decarbonisation." 

The  "fit  for  55"  package  proposes  a  set  of  measures  aimed  at 
increasing the carbon price: 

  Extending  the  number  of  sectors  subject  to  emission 
allowances  to  the  residential  and  tertiary  sectors  and  to 
road  and  maritime  transport:  the  Commission  proposes 
(ETS)  Directive 
revising  the  Emissions  Trading  System 
(2003/87/EC  as  amended),  which  currently  applies  to 
energy  generation 
installations  from  the 
installations,  to 
manufacturing industry and to aviation (intra-EU flights). 

  The  Commission  also  plans  to  end  free  allowances  for  the 
in  the  Climate  and 
(also  approved 

aviation  sector 
Resilience Law adopted in France in July 2021). 

  Reducing  carbon  budgets  by  sector  ("right to emit"); ETS 

sectors will have smaller budgets. 

 

Introducing  a  Carbon  Border  Adjustment  Mechanism: 
measures  to  create  a  level  playing  field  for  our  industrial 
companies vis-à-vis  competitors  from  other  regions  of  the 
world that are not subject to the same climate rules. 

  Taxing  energy  products:  taxing  energy  will  ensure  that 
fossil fuels become the exception. Fuels will no longer be taxed 
according  to  their  volume  but  according  to  their  energy 
content in order to tax carbon emissions as accurately as 
possible. 

About the author: 

Arnold Puech d’Alissac 

Vice-President of the EESC Employers’ Group 

Spokesperson of the EESC Farmers’ Category 

National Federation of Farmers Unions  (FNSEA) 

 
SMEs,  which  account  for  99.8%  of  all  EU  companies,  will  be  a 
decisive  factor  in  achieving  the  ambitious  climate  goals  that  the 
"Fit  for  55"  package  sets  for  Europe.  However,  the  package's 
requirements  need  to  be  viable  for  SMEs,  as  putting  too  much 
strain  on  the  sector  that  suffered  severe  losses  during  the 
COVID-19  pandemic  would  be  a  severe  threat  to  Europe's 
economy.  

To support SMEs in becoming climate-neutral, while keeping them 
competitive,  the  package  needs  to  be  accompanied  by  a 
framework  that  is  tailored  to  SMEs.  The  key  elements  of  such  a 
framework  should  be,  among  other 
things,  sector-specific 
information, easier access to different forms of financing for initial 
investments  linked  to  new  technologies  that  minimise  pollution, 
and  training  for  entrepreneurs  and  their  employees  to  use  these 
technologies.  Furthermore,  it  is  important  to  ensure  consistency 
between  the  "fit  for  55"  package  and  new  and  existing  EU 
legislative  texts,  as  SMEs  do  not  have  the  resources  to  cater  for 
contradictory legislation. 

As  part  of  the  "fit  for  55"  package,  several  regulations  have  been 
reviewed. The following three issues are of particular relevance for 
SMEs in the "fit for 55" package: 

Review of the Energy Efficiency Directive: 

As  part  of  the  "fit  for  55"  package,  the  Commission  has  also 
published  a  revision  of  the  2012  Energy  Efficiency  Directive.  It 
includes  an  impact  assessment  and  the  results  of  a  public 
consultation.  The  revision  will  affect  SMEs  through  the  following 
articles: 

  The new 2030 reduction target is binding only at EU level. This 
means  that  Member  States  can  still  use  mandatory  energy 
efficiency schemes or alternative policy measures to make their 
energy savings. The flexibility given through alternative policy 
measures  can  provide  ample  opportunities  for  SMEs  to 
participate, for example, in energy efficiency networks. 

  Article 9(4) places particular emphasis on SMEs, specifying that 
Member States may require obligated parties to achieve energy 
cost  reduction  targets  and  energy  savings  by  promoting 
energy-efficiency  improvement  measures,  including  financial 
support measures mitigating carbon price effects on SMEs and 
micro-SMEs. 

  Article 21 explicitly mentions the creation of one-stop shops or 
similar  mechanisms 
technical, 
administrative and financial advice and assistance in the field of 
energy efficiency. 

the  provision  of 

for 

  Article  27  extends  the  areas  in  which  Member  States  must 
disseminate  information  to  SMEs  in  order  to  promote  their 
access to the energy services market. 

  The exemption of  SMEs from the mandatory energy audit  has 
been abandoned in favour of a new criterion based on average 
annual  consumption  in  excess  of  a  certain  amount  of  TJ.  The 

© Shutterstock/  Nikolay Litov  

impact on SMEs of the new criterion introduced by Article 11(1) 
and (2) for the adoption of energy management schemes and 
the  implementation  of  energy  audits  should  therefore  be 
monitored. 

Extension  of  the  Emissions  Trading  Scheme  to  buildings  and 
road transport: 

This extension does not benefit SMEs, which would have to oppose 
such a move because it introduces a complicated and bureaucratic 
process  that  will  have  a  direct  impact  on  all  SMEs  that  heat  their 
offices and homes and use company vehicles and trucks.  

It  is  obvious  that  fuel  suppliers  (who  will  be  in  charge  of 
monitoring and reporting on the amount of fuel they place on the 
market  and  providing  allowances  each  year  based  on  the  carbon 
intensity of fuels) will shift the additional cost onto all consumers 
by increasing the price of heating and vehicle fuel.  

In addition, the trickle-down effect of higher fuel prices for homes 
and  vehicles  will  not  be  fully  mitigated  by  a  social  climate  action 
mechanism  that  represents  only  25%  of  the  new  scheme's 
revenues. 

Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism: 

Efforts  to  bring  the  proposal  into  line  with  WTO  requirements  by 
allowing the cost of other carbon pricing schemes to be deducted 
are to be welcomed. However, the Commission should be urged to 
ensure that the procedures and conditions for reporting emissions 
from  imported  products  are  easy  and  free  of  charge,  as  complex 
calculations  would  result  in  small  importers  facing  higher  carbon 
prices. 

During  the  upcoming  negotiations  between  the  European 
Parliament and the Council on the "fit for 55" package, the crucial 
role that SMEs will play in Europe's drive towards climate neutrality 
needs  to  be  clear  to  all  parties:  climate  neutrality  cannot  work 
without SMEs and neither can the European economy.   

About the author: 

María Helena de Felipe Lehtonen 

Member of the EESC Employers’ Group 

Spokesperson of the EESC SME Category 

Vice-president of SMEunited 

This  article  contains  a  number  of  comments  made  by  Guido  Lena, 
Director for Sustainable Development at SMEunited.  

Major  changes  in  the  European  Union  now  seem 
inevitable.  It  is  not  possible  to  respond  to  the  old  and 
new challenges facing the EU by continuing the current 
model.  

We must address some fundamental issues. The economy, security, 
climate, the rivalry between the two superpowers of China and the 
United  States  and  the  humanitarian  situation  are  likely  to  lead  to 
significant  initiatives  and  changes  in  the  near  future.  All  these 
major  issues  require  proper  debate  in  EU  countries.  This  is  an 
exceptional opportunity for the first ever Conference on the Future 
of Europe.  

The Conference is an occasion  for citizens and business to have a 
much stronger voice and make concrete proposals for our shared 
future. EU institutions are committed to giving Europeans more say 
on what the EU does. 

Something very fundamental is missing if the voice of businesses is 
not  properly  heard  in  these  discussions.  Policy-makers  need 
information  on  the  direction  in  which  businesses  want  the  EU  to 
develop,  or what they expect from the EU. Policy-makers need to 

pay  attention  to  what  businesses  do  and  how  their  activities, 
problems and opportunities relate to the EU. Only in this way can 
decisions be taken in the EU that support businesses. 

It  is  possible  to  participate  in  the  Conference  on  the  Future  of 
Europe  by  making  proposals  and  discussing  other  people's  ideas 
and  by  taking  part  in  events  across  Europe,  also  beyond  the 
capitals. This is supported by a multilingual digital platform. 

The  EESC  and  its  Employers'  Group  want  an  active  dialogue  with 
representatives  of  civil  society  and  both  small  and 
large 
companies.  We  are  therefore  organising  events  right  across 
Europe. We want to listen, discuss and advance our common goals, 
also as part of the Conference on the Future of Europe. 

That's why we are hoping for your active engagement! The course 
of Europe's future is determined and set together!  

About the author: 

Janica  Ylikarjula 

Member of the EESC Employers’ Group 

Confederation of Finnish Industries (EK) 

www.futureu.europa.eu 

Find further 
instructions in the 
Website guide for 
general users 

Engage in the discussion on Twitter 
using #TheFutureIsYours and #CoFoE 
and by tagging @CoFoE 

How does COFOE work? 
Find more information, campaign 
materials, videos, … here 

Engage via the COFOE platform 
It centralizes all information and 
ways to engage. 

Share your ideas and discuss/
endorse other ideas in every EU 
language 

Publish information about an 
event you organize and share its 
outcomes to encourage further 
discussion 

Find events (physical and digital) 
and sign up to participate  

Besides  the  Digital  Markets  Act  and  the  Digital  Services  Act,  a 
Digital Rural Act (DRA) is indispensable to deliver on the promises 
of Europe's "Digital Decade". 

The DRA is envisaged as a strategy to develop digital technologies 
in  agriculture  and  rural  areas  and  to  use  these  technologies  to 
improve  the  effectiveness  of  the  CAP  Strategic  Plan.  It  could  also 
help accomplish the Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategies.  

The DRA aims to empower rural areas with digital skills, alongside a 
digital  infrastructure  to  enable  people  in  remote  areas  and  with 
economic or social challenges to benefit from it and progressively 
become the change in the sustainable growth of society. For this to 
happen,  investment  in  broadband  infrastructure,  including  'last 
mile' coverage, must take account of the socio-economic  benefits 
in rural areas. 

The idea behind the DRA is to map the existing landscape of policy 
support;  identifying  the  opportunities  and  needs  of  rural  areas  to 
use  digitalisation  in  order  to  set  priorities  and  ensure  that  this 
digital  strategy  creates  the  conditions  to  genuinely  benefit  rural 
communities.  Developing  and  promoting  the  uptake  of  digital 
services  in  rural  regions  must  consider  the  rural  community  itself 
and the needs, opportunities and challenges identified in the DRA's 
design  and  this  can  only  be  achieved  by  looking  at  the  specific 
needs of each rural area.  

The Digital Rural Act is composed of three pillars/components that 
need to be addressed together, as they reinforce each other: 

1.  Broadband 

infrastructure:  According  to  the  2017  EU 
Digital  Economy  and  Society  Index  (DESI)  report,  rural  areas 
remain insufficiently covered (8% of homes are not covered by 
any  fixed  network,  and  53%  are  not  covered  by  any  Next 
Generation  Access  technology).  This  shows  that  connectivity 
does not reach the regions where it is most needed and could 
be  most  transformative:  the  remote  regions  and  those  with 
economic  or  social  challenges.  The  ‘last  mile’  of  coverage  is 
generally  the  most  challenging  and  expensive  one,  but  often 
affects  the  villages  and  rural  towns  that  could  benefit  most 
from connectivity.  

2.  Digital  skills  and  literacy:  The  crucial  factor  hindering 
greater  digitalisation  in  rural  areas  is  the  digital  literacy  of  the 
people  living  in  those  areas.  The  2020  Digital  Economy  and 
Society Index shows slow progress in the acquisition  of digital 
competences,  as  the  number  of  EU  citizens  with  insufficient 
digital skills drops by just 1%, from 43% to 42% and this figures 
increases  significantly  in  rural  areas.  Digital  skills  are  not 
achieved by simply giving access to broadband connection and 
digital services, because these require a level of knowledge and 
competence  in  operating  digital  tools  and  rely  on  having  a 
basic knowledge of security, privacy or app usage 

© Shutterstock/ Mr. Whiskey 

3.  Promoting  the  uptake  of  digital  services: In order to get 
the  best  value  from  investments  in  broadband  infrastructure 
and  in  digital  literacy,  rural  communities  need  not  only  to 
understand the usefulness of digital applications (as explained 
in point 2) but also and more importantly, to actively want to 
use  them.  In  rural  areas,  many  people  may  be  unaware  of 
potential  applications  that  could  dramatically  improve  their 
quality  of  life  in  areas  such  as  active  and  healthy  aging,  e-
health, distance learning, shared mobility,  logistics and so  on. 
Therefore, it is important to find ways of designing, testing and 
showcasing applications with and within the local community 
itself. 

The  idea  of  a  DRA  was  developed  by  EESC  Employers'  Group 
member  Luis  Mira  and  EESC  Employers'  Group  President  Stefano 
Mallia  during  the  webinar  "Challenges  of  the  Digital  &  new 
Economy" and was presented to EU Commissioner for Agriculture 
Janusz  Wojciechowski  at  the  Extraordinary  Employers'  Group 
meeting in July.  

Commissioner  Wojciechowski  underlined  the  need  for  a  digital 
strategy 
for  rural  areas  by  stating  at  the  meeting  that 
"Digitalisation  in  agriculture  and  rural  areas  can  be  regarded  as 
instrumental,  not  only  to  strengthen  the  competitiveness  of  the 
sector  and  rural  communities,  but  also  to  contribute  to  several 
sustainability-related  policy  objectives.  This  includes,  of  course, 
environmental  and  socio-economic  sustainability,"  and  by 
pointing to how digital technologies can transform agriculture by 
helping 
to  work  more  precisely,  efficiently  and 
sustainably,  for  example,  in  the  use  of  nutrients  and  through 
tailored animal welfare measures. 

farmers 

Read more about the meeting via: https://europa.eu/!vvVNvG  

About the author: 

Luís Mira 

Member of the EESC Employers’ Group 

Portuguese Farmers’ Confederation 

With the European Parliament and the Council ready to adopt the 
final  revision  of  the  Blue  Card  in  September,  employers  call  for 
more  focus  on  policies  linked  to  regular  migration  at  a  moment 
when  the  Afghanistan  crisis  risks  fuelling  more  toxic  debates  on 
irregular  migration  and  asylum  policy,  reminiscent  of  the  2015 
migration crisis.  

Regular  migration  doesn't  only  provide  economic  opportunities 
for  migrants  and  their  families,  but  also  fuels  economic  growth. 
For  employers,  migration 
improve  the 
balancing  of labour supply and demand, for sparking innovation, 
and for transferring and spreading skills. Finding solutions to use 
regular  migration  to  everyone's  benefit  becomes  even  more 
pressing given the current geopolitical challenges. 

is  also  a  vehicle  to 

In  2020,  the  EU  counted  some  23  million  third-country  nationals 
legally  residing  in  the  27-country  bloc,  or  5  %  of  the  447  million 
Europeans. The vast majority arrives via regular channels. In 2019, 
some 2.5 million regular migrants were registered, and the yearly 
flow  of  regular  migrants  is  rather  stable  in  the  long  term.  So  the 
legal  pathways  for  migrants  and  their  integration  should  be  our 
main concern.   

With  its  New  Pact  for  Migration  and  Asylum,  the  European 
Commission  proposed  last  year  an  updated  way  of  dealing  with 
migration.  

for  Migration  and  Asylum 

The  EESC  adopted  four  opinions  and  concluded  that  the  holistic 
approach  of  the  New  Pact 
is 
appreciated,  but  the  proposals  are  focusing  too  much  on  border 
controls  and  on  stopping  illegal  migration,  giving  little  attention 
to  the  legal  pathways.  Furthermore,  the  feasibility  of  the  new 
solidarity  mechanism  and  its  ability  to  decrease  the  burden  on 
countries  of  first  entry  should  be  questioned.  Another  concern  is 
linked  to  the  feasibility  of  the  crisis  approach  with  the  notion  of 
‘force majeure’.  In any case, the real challenge of the new Action 
Plan will be its implementation, which is why the EESC asks that a 
credible monitoring mechanism be put in place.  

In  the  coming  months,  the  European  Commission  has  planned  a 
number  of  actions  that  will  have  a  decisive  impact  on  regular 
migration and on the mobility of workers. Employers hope to see a 
clear shift of focus to regular migration and its benefits.  

Employers  call  for  new  approach  taking  into  consideration  the 
following:  

  Revision  of  the  Schengen  regulation: 

  To  restore 
confidence  in  the  Schengen  mechanism,  all  Member  States 
need  to  be  on  the  same  page  for  the  new  strategy  with  an 
effective external border management and a more centralised 
management  with  improved  digital  tools,  which  have  to 
compensate for the absence of controls at internal borders. 

  Revision  of  the  EU  Blue  Card  Directive:  The Blue Card will 
only  become  a  success  if  it  is  made  sufficiently  attractive  to 

© Shutterstock/ Gago Design  

Member  States,  employers  and  job  seekers  so  that  it  can 
become  the  main  system  for  the  admission  of  highly  skilled 
third country nationals into the EU, regardless of what national 
work permit Member States have put in place, as a counterpart 
of the American “green card”.  

  The  simplification  of  the  procedure  of  the  Single  Permit: 
The  Single  Permit  is  a  combined  work  and  residence  permit. 
The  review  proposal  starts  from  a  series  of  procedural 
shortcomings  such  as  those  concerning  the  numerous 
administrative steps, the long procedure for the entry visa and 
the  possible  application  of  lengthy  labour  market  tests.  Other 
questions  concern  the  exclusion  of  the  self-employed,  the 
protection against labour exploitation and the level where the 
distinction between of medium- and low-skilled should be set.  

  Promoting  the  idea  of  Talent  Pools  for  third  country 
workers:  The  EU  Talent  Pools  for  third-country  skilled 
workers could operate as an EU-wide platform for international 
recruitment,  through  which  skilled  third-country  nationals 
could  express  their  interest  in  migrating  to  the  EU,  and  could 
be identified by EU migration authorities and employers based 
on  their  needs.  The  problem  with  realising  this  idea  at  the 
European  level  is  that  countries  would  be  interested  in 
attracting  talents  for  their  home  market  –  but  a  common 
reservoir would also have to include a solidarity aspect. 

  Setting  up  of  Talent  Partnerships  with  third  countries: 
Based on the EU's need for labour and skills, talent partnerships 
with key third countries would support the mobility of people 
to the EU for study, training, and work. They could also provide 
partner  countries  with  assistance  for  capacity  building  in  the 
labour market or skills intelligence. 

In  the  coming  months,  the  risk  of  a  new  refugee  wave  will  not 
improve  the  chances  of  a  political  consensus,  so  we  need  to  act 
swiftly on all these issues finding win-win patterns for all Member 
States. The political and societal impacts of migratory movements 
can  affect  the stability  not  only  of  the  concerned  Member  States 
but of the European Union as a whole.  

About the author: 

Paul Soete 

Member of the EESC Employers’ Group 

Industrial relations consultant 

Chair of the EESC’s Thematic study group on 
immigration and integration 

European 

published 

its 
Commission 
The 
Communication  "Better  Regulation  –  Joining  Forces  to 
Make  Better  Laws"  on  29  April  2021.  It  had  been 
announced for 2020, but was postponed several times, 
even  though  President  von  der  Leyen  had  made  the 
matter  a  core  component  of  her  "mission  letters"  to 
other  Commissioners  when  she  took  office.  The  delay 
seems to reflect a difficulty in getting the balance right, 
since the actual substance of the communication is also 
unclear  in  parts  and  falls  short  of  the  expectations  of 
the EESC and, above all, of the economy.  

"Better regulation" is not about deregulation, but about improving 
the  quality  of  laws.  The  intention  behind  stakeholder  and  public 
consultations,  impact  assessments  and  expert  reviews  is  to  make 
sure  that  legislators  take  sensible  decisions  based  on  sound 
evidence and with the involvement of all affected groups. In these 
times  of  fake  news,  populism  on  the  march  and  manipulative 
messages  online,  rational,  evidence-based  policies  are  becoming 
increasingly 
important.  However,  producing  better  regulation 
cannot  and  should  not  replace  political  decisions;  these  must,  of 
course, be left to the legitimate office-holders (i.e. the Commission, 
the Council and the Parliament). 

its  Communication,  the  Commission  clearly  supports  the 
In 
continuation of the better-regulation agenda and announces some 
important developments. The aim is to improve the evidence base 
(including with the help of science) and consultation processes. In 
addition 
the 
representativeness  of  feedback  as  being  particularly  important 
here.  Weighting  of  responses  and  explanation  of  how  they  are 
evaluated  is  extremely  important  for  both  the  findings  of  the 
consultations and for those taking part in them. 

outstanding 

issues, 

EESC 

sees 

the 

to 

responsible 

At the heart of the Better Regulation process is the assessment of 
the  impact  of  a  proposed  piece  of  legislation.  The  Regulatory 
Scrutiny  Board, 
impact 
assessments,  has  recently 
identified  shortcomings,  since  the 
Commission's  impact  assessments  are  often  carried  out  at  speed, 
do not include all possible options and aim to support the outcome 
sought  by  the  Commission.  This  is  a  grave  criticism  and  one  the 
Commission should take seriously. 

for  examining 

these 

© Shutterstock/ Respiro  

It  is  entirely  unclear,  however,  how  the  Commission  means  to 
implement this "mainstreaming" of the extensive UN catalogue of 
17  Sustainable  Development  Goals  (SDGs)  with  their  169  sub-
targets without overloading or politically influencing the process.  

The  "one  in,  one  out"  approach  announced  by  the  Commission 
states that any new onerous measure should entail the rescinding 
of  an  existing  burden  in  the  same  area.  This  sounds  appealing  at 
first glance, but has rarely delivered in practice: either "one in, one 
out" is implemented half-heartedly and with numerous exceptions, 
or  it  proves  difficult  to  remove  a  "burden"  because  existing  legal 
provisions generally serve a legitimate end and cannot be repealed 
without something to replace them. How the Commission intends 
to proceed in the future is unclear. In any event, the example given 
in  the  Communication,  namely  that  harmonisation  of  27  national 
rules should always be regarded as "one out", is incorrect, since it 
completely  ignores  the  actual  impact  of  an  EU  measure  on  the 
people  concerned.  What  is  needed  instead  is  a  case-by-case 
assessment in every instance. 

The  existing  mechanisms  and  procedures  for  monitoring  and 
evaluating  EU  legislation,  such  as  the  Fit  for  Future  Platform 
(formerly  the  REFIT  Platform),  are  to  be  maintained  and  further 
developed. 
excessive 
implementation  at  Member  State  level  is  not  addressed.  While 
Member States are, of course, perfectly entitled to use their leeway 
in implementation, this must be done transparently and must not 
undermine efforts at harmonisation.  

The  problem 

of  divergent 

and 

intends  to  align 

impact 
In  the  future,  the  Commission 
assessments  with  the  17  UN  Sustainable  Development  Goals  and 
the  green  and  digital  transformation.  It  goes  without  saying  that 
economic,  environmental  and  social  sustainability  must  always 
guide sound policy and hence also be part of impact assessments. 

its 

About the author: 

Heiko Willems 

Member  of the EESC Employers’ Group 

The German Business Representation (BDI/BDA) 

On  21  April,  the  European  Commission  published  a  new 
coordinated  plan  on  artificial 
intelligence  (AI)  updating  the 
previous  plan  which  was  adopted  in  2018,  together  with  a 
proposal  for  a  legislative  framework  to  ensure  the  security  and 
ethics  of  AI  applications.  These  two  initiatives,  which  follow  on 
from  the  white  paper  on  AI  published  in  February  2020,  are 
inextricably  linked.  Excellence  and  trust  go  hand  in  hand  as 
regards  AI.  Without  trust,  innovation  is  a  non-starter.  Like  its 
predecessor,  the  EESC  opinion,  to  be  adopted  in  September, 
assumes that competitiveness and ethics go together.  

This  coordinated  plan  is  Europe's  last  chance  not  to  miss  the  AI 
train and to guarantee its sovereignty in this field. Now more than 
ever, the EU must act quickly and deliver on its goal of coordination 
and shared effort. Seamless cooperation between all stakeholders 
is  paramount:  European  institutions,  Member  States,  civil  society, 
the social partners and businesses. Success is dependent on it. 

The European Commission has earmarked a substantial budget for 
this  objective:  EUR  1  billion  each  year  between  2021  and  2027, 
from  the  digital  Europe  programme  and  Horizon  Europe.  If  this 
achieves  the  expected  leverage,  public  and  private  investment  is 
set  to  reach  EUR  20  billion  each  year  during  this  period, 
supplemented  by  funds  from  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Facility 
(RRF). 

This new plan is structured around four pillars, which the EESC has 
no hesitation in endorsing:  

  creating  an  AI-friendly  environment,  based  on  stronger 

cooperation and data and computing infrastructure; 

  creating an area of excellence, from fundamental research and 

innovation to the market;  

  bolstering people's skills and trust in AI; 

  developing  strategic 

in  high-impact  sectors 
(particularly  agriculture,  transport,  health,  environment  and 
security). 

leadership 

This plan is part of a package: the European strategy on data (GDPR 
and  the  creation  of  a  European  data  space)  and  cybersecurity, 
clearly a critical issue. 

In line with the previous EESC opinion, this one points out the need 
for  an  inclusive  approach  to  AI,  geared  towards  promoting  the 
wellbeing  of  society  as  a  whole  and  meeting  societal, 
environmental  and  public  health  challenges.  Social  dialogue  and 
the  social  partners  will  play  a  pivotal  role  in  the  shift  to  AI, 
particularly  as  regards  designing  training  programmes  and 
fostering  individual  empowerment  as  both  workers  and  citizens. 
Teaching everyone to understand and use AI is crucial. 

The opinion makes two key recommendations: 

 

 

the  new  strategy  must  incorporate  debate  on  the  future  of 
work  given  the  rise  of  automation,  including  the  way  it 
complements human action; 

it  must  focus  on  support  for  businesses,  particularly  the 
smallest. Training courses tailored to micro, small and medium-
sized businesses are needed, targeting both the self-employed 
and  employees.  Steps  must  be  taken  to  make  it  easier  for 
employees to go on training courses by offsetting the resulting 
financial losses, which are often an obstacle. As well as financial 
support,  provisions 
for  micro,  small  and  medium-sized 
businesses  (such  as  tests  and  experiments,  digital  innovation 
hubs  and  platforms  on  demand)  should  be  evaluated  and  if 
need be, reinforced 

The opinion on AI development in micro, small and medium-sized 
businesses,  which  I  have  the  honour  of  drawing  up,  will  I  hope 
issue  relevant  and  useful  recommendations  in  this  field,  as 
underlined in the Employers' Group study on AI for the MSMEs 

Lastly, while coordination is desirable and strongly encouraged, it 
is  still  down  to  the  stakeholders  to  make  it  work.  The  EESC 
underscores the importance of being able to evaluate and measure 
the progress made, based on carefully selected indicators devised 
with  all 
the  European 
Commission  has shown just how important it considers this issue 
to be.  

the  stakeholders.  Discussion  with 

About the author: 

Marie-Françoise Gondard-Argenti 

Member of the EESC Employers’ Group 

National Union of Liberal Professions (UNAPL)  

Editors 
Daniela Vincenti | daniela.vincenti@eesc.europa.eu 
Katharina Radler | katharina.radler@eesc.europa.eu 

THE EESC IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF EXTERNAL WEBSITES  

Contact 
European Economic and Social Committee, 99 Rue Belliard, 1040 Brussels 
Tel. +32 (0) 2 546 82 07 | Fax: +32 (0) 2 2 546 97 54   
gr1@eesc.europa.eu  www.eesc.europa.eu/employers-group  

Print: 
QE-AH-21-007-EN-C  
ISSN 2467-4478  

EESC-2021-52-EN 

Online: 
QE-AH-21-007-EN-N  
ISSN 2467-4494