Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 287 E/258 EN Official Journal of the European Union 24.11.2006

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

PRESENT TEXT AMENDMENTS

Amendment 13

_Rule 148_

_**Disturbances**_ _**Internal appeal procedures**_

_**Should disturbances in Parliament threaten to obstruct the**_
_**business of the House, the President shall close or suspend**_
_**the sitting for a specific period to restore order. If he cannot**_
_**make himself heard, he shall leave the Chair. This shall have**_
_**the effect of suspending the sitting. The President shall**_
_**reconvene the sitting.**_

_**The Member concerned may lodge an internal appeal with**_
_**the Bureau within two weeks of notification of the penalty**_
_**imposed by the President. Such an appeal shall have the**_
_**effect of suspending the application of that penalty. The**_
_**Bureau may, not later than four weeks after the lodging of**_
_**the appeal, annul, confirm or reduce the penalty imposed,**_
_**without prejudice to the external rights of appeal open to**_
_**the Member concerned. Should the Bureau fail to take a**_
_**decision within the time-limit laid down, the penalty shall be**_
_**declared null and void.**_

Amendment 14

_Annex XVI a (new)_

_**ANNEX XVIa**_

_**Guidelines for the interpretation of the standards of conduct**_
_**of Members**_

_**1. A distinction should be drawn between visual actions,**_
_**which may be tolerated, provided they are not offensive**_
_**and/or defamatory, remain within reasonable bounds and**_
_**do not lead to conflict, and those which actively disrupt**_
_**any parliamentary activity whatsoever.**_

_**2. Members shall be held responsible for any failure by**_
_**persons whom they employ or for whom they arrange**_
_**access to Parliament to comply on Parliament's premises**_
_**with the standards of conduct applicable to Members.**_

_**The President or his representatives may exercise disci-**_
_**plinary powers over such persons and any other outside**_
_**person present on Parliament's premises.**_

**P6_TA(2006)0022**

**Implementation of the European Charter for Small Enterprises**

**European Parliament resolution on implementing the European Charter for Small Enterprises**
**(2005/2123(INI))**

_The European Parliament_,

— having regard to its resolution of 9 March 2005 on the mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy ( [1] ),

— having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council in March 2000;

( [1] ) OJ C 320 E, 15.12.2005, p. 164.

24.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 287 E/259

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

— having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Barcelona European Council in March 2002;

— having regard to the Report of the High Level Group chaired by Wim Kok, following the meeting of
the Barcelona European Council;

— having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council in March 2005;

— having regard to the Commission Communication of 2 February 2005, entitled ‘Working together for
growth and jobs: A new start for the Lisbon Strategy’ (COM(2005)0024);

— having regard to the Commission's fifth report on the implementation of the European Charter for
Small Enterprises (COM(2005)0030),

— having regard to the European Charter for Small Enterprises, endorsed by the European Council in
Santa Maria da Feira in June 2000,

— having regard to its resolution of 9 June 2005 on strengthening European competitiveness — the
effects of industrial change on policy and the role of SMEs ( [1] ),

— having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

— having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of
the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on Employment and Social
Affairs (A6-0405/2005),

A. whereas the European Council has adopted the strategy of making Europe the most competitive and
knowledge-based economy in the world,

B. whereas the Commission has launched a policy of ‘think small first’, and proposed new programmes
for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), notably an Entrepreneurship Action Plan,

C. whereas the Commission communication of 2 February 2005 on a new start for the Lisbon Strategy
overlooks small enterprises, even though the Lisbon European Council had declared that small enterprises were the backbone of the European economy and job creation,

D. whereas the European Charter for Small Enterprises has been adopted by the Member States of the
European Union, the accession and candidate countries, associated states, and the Commission, raising
to 35 the number of countries in which it applies; whereas the mechanisms for applying the Charter
are based on the open method of coordination,

E. whereas the Commission outlined the key instructions for reforms at EU level by focusing on 8 main
actions accompanied by around 100 regulatory, financing and policy development actions to be carried
out prior to 2008,

F. whereas the European Council has called for faster implementation of the Charter,

G. whereas professional organisations are playing an active role in applying the Charter and whereas they
are anxious to increase their participation; whereas small businesses' assessment of the Charter's
content is positive,

H. whereas there is still a shortage of relevant information on small and micro-businesses and whereas
insufficient knowledge of such businesses is a brake on the development of effective entrepreneurial
policies,

I. whereas, following a Council recommendation, the Commission's fifth implementation report on the
Charter concerns three of its ten lines for action, education for entrepreneurship, better regulation and
overcoming skills shortages,

( [1] ) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2005)0230.

C 287 E/260 EN Official Journal of the European Union 24.11.2006

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

J. whereas small enterprises and craft enterprises are two of the main engines for increasing employment
in Europe; whereas they play a vital role in competitiveness and innovation, as well as in professional
training, and are an essential element of social cohesion in urban and rural areas,

K. whereas the High Level Group, the Commission and the European Council proposed and determined a
new start for the Lisbon process,

_**The European Charter for Small Enterprises**_

1. Welcomes the application of the Charter beyond the European Union; considers that it is playing a
positive role in the preparation of the accession and candidate countries, and that the Charter's implementation should be encouraged in the pre-accession strategy;

2. Highlights the responsibility of the Member States and EURO-MED partner countries for more thorough implementation of the Charter and encourages them to learn from each other through the exchange
of good practice in this area;

3. Highlights the importance of small enterprises in delivering the Lisbon objectives of stronger, lasting
growth and more and better jobs;

4. Supports the principle of applying the Charter in the associated states; considers that it represents an
excellent vehicle for the approximation of legislation between those states and the European Union; wishes
the Charter to have a consistent place in the European Neighbourhood Policy's projects;

5. Considers that the open method of coordination between the states is relevant, but that it should not
exonerate the Commission from active participation in implementing the Charter;

6. Wishes the structure of small businesses' professional organisations, especially at the regional level to
be strengthened, and for those organisations to be better involved; considers that the annual conferences
on the Charter should be complemented by other regular meetings to structure the exchange and dissemination of best practice; calls for the promotion of cooperation and collaboration projects involving small
enterprises;

7. Points out that the Charter concerns small businesses and this special purpose is what makes it worthwhile; nevertheless, with due regard for its special purpose, considers that the Charter's actions for small
businesses should be incorporated in, and supplemented by, the general policy for SMEs based on binding
measures not only at Community level but also within Member States, where sharing of best practice
should be specifically encouraged; notes, in particular, that the tenth and final line for action on strengthening the representation of the interests of small enterprises requires a review to be completed of how the
interests of small businesses are represented at European Union and national level, including through the
social dialogue; stresses that this is a key requirement, given that the current composition of the social partners is primarily reflective of larger businesses and their employees; calls, while noting that the Commission's current implementation report focuses on three other key priority areas of the Charter, for early
completion and publication of this review; in the meantime, calls on employers' representatives to represent the interests of small businesses without delay in their role as social partners;

8. Points out that the concept of ‘small enterprise’ includes businesses of different sizes, character and
activity, whose situations and requirements vary; calls on the Commission to use the mechanisms of the
Charter and to cooperate with professional organisations representing small enterprises to overcome the
lack of available information and data on such enterprises and on their needs and potential; bearing in
mind the specific nature of craft enterprises, reiterates its request that detailed and accurate economic and
statistical analyses of such enterprises be carried out and that a fresh boost be given to work on craft enterprises;

24.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 287 E/261

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

_**The content of the Commission's report**_

9. Notes that the report does not give a consistent overview of the situation in all Member States; calls
on the Commission, in future reports, not only to analyse individual countries but to carry out a critical,
complete yet concise assessment of all Member States and associated states in order to make specific
comparisons possible;

10. Is surprised at the rather complex presentation of the report, which varies in density depending on
the version concerned; would have appreciated a more systematic and more critical review;

11. Notes that progress in the area of entrepreneurship is rather patchy and in many cases has little
effect in terms of actual benefits for enterprises; considers that better coordination with the Entrepreneurship Action Plan is required; points out that the involvement of businesses in such actions is an essential
condition for their success; stresses, in particular, the need to enhance the opportunities of small and
micro-businesses to make use of European programmes given the difficulties they encounter in gaining
access to such programmes;

12. Considers that the SME Envoy performs a useful function in externally connecting small enterprises
with the Community environment, and calls therefore on the Commission to promote coordination
between the Envoy and bodies representing small enterprises and craft enterprises in respect of all Community issues; considers that this role could be more effectively enhanced if the Envoy could also be more
vocal internally, by being invited to attend and contribute to committee discussions in Parliament on
proposed legislation so that the needs of SMEs can be more fully explored in due time;

13. Appreciates the very important role that international collaboration between Chambers of Commerce
can play in improving the competitiveness of small enterprises, particularly at a time in which globalisation
leads to more and more enterprises, concentrations and cartels expanding internationally;

14. Welcomes the Commission's willingness to improve SMEs' access to EU programmes; stresses that it
is important to facilitate their access to structural funds and promote other initiatives to improve access to
private capital flows for the benefit of small enterprises, including the creation of microfinancing facilities
for flexible forms of women or family-run enterprises, by helping to cofinance projects and providing
qualified and financially accessible information, in particular through the Euro Info Centres and the Innovation Relay Centres;

15. Points out that undertakings in outlying and rural areas are predominantly small in size; stresses
therefore the need for increased funding in the form of special measures and investment programmes and
extension of the innovation network to encompass outlying small businesses, for which access to innovation is of vital importance; recommends simplified procedures for the creation of regional and local funds
of risk capital in cooperation with institutions dealing with technological development and innovation
such as technological incubator centres, high-tech centres, technological parks etc.;

16. Stresses that the purpose of the report is to strengthen the small-enterprise dimension in Community
policy by drawing up best practices and streamlining the existing policy instruments; given that small
enterprises are recognised as a major motor for creating and increasing employment and innovation in
Europe as well as fostering social and regional development; regards it as vital that both the role and the
needs of SMEs be generally considered when any legislative proposal is being developed, not just proposals
specifically concerning small enterprises;

C 287 E/262 EN Official Journal of the European Union 24.11.2006

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

17. Notes that small and craft enterprises are an irreplaceable source of technological innovation;
requests that the Competitiveness and Innovation Programme and other research and innovation
programmes, as well as regional policy, should facilitate the development of such innovation and support
the initiatives taken by these enterprises; stresses that innovation should not be confined to technology, but
that it also concerns the modernisation of the activities and services of small and craft enterprises,
including modernisation for social and job creation purposes;

18. Recognises that Member States are best placed to oversee bankruptcy legislation; nevertheless believes
that it is not enough simply to exchange best practice, and calls therefore on the European Union to
encourage further development and fostering of business support networks at regional and local level that
would provide support to small enterprises to relaunch their business;

19. Welcomes the progress made by the Member States in the area of legislation on bankruptcy; points
out that a number of financial obstacles are still hampering the development of small and micro-businesses,
particularly their access to lending, and that measures to this end should therefore be taken at Community
level; repeats its view that the European Investment Bank and European Investment Fund should be better
used to support the growth of such businesses, especially those working in the field of innovation and
technological development; also considers that facilitating the transfer of businesses will significantly boost
the viability of small businesses; calls for more extensive joint European initiatives to promote the establishment of small businesses and use to greater advantage their investment potential; considers that EU
measures should — in accordance with the subsidiarity principle — supplement and underpin national
policies;

20. Calls on the Commission and the Council to strengthen the financial instruments for small and craft
enterprises, particularly mutual guarantee systems;

21. Draws attention once again to persistent fiscal impediments, particularly as regards investment;
considers that this action area should be a priority, in order to give SMEs easier access to capital; suggests,
for instance, that European subsidies for small businesses should be exempt from corporation tax;

22. Believes that tax and administration systems relating to the creation and the development of small
businesses should be simplified, that tax obstacles to all forms of cross-border economic activity should be
eliminated, for instance by a common system of value added tax, and that the fight against illegal state aid
in the form of harmful tax competition should continue; supports in particular the Commission proposals
for a pilot scheme for home state taxation for SMEs, which provide a short-term solution for small businesses and supplement the principal measure in this area — the common consolidated corporate tax base;
urges Member States to reform and simplify their tax systems relating to the creation and the development
of small businesses, to provide incentives for innovative companies and to abolish disadvantages created by
tax systems for equity financing;

23. Calls not only for tax relief for small enterprises but also for a reduction in bureaucratic obstacles,
particularly in the launch phase;

24. Believes that the Member States and the Commission have failed to grasp the scale of the considerable challenge that the European Union will face over the next ten years as millions of small and craft
enterprises cease to operate because of the retirement of those who run them, with the danger that several
million jobs will be lost; considers that it is a priority of major importance for the Union to ensure that
such enterprises are handed on and taken over; calls on the Commission and Council to draw up a strategy
to encourage and facilitate the handing on and taking over of small and craft enterprises;

24.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 287 E/263

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

25. Notes that, in terms of impact analysis, the Member States' progress is still limited; is still awaiting
the adoption by the Commission of a definitive method for carrying out impact assessments; asks the
Commission and the Member States to define detailed objectives for simplifying the present regulatory
framework, sector by sector; calls for that exercise to pave the way for effective simplification for small
businesses; calls, moreover, on the Commission and the Member States actually to make use of the results
of the impact assessments and incorporate them in their legislative proposals;

26. Believes that, to ensure a level playing field for SMEs, the Commission must ensure that all legislation
is implemented uniformly across all Member States and that in the case of non-compliance, rapid infringement procedures are applied;

27. Calls on the Member States to ensure that the possibility of exempting small businesses from certain
regulatory requirements is effectively implemented, as the Charter proposes; emphasises that the simplification of legislation generally and the exemption of SMEs from certain regulatory obligations, as proposed in
the Charter, are useful means of alleviating the burden of administrative expenditure and procedures for
SMEs;

28. Notes the differences which apply in respect of education in entrepreneurship and the nurturing of
the entrepreneurial spirit in schools; recognises that the development of business skills should be an objective of national secondary education programmes in all the Member States; recognises the importance of
the first line for action in the Charter, relating to ‘education and training for entrepreneurship’, which
emphasises the need to support business innovation and worker training, to develop entrepreneurship
from an early age in lessons and training courses devoted to business in secondary school, university and
technological training, to encourage close cooperation with research centres, to encourage public support
for young entrepreneurs and to establish links between the various sectors of public administration;
considers that the formation of business clusters of small enterprises could be one effective way to foster
job creation;

29. Considers that, in the case of training, the results are still a long way from meeting the needs
expressed; repeats its wish to see special consideration given to groups of small enterprises within the
framework of the Leonardo da Vinci apprentice exchange programme; expects the Member States to
develop and support a range of performance-oriented training opportunities; repeats its wish to see an
exchange programme set up for workers, from apprentices upwards, to make it possible for them to
complete a vocational training period abroad, thereby encouraging their mobility;

30. Proposes to strengthen the cooperation between Euro Info Centres, the Commission and the European Union's information offices and to involve associated business structures, as this would give SMEs
better access to information;

31. Calls on the Commission, the Council and Member States to start the process of modernisation of
the Charter and re-launch the implementation process with priorities of the Lisbon agenda; considers that
revision of Charter should be the focus of the next annual conference on the Charter; welcomes the practice followed hitherto of holding conferences on the Charter, such as those held in Dublin (2004) and
Luxembourg (2005); is in favour of the practice of holding national conferences on the Charter and recommends that the mechanism for submitting reports regarding the Charter be linked to progress reports on
the Entrepreneurship Action Plan;

32. Considers that additional priorities should be introduced into the Charter, such as the promotion of
entrepreneurship as a true value of society, a considerable reduction of the stigma attached to entrepreneurial failure, enhanced cooperation between small enterprises, education and research institutions and
support for intensive cooperation between the aforementioned actors, financial institutions and capital
markets;

C 287 E/264 EN Official Journal of the European Union 24.11.2006

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

_**Evaluating the Charter's implementation**_

33. Calls for the countries that have not implemented the lines for action to be identified in the report
and for all the countries to be listed for each line for action, so as to have a complete overview of progress
made;

34. Stresses that if the Charter had force of law and were binding, as the European Parliament has regularly requested, the involvement of Member States would be greater, making it possible to carry out a fuller
and more detailed analysis; is concerned at the excessive degree of latitude allowed to Member States as to
whether or not to participate in the implementation of the Charter; deplores the fact that some Member
States are not properly implementing all the Charter's action lines and are refusing to undertake the structural reforms needed for small enterprises; calls on the Council to address this question so as to play a
greater role in monitoring the implementation of the Charter;

35. Wishes best practices to be highlighted, so as to provide models of experience for each line for
action; notes that the Best Procedure projects are working well and considers that their dissemination
needs encouraging;

36. Maintains that the fifth line for action covered by the Charter, ‘Improving online access’, should be
considered more explicitly, especially the role of the public authorities in increasing their electronic
communication with the small business sector;

37. Points to the need to focus more attention on, and give better guarantees as regards access to,
specific Community support for micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises; maintains that it is essential
to do away with the red tape in the procedures for granting Community funds;

38. Is concerned by the lack of data on small enterprises at national and European level; recalls that reliable and more complete statistical information is an essential tool when addressing the problems and
needs of small businesses;

39. Calls on the professional organisations of small businesses to deliver an opinion on the Charter's
implementation at both national and European level; wants to see them more closely involved, both during
the framing of policies and in all the decisions taken at Community level regarding small enterprises, by
setting up standing working groups for this purpose; calls on the Member States and the Commission to
ensure full and independent participation by the organisations representing all these enterprises in the
European social dialogue as a whole; points out that through the Charter, the Commission, in cooperation
with the Member States, could put together data on small and micro-businesses with particular reference
to the needs of small businesses, including data on the productivity and efficiency of micro-businesses
compared with medium-sized businesses, so as to make Community legislation more responsive to their
requirements and better adapt its actions, programmes and policies, including through the identification of
indicators to assess the impact on business activity;

40. Calls for better statistics concerning the situation of small enterprises in the European Union so that
more accurate quantitative comparisons can be drawn and best practices applied more effectively;

41. Calls for a level playing field regarding capital accretion by small businesses, particularly in connection with the ‘Basel II’ provisions - ensuring them more funds for investment in research and development
so that they can compete effectively;

42. Considers it necessary, for the sake of enhanced innovation and competitiveness, to increase the
contribution of trans-European networks to disseminating technology and new ideas among small businesses and to encourage staff mobility between small enterprises and higher education and research institutions; also considers it necessary to develop more targeted research programmes focused on the commercial application of knowledge and technology by small enterprises;

24.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 287 E/265

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

43. Is disappointed by the deadlock in the Council's negotiations on a Community patent; urges the
Commission to provide a suitable legal framework to protect patent and intellectual property rights
regarding the dissemination of innovatory ideas among small enterprises and all other bodies operating
within the internal market; stresses that patents should be affordable for small businesses;

44. Welcomes the Commission's initiative to withdraw one third of screened legislative proposals to
ensure that the regulatory framework in which businesses operate is simple and of high quality; calls upon
the Member States to support the Commission in this project with equivalent measures at national level;
welcomes the Commission's proposal that new regulations at national and Community level should be
screened to assess their impact, both positive and negative, on small enterprises and entrepreneurs; requests
that the principle of subsidiarity be more rigorously taken into account and a more systematic use be
made of impact assessments and public consultation in the development of new policy proposals; calls
accordingly on the Commission to ensure that impact assessments of Community legislation are clearly
and specifically extended to small enterprises; believes that this Commission proposal concerning new
regulations should also be formally extended to include existing regulations and that, where legislation is
deemed unnecessary at Community level, it should be revised or repealed; calls on the Commission to
draw up a clear timetable and action plan in order to deliver this objective;

45. Underlines the need to accelerate far-reaching structural reforms in each Member State in order to
strengthen small enterprises' competitiveness, create favourable conditions for businesses, especially small
businesses, and complete the creation of a fully-functioning internal market;

46. Calls, for that reason, for concrete policies and actions to increase investments at national and
regional level; calls urgently for suitable investment incentives to be given to small businesses, such as
simplified procedures for supporting small investments via public development funds, venture capital funds
(especially seed capital funds), business angel finance, investment by private individuals (micro-angels) and
micro-credit funds operating on a public-private partnership basis; encourages the pooling of resources
and information concerning joint projects, greater participation in projects carried out by Member States
and transparency of taxation regarding policies aimed at attracting foreign investments;

47. Recognises the need for special assistance to small enterprises in implementing environmental and
social legislation;

48. Believes that all the measures laid down in the Charter to stimulate business enterprise should be
equally applicable to the self-employed, especially as regards matters of interest to them, such as social
security systems, prevention of occupational hazards, and unemployment insurance;

_**The Charter's future**_

49. Takes note of the suggestion of linking the progress reports on the Entrepreneurship Action Plan
with the reporting mechanism for the Charter, and revising the content and priorities of the Action Plan, if
need be;

50. With a view to the possible revision of the Charter, calls for craft enterprises to be expressly recognised in the text; with this in view, hopes that the main goal of the Fourth European Conference on Crafts
and Small Businesses will be to help define the common interests of craft sectors at European level and
that it will have the technical, human, financial and political means to enable it to draw up a strategy
better geared to the specific nature, needs and expectations of craft sectors;

C 287 E/266 EN Official Journal of the European Union 24.11.2006

**Thursday, 19 January 2006**

51. Congratulates the new Member States for actively learning from others and on their early results in
implementing the Charter though further progress must be made; draws attention to the particularly
important role played by SMEs in the new Member States, especially in those in which significant institutional and political changes are underway;

52. Regrets the fact that there will be no more annual Charter reports in future, as Charter reporting will
from now on be absorbed into Lisbon reporting; believes that this is certainly a backward step as far as
future focus on SMEs is concerned; further regrets that the process of Charter reporting, which involved
annual bilateral discussions with representatives of business organisations, will now lapse without such
future direct input from SMEs; considers that this decision should be revisited;

53. Considers that while this would make it possible to rationalise follow-up action for the two instruments, it is not acceptable for implementation of the Charter to become merely a subheading of the Action
Plan;

54. Believes that consideration needs to be given to the special situation of non-profit SMEs;

55. Therefore considers that this solution would be acceptable only on the following conditions:

— retaining the small and micro-businesses dimension of the Charter, with actions specifically intended
for them;

— setting up a specific follow-up and evaluation mechanism for the accession and candidate countries,
and associated states that are not party to the Action Plan;

— taking account of the participation of the professional organisations, which have a more important role
in implementing the Charter than in the Action Plan;

— maintaining the dissemination of best practices and exchanges between the Charter's signatory states;

56. Stresses that including the follow-up to the implementation of the Charter as part of the Lisbon
Strategy must not be an end in itself; emphasises that, if this follow-up action is simplified in any way, this
should not be at the expense of the content and substance of the annual reports forwarded by the states
concerning follow-up to the Charter; calls therefore for these national reports to continue to focus on the
introduction of best practice, experimentation, the presentation of concrete legislative measures and
specific political commitments aimed at small and micro enterprises;

57. Welcomes the intention of the Commission to evaluate the implementation of the Charter in the
contextual framework of the Lisbon process;

58. Calls on the Commission to involve all representatives of small and craft enterprises in any revision
process and to take these conditions into account when it presents to Parliament a proposal for revising
the Charter and improving its follow-up action;

59. Calls on the Council, the Commission, and the Member States to ensure that the annual report on
the Charter remains the key instrument for monitoring the development in the field of entrepreneurship;

                                   
                                  -                                  

60. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.