Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

###### **COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES** Brussels, 03.07.1998 COM(1998) 422 final 97/119 (COD) OPINION OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 189 b (2) (d) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL DECISION **adopting the 5th Framework Programme of the** **European Community for research, technological development and** **demonstration activities (1998-2002)**

**EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM**

Pursuant to Article 189b (2) (d) of the EC Treaty, the Commission is required to deliver
an opinion on amendments proposed by the European Parliament on second reading.

The Commission sets out below its opinion on the amendments proposed by the
European Parliament.

#### **1. Background**

**30 April 1997** **COM** - Initial proposal (EC and EURATOM)

**11** **August** **1997** **COM** - 1st amended proposal (EC and EURATOM)

(Supplement concerning the overall amount of funding)

**18** **December** **1997** **EP** - Opinion on 1st reading (EC and EURATOM)

**14 January 1998** **COM** - 2nd amended proposal (EC and EURATOM) (following

EP opinion)

23 **March 1998** **COUNCIL** - Common position on FP 5 (EC)

**30 March 1998** **COM** - Commission communication to Parliament on the

Council's common position
**2 April 1998** **EP** - Receipt by Parliament of the Council's common position
and explanatory memorandum for 2nd reading, and receipt by
Parliament of the political agreement on EURATOM (for
information)
**17 June** **1998** **EP** - Adoption of 35 amendments to the Council's common
position

#### **2. Purpose of the proposal for a Decision**

Based on Article 130 i of the Treaty, the aim of the Framework Programme is to
strengthen the Union's science and technology base and encourage its competitiveness.
The 5th Framework Programme (1998-2002) includes among its objectives the Union's
major socio-economic needs and identifies the research priorities designed to address
them.

#### **3. Commission opinion on Parliament's amendments on 2nd reading**

**Introduction**

In accordance with Article 189b of the EC Treaty, the purpose of this opinion is to set oui
the Commission's position on the amendments adopted by Parliament on 2nd reading on
17 June 1998.

The Commission's opinion should make it possible to identify the essential points on
which there is a convergence of views between Parliament and Council and those where

their respective positions are still different. Another aim is to ensure that the co-decision
procedure results in a balanced outcome within a time limit such that the efficiency and
continuity of Community research activities are ensured.

**General assessment**

The Commission notes the convergence of views between the three institutions on the
structure and scientific and technical content of the Framework Programme. The broad
strategic guidelines set out in the Commission's proposal are confirmed by the EP on its
2nd reading; the need to concentrate efforts is reaffirmed; and the key actions, which are
essential components of the thematic programmes, are regarded as appropriate means of
mobilising the expertise needed in order to meet the expectations of society.

The Commission also sees that the European Parliament wishes to assign to the 5th
Framework Programme resources commensurate with the stated objectives, and that
Parliament supports the Commission's proposal for an overall budget of
ECU 16.3 billion [1] for the 5th Framework Programme, whereas the figure in the Council's
common position is much lower, namely ECU 14 billion.

In view of this, the Commission has opted to maintain its amended proposal of
14 January 1998 and not to incorporate in it amendments other than the ones that it had
already taken over following the 1st reading.

**Analysis of the 2nd reading**

A significant number of the amendments concern the breakdown of the overall amount of
funding and its links with the financial perspective and the budgetary decisions
(Amendments 4 to 7, 9, 35).

- Parliament's amendments on the breakdown of the overall amount are indicative of

differences of opinion about the major priorities of the future Framework Programme:

- Parliament wishes to increase the budget for the thematic programme "Quality of life
and management of living resources". The Commission had itself assigned priority to
this by nearly doubling the relative share for this area. Any further increase in this part
of the Framework Programme would result in a corresponding reduction in other
activities which are equally crucial in order to enhance the Union's competitiveness.

- This is the case, for example, with the 4th activity concerning human potential:
Parliament would have to reduce the support for the mobility of researchers and
training through research.

- Parliament wishes to reduce the constraints resulting from the link with the financial
perspective in terms of the implementation of the future specific programmes. While
sharing the EP's concerns in this respect, the Commission finds that the scenario
envisaged, namely the inconsistency of the overall amount with the financial

**Parliament wishes to assign ECU** **15** **040 million to the part covered by the EC Treaty (the only one**
**that is concerned by this 2nd reading).**

**perspective or the absence of** **a** **new financial perspective, is very hypothetical; it also**
**considers that this could seriously jeopardise the chances of success in the final stage**
**of the co-decision procedure.**

**Another series of amendments concern the monitoring and implementation of the**
**Framework Programme (Amendments 3, 8, 10 to 14)**

**The Commission sees that Parliament wants to be more involved in the implementation**
**of the Framework Programme. It notes in this connection that Parliament shares its**
**concern to combine the requirements relating to transparent implementation and efficient**
**management.**

**The amendments concern four broad types of functions:**

**• Technical functions. These are linked to the** _**modus operandi**_ **of the consultative**
**groups for the key actions and the committees of independent experts to evaluate the**
**research proposals. The Commission has laid down and will continue to lay down**
**internal operating rules to guarantee transparency.**

**• Monitoring. This makes it possible to provide, each year, elements of guidance for**
**each programme. The monitoring reports are accessible and made available to**
**Parliament, but formal transmission would place an extra burden on programme**
**implementation.**

**• Transmission of information and evaluations to Parliament and the Council.**

**The formal transmissions already established cover all Community RTD activities;**
**they comprise:**

**- a very detailed annual report on research activities drawn up pursuant to Article** **130p**
**of** **the Treaty.**

**- a five-year evaluation exercise both for each specific programme and for the**
**Framework Programme as a whole, entailing a wide-ranging examination of activities**
**in progress and resulting in a series of recommendations.**

**• Mid-term review of the Framework Programme. Given the decision-making rules now**
**in force the guidelines adopted following this exercise may not be adopted before the**
**end of the period covered by the Framework Programme.**

**Most of** **the** **other amendments concern specific aspects of** **the** **content of** **the** **Framework**
**Programme and the participation arrangements (Amendments 2,** **15,** **17,** **22 to 25, 27 to**
**29,** **31 to** **34,** **36).**

**• The Commission shares the EP's concern about the need to facilitate and increase**

**SME participation in Community research activities, but this must be achieved**
**without departing from the** **objectives** **of the Framework** **Programme** **or the**
**participation rules.**

**• Parliament wishes to create a new key action "Information society and social context".**
**The Commission takes the view that this aspect, which is to a large extent covered by**

**3**

the content of theme 2, will be addressed all the more effectively if it is tackled in an
integrated fashion within the existing key actions of this programme.

- Other amendments relating to the scientific and technological content of the
Framework Programme would result in a dispersion of priorities that would be
detrimental to the objective of targeting and concentration which is the underlying
principle of the Commission's proposal; some of them concern points of detail that it
is more appropriate to address at the level of the specific programmes.

In general, for many of the issues raised, Parliament will find more details, which should
broadly satisfy its expectations, in the proposals concerning the specific programmes.

In any case, a significant number of amendments (Amendments 1, 16, 18 to 21, 30), most
of which make useful additions or clarifications to the content of the Framework
Programme, have already been taken up in the Commission's revised proposal following
the first reading: on all these points the Commission can only confirm its support for
Parliament's amendments.

**Conclusion**

The Commission has opted to maintain its amended proposal without including in it
amendments other than the ones that it had already taken up, as they stand or in large
degree, following the 1st reading.

The Commission is well aware that further efforts to achieve convergence between
Parliament and Council will have to be made on the basis of the amendments arising
from Parliament's 2nd reading and it is determined to work towards an overall
compromise in the context of the conciliation procedure.

The Commission renews its appeal to Council and Parliament to keep Community
research efforts at the appropriate level, while ensuring the continuity of the Union's
research and technological development activities.

**Summary table**

Amendments accepted by the Commission 16, 21;
(incorporated in the amended proposal of
14 January 1998)

Amendments the substance of which has 1, 18 to 20, 30;
been taken up by the Commission
(incorporated in the amended proposal of
14 January 1998)

Amendments rejected 2 to 15,17, 22 to 25, 27 to 29, 31 to 36 I

##### ISSN 0254-1475

## COM(98) 422 final

# **DOCUMENTS**

### EN 15 06 04 Catalogue number : CB-C0-98-426-EN-C ISBN 92-78-37822-4

**Office for Official Publications of the European Communities**

**L-2985** **Luxembourg**

_**1**_