				|

		52014PC0077

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL DECISION approving the conclusion, by the Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union /* COM/2014/077 final */

			   	EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
On 24 September 2012 the
Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations, on behalf of the
European Union and its Member States and the Republic of Croatia, with Serbia in
order to conclude a Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement
between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and
the Republic of Serbia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of
the Republic of Croatia to the European Union.
Two rounds of negotiations took place on 28
January 2013 and on 13 March 2013 and were followed by further technical
clarifications and correspondence. The Protocol was initialled by the
Commission and the Government of Serbia on 10 December 2013. The text of the draft
Protocol is attached.
The Commission proposes that
the Council decides on the signature and provisional application of the
Protocol on behalf of the European Union and concludes the Protocol on behalf
of the European Union and its Member States. The European Atomic Energy
Community (EAEC) is also a Party to the Stabilisation and Association
Agreement. For the conclusion of the Protocol on behalf of the European Atomic
Energy Community, the Commission proposes that the Council gives its approval,
pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 101 of the Treaty establishing the
EAEC.
In accordance with Article
101 EAEC Treaty, the decision to sign the agreement is adopted by the
Commission and the decision to conclude the agreement is adopted by the
Commission with the approval of the Council. It is therefore necessary to adopt
separate decisions for the signature and conclusion of the Protocol by the EU
and by the EAEC.
For the conclusion of the
Protocol on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, the Commission proposes
that the Council:
–
gives its approval, pursuant to the second
paragraph of Article 101 of the Treaty establishing the EAEC.
Recommendation for a
COUNCIL DECISION
approving the conclusion, by the
Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Protocol
to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities
and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the
other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the
European Union
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing
the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second paragraph of
Article 101 thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation from
the Commission,
Whereas:
(1)
On 24 September 2012 the Council authorised the
Commission to open negotiations with the Republic of Serbia in order to
conclude a Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the
European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic
of Serbia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic
of Croatia to the European Union ("the Protocol").
(2)
These negotiations have been successfully
completed by initialling the Protocol on 10 December 2013.
(3)
The conclusion, by the Commission, of the
Protocol should be approved as regards matters falling within the competence of
the European Atomic Energy Community.
(4)
The signature and conclusion of the Protocol is
subject to a separate procedure as regards matters falling within the
competence of the Union and the Member States.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Sole Article
The conclusion by the European Commission,
on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Protocol to the
Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and
their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the other
part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the
European Union is hereby approved.
The text of the Protocol is attached to the
Decision on its signature.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President


Avis juridique important

|

31989H0214

89/214/EEC: Commission Recommendation of 24 February 1989 on the rules to be followed for inspections carried out in fresh meat establishments approved for the purposes of intra-Community trade

Official Journal L 087 , 31/03/1989 P. 0001 - 0051

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 24 February 1989 on the rules to be followed for inspections carried out in fresh meat establishments approved for the purposes of intra-Community trade (89/214/EEC) Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June 1964 on health problems affecting intra-Community trade in fresh meat(1), as last amended by Directive 88/288/EEC(2), is designed, in particular, to establish uniform health protection arrangements for  meat in establishments handling fresh meat.  In accordance with Article 9 of the Directive, as amended, Commission veterinary experts must inspect facilities and check whether the requirements of the Directive, notably those of Annex I, are complied with, in order to ensure uniform application of  its provisions.  Pursuant to Council Directive 72/462/EEC of 12 December 1972 on health and veterinary inspection problems upon the importation of bovine animals and swine and fresh meat from third countries(3), as last amended by Directive 88/289/EEC(4), and in  particular Article 4 thereof, for the purposes of decoding whether establishments located in third countries may be listed as establishments from which the Member States are authorized to import fresh meat, the main consideration must be compliance with  the provisions of Annex I to Directive 64/433/EEC.  Detailed interpretation of these technical rules drawn up in collaboration with Member States, are of definite value.  The Commissions' veterinary experts will use this interpretation including any future amendments when inspecting approved establishments in Member States and in third countries.  Such an interpretation entails, through a more specific definition of the terms of the Directive, very rigorous production conditions. Firms in this sector have already been required to invest heavily in major technical changes because of keener  competition within the Community and strict rules governing general health matters, consumer and animal protection.  In a sector which has become very sensitive, and given the prospect of adoption of the code provided for in Article  9 (1) of Directive 64/433/EEC, as amended, it will suffice for the time being to invite those working in the field in the private sector and the national authorities to follow the general line of conduct drawn up by the Commission.  For these reasons, pursuant to Article 155 of the Treaty, the Commission recommends that, where fresh meat establishments the production of which may be involved in intra-Community trade are seeking approval, the interpretation of the rules derived from  Directive 64/433/EEC, and in particular Annex I thereto, set out in the Annex to this recommendation should be followed.   Done at Brussels, 24 February 1989.  For the CommissionRay MAC SHARRYMember of the Commission  (1)OJ No 121, 29. 7. 1964, p. 2012/64.  (2)OJ No L 124, 18. 5. 1988, p. 28.  (3)OJ No L 302, 31. 12. 1972, p. 28.  (4)OJ No L 124, 18. 5. 1988, p. 31.


66/486/CEE: Recommandation de la Commission, du 29 juillet 1966, à la République française au sujet de l'aménagement du monopole national à caractère commercial des poudres et explosifs


title: Council Recommendation of 8 July 2014 on the implementation of the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States whose currency is the euro

text:
               29.7.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 247/141

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 8 July 2014
   on the implementation of the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States whose currency is the euro
   2014/C 247/27
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 136 in conjunction with Article 121(2) 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 policies (1), and in particular Article 5(2) thereof,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (2), and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The current economic environment of the euro area is characterised by a gradual, but still fragile economic recovery. In 2013 and in early 2014, euro area inflation declined markedly and is expected to increase only very gradually over the forecast horizon, reflecting the existing slack together with the ongoing relative price adjustments in the vulnerable economies and the past appreciation of the euro exchange rate. Furthermore, while the recovery is becoming more broad‐based, divergences between Member States whose currency is the euro (‘euro area Member States’) remain high.

               (2)

               The euro area is more than just the sum of its members. The economic and financial crisis clearly exposed the close interrelations in the euro area and underscored the need for stronger coordination of fiscal, financial and structural policies among euro area Member States to ensure a coherent policy stance for the euro area as a whole. The euro area Member States have committed themselves to a set of far‐reaching policy reforms and policy coordination by signing the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance (TSCG) in the Economic and Monetary Union on 2 March 2012. The entry into force of the so‐called two pack Regulations (3) (‘two pack’) in 2013 has further deepened budgetary and economic policy coordination within the euro area. Euro area Member States have a specific responsibility for an effective implementation of the new governance framework. This calls for increased peer pressure to support national reform implementation and fiscal prudence, greater assessment of national reforms from a euro area perspective, internalising potential spillovers and stimulating policies of particular importance for a well functioning EMU. This also calls for appropriate communication about the euro area strategy.

               (3)

               Given the high interdependence between euro area Member States, there are potentially large spillovers related to the implementation of structural reforms which need to be taken into account in order to secure optimal policy design and implementation for euro area Member States individually and for the euro area as a whole. For example, more concerted action in the implementation of reforms would facilitate the necessary convergence between Member States. Early discussion of reform plans of the euro area Member States, building on existing practices and effective implementation of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure are of key importance in this regard.

               (4)

               One of the key policy challenges facing the euro area is to reduce government debt by pursuing differentiated, growth‐friendly fiscal policies while boosting the growth potential of the euro area and tackling the social consequences of the crisis. Thanks to the consolidation efforts of the past years, the euro area fiscal situation has improved but a number of euro area Member States still need to continue with fiscal adjustment to bring down very high levels of debt. All euro area Member States should improve the quality of public finances with the aim of boosting productivity and employment.

               (5)

               Investment in the euro area fell strongly in the initial phase of the crisis and has not yet recovered to its long‐term average. Sluggish investment trends are being driven by the combined impact of private sector deleveraging, financial fragmentation, and necessary fiscal consolidation efforts which have led to a reduction in public investment. Increasing investment in infrastructure and skills is essential to sustain the recovery and boost potential growth. Much of the investment must come from the private sector, but public authorities can play an important role in creating supporting conditions.

               (6)

               In the euro area, the flow of credit to the real economy remains subdued and financial market fragmentation is still high in spite of reduced stress on sovereign debt. Access to finance, in particular for SMEs, remains challenging in many Member States which risks undermining economic recovery. This calls for initiatives aimed at restoring credit flows, deepening capital markets and boosting the long‐term financing of the economy. Actions such as completing banks' balance sheets repair, continuing to strengthen equity buffers, where needed, asset quality reviews and stress tests help identify any remaining pockets of vulnerability and reinforce confidence in the sector as a whole. Significant progress has been achieved as regards the Banking Union, in particular with the establishment of the Single Supervisory Mechanism and the agreement on the Single Resolution Mechanism.

               (7)

               The financial crisis has exposed gaps in the architecture of Economic and Monetary Union. On 28 November 2012, the Commission presented a blueprint for a deep and genuine economic and monetary union with the aim of launching a European debate. On 5 December 2012, the President of the European Council in close collaboration with the President of the European Commission, the President of the Eurogroup and the President of the European Central Bank, presented a report building on a number of ideas from the Commission's blueprint, and including a timeframe and a stage‐based process towards the completion of the Economic and Monetary Union. The European Parliament expressed its views in its resolution of 20 November 2012. Significant steps have been taken since then. The European Council provided further views in December 2013. Further developing EMU will require a step by step approach combining discipline with solidarity. The so‐called six‐pack (4) and the two‐pack foresee a first review of their implementation by the end of 2014.

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that euro area Member States take action, individually and collectively, without prejudice to the competences of the Council as regards the coordination of economic policies of the Member States, but in particular in the context of economic policy coordination in the framework of the Eurogroup, within the period 2014‐2015 to:

               1.

               Promote and monitor, in close cooperation with the Commission, the implementation of structural reforms in those areas most relevant for the smooth functioning of the euro area in order to foster growth and convergence and adjustment of internal and external imbalances. Assess and stimulate progress in delivering on reform commitments in euro area Member States experiencing excessive imbalances and in reform implementation in the euro area Member States with imbalances requiring decisive action, to limit negative spillovers to the rest of the euro area. Foster appropriate policies in countries with large current account surpluses to contribute to positive spillovers. Regularly hold thematic discussions on structural reforms in the labour and product markets with potentially large spillovers, focussing on reducing the high tax wedge on labour and reforming services markets.

               2.

               Coordinate fiscal policies of the euro area Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, in particular when assessing draft budgetary plans to ensure a coherent and growth‐friendly fiscal stance across the euro area. Improve the quality and sustainability of public finances by prioritising material and immaterial investment at national and EU levels. Ensure that national fiscal frameworks, including national fiscal councils, are strong.

               3.

               Ensure the resilience of the banking system, in particular by taking the necessary action in the follow up of the asset quality review and the stress tests, and by implementing the Banking Union regulations and taking forward the further work foreseen in the SRM transition period. Stimulate private sector investment and increase the flow of credit to the economy via actions to improve access to credit by SMEs, deepening of capital markets, restarting the securitisation market, based on the proposals and the calendar in the Commission Communication on long‐term financing of the European economy.

               4.

               Take forward work on deepening Economic and Monetary Union and contribute to the improvement of the economic surveillance framework in the context of the reviews foreseen for end 2014.

      Done at Brussels, 8 July 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. C. PADOAN

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25.

      (3)  Regulation (EU) No 472/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on the strengthening of economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States in the euro area experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability (OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p. 1); Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on common provisions for monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area (OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p. 11).

      (4)  Council Regulation (EU) No 1177/2011 of 8 November 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 33); Council Directive 2011/85/EU of 8 November 2011 on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 41); Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 1); Regulation (EU) No 1174/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 8); Regulation (EU) No 1175/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 12); Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25).


Important legal notice

|

52005SC0227

Recommendation for a Council opinion in accordance with the third paragraph of Art. 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 On the updated stability programme of Spain, 2004-2008  /* SEC/2005/0227 final */

	Brussels, 16.2.2005SEC(2005) 227 finalRecommendation for aCOUNCIL OPINIONin accordance with the third paragraph of Art. 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 On the updated stability programme of Spain, 2004-2008(presented by the Commission)EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUMCouncil Regulation (EC) No. 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies[1] stipulates that participating Member States, that is, those which have adopted the single currency, had to submit stability programmes to the Council and the Commission by 1 March 1999. In accordance with Article 5 of this Regulation, the Council had to examine each stability programme based on assessments prepared by the Commission and the Committee set up by Article 114 of the Treaty (the Economic and Financial Committee). On the basis of a recommendation from the Commission and after having consulted the Economic and Financial Committee, the Council delivered an opinion, following its examination of the programme. According to the Regulation, Member States need to submit annual updates of their stability programmes, which may also be examined by the Council in accordance with these same procedures.The first stability programme of Spain, covering the period 1998-2002, was submitted on 30 December 1998 and assessed by the Council on 15 March 1999[2]. Updates were presented every following year. Spain submitted the most recent update of its stability programme on 23 December 2004. The Commission services have carried out a technical evaluation of this update, taking into account the results of the Commission services Autumn 2004 economic forecasts, and having regard to the code of conduct[3], the commonly agreed methodology for the estimation of potential output and cyclically-adjusted balances, the recommendations in the broad economic policy guidelines for the period 2003-2005 and the principles laid down in the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 27 November 2002 on strengthening the coordination of budgetary policies[4]. This evaluation warrants the following assessment: Spain submitted its sixth updated stability programme, covering the period 2004-2008, on 23 December 2004. The information provided in the updated programme complies with the data requirements of the revised code of conduct on the content and format of stability and convergence programmes. However, the updated programme was presented three weeks after the 1 December deadline.-  The programme projects GDP growth of 2.6% of GDP in 2004, 2.9% in 2005 and 3.0% thereafter. These are relatively favourable projections for 2005 and 2006 as compared with the Commission services autumn 2004 forecast, which predicts growth at 2.6% and 2.7% respectively. For the outer years of the programme, growth also seems on the high side compared to estimates of trend GDP growth. The macroeconomic scenario in the update projects buoyant domestic demand coupled with a sizeable but narrowing negative contribution to GDP growth of net external demand. The programme’s GDP deflator projections are plausible. The update also includes a “moderate growth” scenario, which projects annual GDP growth of 0.5 percentage points lower than in the reference scenario. While the reference scenario seems on the high side, the moderate growth scenario is considered to be on the low side.-  The budgetary strategy of the Spanish authorities is summarised in the programme by the statement that “the general principle guiding fiscal policy is that of budgetary stability over the full economic cycle”. This general principle could imply the occurrence of budget deficits, in the event of a cyclical slowdown. In this line, the update provides a brief description of the upcoming reform of the General Law on Budgetary Stability that will redefine the concept of stability in terms of the full length of the business cycle. For 2004, a deficit outcome of 0.8% of GDP is estimated. This is due to one-off accounting adjustments consisting of the reclassification into the general government sector of RTVE (the public broadcasting company), as requested by Eurostat, with an impact on the deficit of 0.1% of GDP, and the assumption of RENFE’s (the railway network company) debt, decided by the new government in office since April 2004, with an impact of 0.7% of GDP in the 2004 deficit.-  Over the period 2005-2008, the update targets small, but rising surpluses; from 0.1% of GDP to 0.4% of GDP at the end of the projection period. Since interest payments are expected to decrease only slightly over the programme period (from 2.1% of GDP in 2005 to 1.9% in 2008), the primary surplus is projected to remain fairly stable (from 2.2% of GDP in 2005 to 2.3% in 2008). While the targets for the general government balance are broadly the same as in the previous update, the targeted primary surpluses are slightly less ambitious (by around 0.3 percentage points of GDP). Based on trend GDP calculated by the Commission services from the projected growth rates in the update, and after netting out the effect of the 2004 one-off accounting adjustments, the cyclically-adjusted budget balance remains at between 0.2% and 0.5% of GDP throughout the programme period.-  The risks attached to the budgetary targets seem broadly balanced. In particular, while the budgetary projections are built upon somewhat favourable growth assumptions, the size of the consolidation envisaged for the entire period is prudent and the update confirms the commitment of the current government to budgetary stability.-  In view of this risk assessment, the budgetary stance in the programme is sufficient to maintain the Stability and Growth Pact’s medium-term objective of a position of close-to-balance throughout the period. It also provides a sufficient safety margin against breaching the 3% of GDP deficit threshold with normal macroeconomic fluctuations in each year.-  According to the update, the debt ratio will decline steadily from 49% in 2004 to 40% in 2008, well below the 60% of GDP reference value. The pace of debt reduction is plausible compared with the Commission services autumn 2004 forecast. The main contribution to debt reduction stems from sustained primary surpluses. A persistent debt-increasing stock-flow adjustment, which adds around 0.7 percentage point to the debt ratio annually is not explained in the programme.-  The programme reviews the government’s structural reform programme which focuses on increasing productivity growth and strengthening social cohesion. Specifically, it aims to enhance productivity through increased expenditure on R&D, innovation, education and infrastructure. The programme also outlines measures to promote job creation and participation as well as to reduce labour market segmentation. The government plans a reform and simplification of personal and corporate income taxes, starting already this year, but the programme provides no details on this. The aim of this reform is to enhance the neutrality and efficiency of the tax system. In addition, the government wants to take steps towards a better match between contributory efforts and pension benefits while raising the lowest pensions. However, the impact of this potential reform on public finances in the long term, remains unclear.-  Spain appears to be in a relatively favourable position with regard to the long-term sustainability of the public finances, despite the projected budgetary cost of an ageing population. Reforms aimed at enhancing long-term sustainability are geared towards increasing labour market participation, maintaining a sound budgetary position which enables debt reduction, and making a more sustainable pension system that would reduce the budgetary impact of ageing. The strategy outlined in the programme is mainly based on the budgetary effects of the reforms, notably the “Pacto de Toledo”, and the planned debt reduction enabled by the target of sustaining budgetary surpluses. However, recommendations agreed within the “Pacto de Toledo”, especially the reform of the public pension system as also recommended in the broad economic policy guidelines, have not yet been fully translated into a reform agenda. Resolutely implementing such measures would prevent the emergence of unsustainable trends, in public finances in the long run, hence contributing to the achievement of sustainability of the public finances over the long-run.-  Overall, the economic policies outlined in the update are partly consistent with the country-specific broad economic policy guidelines in the area of public finances. In particular, as regards the recommended reform of the public pension system to ensure the long-term viability of the system, the reform agenda to align contributions and benefits more closely is not yet defined.-  In view of the above assessment, it would be appropriate for Spain to prevent the emergence of unsustainable trends in public finances in the long run, in particular through a major reform of the pension system.***Based on this assessment, the Commission has adopted the attached recommendation for a Council Opinion on the updated stability programme of Spain and is forwarding it to the Council.Recommendation for aCOUNCIL OPINIONin accordance with the third paragraph of Art. 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 On the updated stability programme of Spain, 2004-2008THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,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 policies[5], and in particular Article 5(3) thereof,Having regard to the recommendation of the Commission,After consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,HAS DELIVERED THIS OPINION:On [8 March 2005] the Council examined the updated stability programme of Spain, which covers the period 2004-2008. The programme complies with the data requirements of the “code of conduct on the content and format of stability and convergence programmes”. However, the updated programme was presented three weeks beyond the 1 December deadline set in the code of conduct.The macroeconomic scenario underlying the programme envisages real GDP growth to pick up from 2.6% in 2004 to 2.9% in 2005 and to average 3.0% over the rest of the programme period. On the basis of currently available information, this scenario seems to reflect rather favourable growth assumptions. The update also considers a “moderate scenario” that projects annual GDP growth of 2.4% in 2005 and 2.5% thereafter. While the baseline scenario can be considered as relatively optimistic, the moderate growth scenario is on the low side. The programme’s projections for inflation (based on the GDP deflator) appear realistic.According to the update, the general principle guiding fiscal policy is that of budgetary stability over the full economic cycle. This general principle could lead to budgetary deficits in the event of a cyclical slowdown, although the update does not target any deficit positions between 2005 and 2008 after the temporary deficit recorded in 2004, which reflected the impact of accounting adjustments. The update targets small, but rising surpluses; from 0.1% of GDP in 2005 to 0.4% of GDP at the end of the projection period. Since interest payments are expected to decrease only slightly over the programme period, the primary surplus is projected to remain fairly stable at around 2¼% of GDP. While the targets for the general government balance are broadly the same as in the previous update, the targeted primary surpluses are slightly less ambitious, which reflects higher interest payments projected in the 2003 update. Based on trend GDP calculated by the Commission services[6] from the projected growth rates in the update, and after netting out the effect of the 2004 one-off accounting adjustments, the cyclically-adjusted budget balance remains between 0.2% and 0.5% of GDP throughout the programme period.The risks to the budgetary projections in the programme appear broadly balanced. In particular, although growth assumptions are somewhat favourable, the risk of sizeable deviations from the programme’s objectives is rather limited due to government‘s cautiousness when setting the targets, generally overachieved in the previous years.In view of this risk assessment, the budgetary stance in the programme is sufficient to maintain the Stability and Growth Pact’s medium-term objective of a position of close-to-balance throughout the programme period (with a temporary deviation in 2004 related to the one-off accounting adjustments). It also provides a sufficient safety margin against breaching the 3% of GDP deficit threshold with normal macroeconomic fluctuations over the period covered in the update.The debt ratio is estimated to have declined to 49.1% of GDP in 2004, well below the 60% of GDP Treaty reference value. The programme projects the debt ratio to further decline by 9 percentage points over the programme period, mainly on account of primary surpluses above 2% of GDP.The budgetary strategy outlined in the programme puts Spain in a relatively favourable position with regard to long-term sustainability of the public finances, in spite of the projected budgetary costs of an ageing population. However, given the risks surrounding such long-term expenditure projections and the large increase of pension expenditure projected in the very long term, current policies need to be supplemented by measures to prevent the emergence of unsustainable trends in public finances in the long run, in particular through a comprehensive reform of the pension system in line with the recommendations of the multi-partisan agreement “Pacto de Toledo”.Overall, the economic policies outlined in the update are partly consistent with the country-specific broad economic policy guidelines in the area of public finances. In particular, as regards the recommended reform of the public pension system to ensure the long-term viability of the system has not been implemented yet.* * *In view of the above assessment, the Council is of the opinion that Spain should adopt measures to prevent the emergence of unsustainable trends in public finances in the long run, in particular through a major reform of the pension system.Comparison of key macroeconomic and budgetary projections2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 |Real GDP (% change) | SP Dec 2004 | 2.6 | 2.9 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 |COM Oct 2004 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.7 | n.a. | n.a. |SP Jan 2004 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | n.a. |HICP inflation2 (%) | SP Dec 2004 | 3.8 | 3.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 | 2.8 |COM Oct 2004 | 3.1 | 2.9 | 2.5 | n.a. | n.a. |SP Jan 2004 | 2.9 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.6 | n.a. |General government balance (% of GDP) | SP Dec 2004 | -0.8 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 |COM Oct 2004 | -0.6 | -0.1 | 0.0 | n.a. | n.a. |SP Jan 2004 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | n.a. |Primary balance (% of GDP) | SP Dec 2004 | 1.5 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.3 |COM Oct 2004 | 1.7 | 2.1 | 2.0 | n.a. | n.a. |SP Jan 2004 | 2.6 | 2.5 | 2.6 | 2.6 | n.a. |Cyclically-adjusted balance (% of GDP) | SP Dec 20041 | -0.7 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.4 |COM Oct 2004 | -0.7 | -0.1 | 0.0 | n.a. | n.a. |SP Jan 20041 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | n.a. |Government gross debt (% of GDP) | SP Dec 2004 | 49.1 | 46.7 | 44.3 | 42.0 | 40.0 |COM Oct 2004 | 48.2 | 45.5 | 42.9 | n.a. | n.a. |SP Jan 2004 | 46.6 | 47.7 | 45.7 | 43.8 | n.a. |Note: 1 The commonly agreed methodology based on the production function approach is not yet applied to Spain, pending the resolution of estimation problems. Therefore, cyclically-adjusted balances are calculated by Commission services based on the Hodrick-Prescott filter methodology from the information provided in the programme. 2 Inflation based on the GDP deflator for the stability programmes. Sources: Stability programme (SP); Commission services autumn 2004 economic forecasts (COM); Commission services calculations. |[1] OJ L 209, 2.8.1997. All the documents referred to in this text can be found at the following website:http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/about/activities/sgp/main_en.htm.[2] OJ C 124, 5.5.1999.[3] Revised Opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee on the content and format of stability and convergence programmes, endorsed by the ECOFIN Council on 10.7.2001.[4] COM(2002) 668, 27.11.2002.[5] OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1. The documents referred to in this text can be found at the following website:http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/about/activities/sgp/main_en.htm.[6] The commonly agreed methodology based on the production function approach is not yet applied to Spain, pending the resolution of estimation problems. Therefore, cyclically-adjusted balances are calculated based on the Hodrick-Prescott filter methodology.


title: Council Recommendation of 8 July 2014 on the National Reform Programme 2014 of Lithuania and delivering a Council opinion on the Convergence Programme of Lithuania, 2014

text:
               29.7.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 247/67

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 8 July 2014
   on the National Reform Programme 2014 of Lithuania and delivering a Council opinion on the Convergence Programme of Lithuania, 2014
   2014/C 247/13
   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 policies (1), and in particular Article 9(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the resolutions of the European Parliament,
   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 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission's proposal to launch a new strategy for growth and jobs, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies, which focuses on the key areas where action is needed to boost Europe's potential for sustainable growth and competitiveness.

               (2)

               On 13 July 2010, the Council, on the basis of the Commission's proposals, adopted a Recommendation on the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and the Union (2010 to 2014) and, on 21 October 2010, it adopted a decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (2), which together form the ‘integrated guidelines’. Member States were invited to take the integrated guidelines into account in their national economic and employment policies.

               (3)

               On 29 June 2012, the Member States' Heads of State or Government decided on a Compact for Growth and Jobs, providing a coherent framework for action at national, EU and euro area levels using all possible levers, instruments and policies. They decided on action to be taken at the level of the Member States, in particular expressing full commitment to achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy and to implementing the country‐specific recommendations.

               (4)

               On 9 July 2013, the Council adopted a Recommendation (3) on Lithuania's National Reform Programme for 2013 and delivered its opinion on Lithuania's updated Convergence Programme for 2012‐2016.

               (5)

               On 13 November 2013, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2014 European Semester for economic policy coordination. Also, on 13 November 2013, the Commission, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which Lithuania was not identified as one of the Member States for which an in‐depth review would be carried out.

               (6)

               On 20 December 2013, the European Council endorsed the priorities for ensuring financial stability, fiscal consolidation and action to foster growth. It underscored the need to pursue differentiated, growth‐friendly fiscal consolidation, to restore normal lending conditions to the economy, to promote growth and competitiveness, to tackle unemployment and the social consequences of the crisis, and to modernise public administration.

               (7)

               On 1 April 2014, Lithuania submitted its 2014 National Reform Programme and on 22 April 2014 its 2014 Convergence Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (8)

               The objective of the budgetary strategy outlined in the 2014 Convergence Programme is to reach the medium‐term objective by 2015 and to achieve a structural surplus of 0,9 % of GDP at the end of the Convergence Programme in 2017. The Convergence Programme confirms the previous medium‐term objective of ‐ 1 % of GDP, which reflects the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. Based on the (recalculated) structural budget balance, annual progress towards the medium‐term objective is at least 0,5 % of GDP in 2014 and 2015. At the same time, there is a risk of deviation from the expenditure benchmark in 2015. Overall, the adjustment path towards the medium‐term objective is broadly in line with the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. The Convergence Programme shows the debt decreasing substantially over the programme period to around 35 % by 2017. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning the budgetary projections in the Convergence Programme is broadly plausible. At the same time, for the years 2015‐2017, consolidation measures have yet to be specified. According to the Commission services 2014 spring forecast, the structural adjustment in 2014 and 2015 is expected to be at 0,2 % and 0,6 % of GDP respectively, and thus for 2014 0,3 % of GDP below the required tightening of 0,5 % of GDP. Furthermore, the expenditure benchmark is at risk of a significant deviation in 2014, with an additional albeit more limited deviation in 2015. Based on its assessment of the Convergence Programme and the Commission forecast, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the opinion that there is a risk of a significant deviation from the adjustment path towards the medium‐term objective as of 2014.

               (9)

               The relative importance of taxes considered less detrimental to growth, such as property and environmental taxes, remains low. Tax revenues rely to a large extent on indirect and labour taxation while the proportion accounted for by environmental taxation remains low. Increased revenue from more growth‐friendly taxes could be used to alleviate the tax burden on low‐income earners, in particular the low‐skilled. A partial review of the tax system was undertaken at the beginning of 2013 and the Government decided to adjust capital taxation, raise the taxable income threshold implying increased progressivity of personal income taxation for the benefit of low‐income earners and increase excise duties for tobacco and alcohol. Overall, however, these measures will have a rather negative effect on revenues. Further steps to improve the sustainability of public finances and strengthen the revenue side therefore remain crucial. No major measures were taken following the 2013 country‐specific recommendation on environmental taxation. There was limited progress in strengthening the fiscal framework, as expenditure ceilings remain insufficiently binding and legislative changes have not yet been approved. Lithuania continues to face challenges in terms of tax compliance, in particular to tackle VAT fraud by, among others, strengthening risk management measures. The 2013‐2014 tax compliance action plan is being implemented and first estimates suggest some positive effects. In 2013, a set of measures was taken to strengthen tax compliance in the field of VAT and excise duties. For 2014‐2015 a new targeted strategy has been launched.

               (10)

               Unfavourable demographic developments cast doubts on Lithuania's long‐term fiscal sustainability. Pension spending is projected to increase substantially and is estimated, over 50 years, to reach almost double the EU average. The gradual increase of the statutory retirement age that started in 2012 is not enough to keep up with shrinkage in the labour force and rising life expectancy. In addition, the sharp rise in poverty and severe material deprivation among older people points to problems linked to pension adequacy. Lithuania has made important but isolated steps in the right direction and more significant changes are needed to implement a comprehensive reform. It has completed the reform of the second pension pillar, but neither occupational schemes nor voluntary pension accumulation are widely used. Alongside the increase in the statutory retirement age, measures that ensure the employability of older workers and age‐friendly working environments are also necessary.

               (11)

               Overall unemployment has gone down but structural unemployment remains high, suggesting skills mismatches, in particular for the low‐skilled. Youth unemployment and the rates of young people not in education, employment or training are decreasing, but are still high. The limited coverage of active labour market policies remains a challenge, and its effectiveness and timeliness needs to be improved. Skilled labour shortages are forecast to become even more pronounced in the future. To improve young people's employability, it is important to improve the labour‐market relevance of vocational and higher education, improve the quality of apprenticeship schemes and work‐based learning, in partnership with the private sector including SMEs. Increased participation in lifelong learning remains insufficient. A comprehensive review of the labour law, with the involvement of social partners, is needed to find ways of alleviating the administrative burden on employers. Primarily it will be essential to identify and eliminate unnecessary restrictions affecting flexible contractual agreements, dismissal provisions and working time arrangements.

               (12)

               Despite recent improvement, working‐age poverty remains above the EU average. Increases in the minimum monthly wage and non‐taxable threshold have helped to address poverty. However, old‐age poverty and severe material deprivation have risen steeply in recent years. In 2012‐2013, the cash social assistance reform pilot resulted in a lower number of social beneficiaries and expenditure on cash social benefits. In 2014, the pilot was expanded to all municipalities. There is a need to ensure monitoring and evaluation as regards the effects of the reform on the most needy. The coverage of activation measures for long‐term unemployed social assistance beneficiaries is insufficient. Moreover, the measures are still focused on public works schemes, and thus provide income support, but do not help to improve the beneficiaries' employability. The impact of the reform on those on low incomes needs to be assessed. Lithuania adopted the 2014‐2020 Action Plan for Enhancing Social Inclusion. However, there remains a need to establish the main target groups, the budget and concrete measures, specifying how the targets will be achieved and how the various ministries, local governments and civil society actors implementing the Action Plan will cooperate.

               (13)

               The Government has been undertaking an ambitious reform of state‐owned enterprises since 2010. Final legal acts were approved in December 2013, amending the transparency guidelines requiring all state‐owned enterprises, as of 2014, to provide separate data for commercial and non‐commercial functions in their annual reports. A first report detailing this breakdown is envisaged for August 2014. It should allow a more detailed assessment of the success of this change. However, the number of independent board members in state‐owned enterprises remains small, partly due to legal constraints applying to state and municipal enterprises. Legal changes are being proposed that would allow for independent members to be appointed to the boards of all state‐owned enterprises. The effectiveness of separation commercial and non‐commercial functions and the professionalisation of boards will have to be assessed once fully implemented.

               (14)

               Electricity and gas links to neighbouring Member States remain underdeveloped, resulting in limited competition and high prices. Competition in the domestic markets has been strengthened through the liberalisation of the gas and electricity markets, but so far customers have not exercised their rights to change suppliers. While the Government has made energy interconnections a priority, these have yet to be finalised. An important gas pipeline has been commissioned and the LNG terminal in Klaipeda is expected to become operational by December 2014. Some progress has been achieved with regard to the interconnections of the Lithuanian energy network with the EU energy market. Furthermore, energy efficiency needs to improve. Lithuania has made some progress on the energy efficiency of buildings, including with respect to investments under the JESSICA holding fund. In 2013 legislative measures were taken to accelerate the absorption of the holding fund. At the beginning of 2014, projects had been finalised, and initial applications have increased considerably. Legal changes involve heating subsidies being reduced if residents reject renovation, thus removing disincentives to renovation.

               (15)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Lithuania's economic policy. It has assessed the National Reform Programme and the Convergence Programme. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socio‐economic policy in Lithuania but also their compliance with EU rules and guidance, given the need to reinforce the overall economic governance of the Union by providing EU‐level input into future national decisions. Its recommendations under the European Semester are reflected in recommendations (1) to (6) below.

               (16)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the Convergence Programme, and its opinion (5) is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Lithuania take action within the period 2014‐2015 to:

               1.

               Reinforce the budgetary measures for 2014 in the light of expenditure growth exceeding the benchmark and the emerging gap of 0,3 % of GDP in terms of structural effort based on the Commission services 2014 spring forecast, pointing to a risk of significant deviation relative to the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact requirements. In 2015, strengthen the budgetary strategy to ensure the required adjustment of 0,5 % of GDP towards the medium‐term objective. Thereafter ensure that the medium‐term objective is adhered to. Complement the budgetary strategy with a further strengthened fiscal framework, in particular by ensuring binding expenditure ceilings when setting the medium‐term budgetary framework. Further review the tax system and consider increasing those taxes that are least detrimental to growth, such as recurrent property and environmental taxation, while continuing to improve tax compliance.

               2.

               Adopt and implement legislation on a comprehensive pension system reform. In particular, align the statutory retirement age with life expectancy, restrict access to early retirement, establish clear rules for the indexation of pensions, and promote the use of complementary savings schemes. Underpin pension reform with measures that promote the employability of older workers.

               3.

               Better target active labour market policy measures to the low‐skilled and long‐term unemployed. Improve coverage and adequacy of unemployment benefits and link them to activation. Address persistent skills mismatches by improving the labour‐market relevance of education inter alia based on skills forecast systems and promote life‐long learning. In order to increase the employability of young people, prioritise offering quality apprenticeships, other forms of work‐based learning, and strengthen partnership with the private sector. Review the appropriateness of labour legislation, in particular with regard to the framework for labour contracts and for working‐time arrangements, in consultation with social partners.

               4.

               Ensure adequate coverage of those most in need and continue to strengthen the links between cash social assistance and activation measures.

               5.

               Complete the implementation of the reform of state‐owned enterprises as planned; in particular by finalising the separation of commercial and non‐commercial activities, further professionalising executive boards and closely monitoring compliance with the requirements of the reform.

               6.

               Step up measures to improve the energy efficiency of buildings, through a rapid implementation of the holding fund. Continue the development of cross‐border connections to neighbouring Member States for both electricity and gas to diversify energy sources and promote competition through improved integration of the Baltic energy markets.

      Done at Brussels, 8 July 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. C. PADOAN

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  Maintained for 2014 by Council Decision 2014/322/EU of 6 May 2014 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States for 2014 (OJ L 165, 4.6.2014, p. 49).

      (3)  OJ C 217, 30.7.2013, p. 51.

      (4)  Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25).

      (5)  Under Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97.


Important legal notice

|

52008PC0577

Recommendation from the Commission to the Council to authorise the Commission to open and conduct negotiations with the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) on the terms and conditions for the European Community's accession  /* COM/2008/0577 final */

	[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 26.9.2008COM(2008) 577 finalRECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCILto authorise the Commission to open and conduct negotiations with the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) on the terms and conditions for the European Community's accessionRECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCILto authorise the Commission to open and conduct negotiations with the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) on the terms and conditions for the European Community's accessionA. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM1. INTRODUCTIONThe International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) is an intergovernmental scientific and technical organisation active in the sector of vines, wine, wine-based drinks, table grapes, raisins and other vine products. It was set up by international Agreement of 3 April 2001, signed in Paris, as the successor to the International Wine Office, established in 1924 by the International Arrangement of 29 November 1924, which subsequently became the International Office of Vine and Wine by decision of 4 September 1958.As at 3 April 2006, the OIV had 43 Members, plus, as temporary observers, the former Member States of the Office. Six Member States of the European Union are not Members of the OIV: the United Kingdom, Poland, Denmark, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.The objectives and activities of the OIV are stated in Article 2.1 and 2.2 of the Agreement establishing it. Under these provisions, the OIV has the following objectives in its areas of competence:1. to inform its members of measures whereby the concerns of producers, consumers and other players in the vine and wine products sector may be taken into consideration;2. to assist other international organisations, both intergovernmental and non-governmental, especially those which carry out standardisation activities;3. to contribute to international harmonisation of existing practices and standards and, as necessary, to the preparation of new international standards in order to improve the conditions for producing and marketing vine and wine products, and to help ensure that the interests of consumers are taken into account.The OIV activities provided for in the Agreement establishing it are then directed and framed by a "triennial strategic plan" which serves as a reference framework for the organisation's activities. The triennial strategic plan is subsequently fleshed out in an "annual programme".A detailed presentation of the structure and procedural rules of the OIV is available on the organisation's website at www.oiv.org.To ensure consistency in the Community's position in its external relations and permit more appropriate coordination of internal measures adopted within the framework of its competences, accession of the European Community to the OIV can be considered legitimate and necessary.Community accession to the OIV does not require an amendment to its founding act (Paris Agreement of 3 April 2001 establishing the International Organisation of Vine and Wine). However, pending a decision on accession and in order to improve Community participation in the OIV, the Community and its Member States will endeavour to improve their coordination within the organisation and enable the Community to play a greater role than it can with guest status.Furthermore, Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine[1] stipulates that, in the matter of authorising new oenological practices, the Commission is to " base itself on the oenological practices recommended and published by the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) " and, on the subject of methods of analysis, " The methods of analysis for determining the composition of the products covered by this Regulation and the rules whereby it may be established whether these products have undergone processes contrary to the authorised oenological practices shall be those recommended and published by the OIV .".Under Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 compliance with the standards recommended by the OIV for oenological practices also becomes a sufficient condition for marketing wines from third countries on the Community market.This underlines the need for a stronger relationship between the Community and the OIV.The Commission therefore recommends that the Council:-  authorise the Commission, under Article 300 of the Treaty, to open and conduct negotiations with the OIV on the terms and conditions for European Community accession to the OIV;-  appoint the competent committee to assist the Commission in that task;-  adopt the proposed negotiating directives. The Commission also recommends that the Council invite the Member States to demonstrate their support for those objectives.2. COMMUNITY COMPETENCES IN MATTERS DEALT WITH BY THE OIVThe OIV is an intergovernmental organisation that plays a major role in setting standards, which involves drafting resolutions, recommendations and proposals on various aspects of the production of and trade in wine-sector products, e.g. oenological practices, product descriptions and definitions, labelling, marketing conditions, analysis and assessment methods, the protection of geographical indications and the protection of varieties.Its resolutions are generally incorporated, with no change to their legal scope, into more detailed standards, usually in the form of codes, periodically updated on the basis of the resolutions adopted by the organisation. To date the OIV has published several codes serving as references for all its Members, e.g. the International Oenological Codex, the Compendium of International Methods of Analysis of Wine and Must, the Compendium of international methods of analysis of spirited beverages, international standards for wine and spirit competitions, and the international standard for labelling wines and spirit drinks.Since the common organisation of the market in wine was established, the Community has maintained and expanded its competences in the wine sector, the Community being given exclusive competence in the areas covered by the CMO, which are now detailed essentially in Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 and its implementing regulations.The Community secondary legislation on matters covered by the OIV includes the following:-  Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine (OJ L 179, 14.7.1999);-  Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 of 29 April 2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine (OJ L 148, 6.6.2008);-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 423/2008 of 8 May 2008 on laying down certain detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 and establishing a Community code of oenological practices and processes (Codified version, OJ L 127, 15.5.2008);-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 753/2002 of 29 April 2002 laying down certain rules for applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 as regards the description, designation, presentation and protection of certain wine sector products (OJ L 118, 4.5.2002);-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1607/2000 of 24 July 2000 laying down detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine, in particular the Title relating to quality wine produced in specified regions (OJ L 185, 25.7.2000);-  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2676/90 of 17 September 1990 determining Community methods for the analysis of wines (OJ L 272, 3.10.1990);-  Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/91 of 10 June 1991 laying down general rules on the definition, description and presentation of aromatised wines, aromatised wine-based drinks and aromatised wine-product cocktails (OJ L 149, 14.6.1991);-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 122/94 of 25 January 1994 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/91 on the definition, description and presentation of aromatised wines, aromatised wine-based drinks, and aromatised wine-product cocktails (OJ L 21, 26.1.1994) ;-  Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2008 on the definition, description, presentation, labelling and the protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 (OJ L 39, 13.2.2008);-  Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs (OJ L 109, 6.5.2000);-  Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (OJ L 299, 16.11.2007), as amended, inter alia, by Regulation (EC) No 361/2008 of 14 April 2008 (OJ L 121, 7.5.2008), which lays down rules applicable in particular to fruit and vegetables;-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2789/1999 of 22 December 1999 laying down the marketing standard for table grapes (OJ L 336, 29.12.1999);-  Council Directive 2001/112/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to fruit juices and certain similar products intended for human consumption (OJ L 10, 12.1.2002).The OIV's activities in which the Members have exclusive competence are very limited in number and of minor importance in the context of the OIV's general objectives.The situation within the Community contrasts with that in the OIV, where at present only full OIV Members have the right to participate actively in decision-making.For this reason, the Community does not have adequate status to exercise its competences directly in this organisation, as national positions are always considered individually, irrespective of whether the OIV Member concerned is a Community Member State or not.Community legislation also already refers directly to OIV resolutions on methods of analysis, recognising as part of the common organisation of the market in wine the Compendium of International Methods of Analysis of Wine and Must, and it is seeking progressively, as far as possible, to achieve consistency with other OIV standards such as the International Code of Oenological Practices and the International Oenological Codex.Community accession to the OIV is also part of the process of the reform of the wine market organisation, the Council having decided to reinforce the existing link between the acts adopted by the OIV and Community legislation, by in particular basing itself on OIV recommendations for setting Community standards for oenological practices and laying down that the methods of analysis authorised are those recommended and published by the OIV.3. COMMUNITY ACCESSION3.1 Status of the European Community and EC participation in the work of the OIVThe European Community currently has no official status in the OIV, although Article 8 of the Agreement of 3 April 2001 establishing the International Organisation of Vine and Wine expressly provides for the possibility for intergovernmental organisations to become full members of the organisation.At present, the Commission is regularly invited as a representative of the European Community to attend the proceedings of the General Assembly, groups of experts, Sub-Commissions and Commissions, but it is not allowed to participate in the proceedings of the Executive Committee (invited ad hoc) and makes no voluntary financial contribution to the OIV.In the light of the above, the current status, permitting only passive participation by Commission representatives in the OIV's proceedings, is far from satisfactory or adequate.3.2 Need for Community accessionGiven that the OIV's areas of competence are now largely covered by Community legislation, the Community's role within the OIV needs to be reinforced and formalised to enable it to ensure consistency in the Community position at international level and guarantee adequate representation of Community interests.Accession as a full member appears to be the most appropriate solution. The other options open to the Community under the OIV's rules, in particular special observer status or guest status, are not satisfactory.Neither guest status nor special observer status permits actual participation in OIV proceedings, but merely allows those with such status to intervene in or attend certain OIV bodies without the possibility of presenting proposals or amendments. Neither status entitles the Community to speak on matters falling within its exclusive competence, or to advocate decisions taken at Community level.In addition, under the Agreement establishing the OIV, a financial contribution is payable by intergovernmental organisations holding a particular status. The Community cannot accept this statutory requirement since it does not in return receive any voting rights.For the above reasons also, the option available to international organisations to conclude a cooperation and collaboration protocol with the OIV would also appear largely insufficient.3.3 Accession applicationa) Stages of accessionThe Agreement of 3 April 2001 expressly provides for the possibility for “intergovernmental organisations” to become members of the OIV.The accession process would consist of the following stages:-  the Council authorises the Commission to negotiate the terms and conditions for OIV membership;-  the Commission opens and conducts negotiations with the OIV on an accession protocol;-  the Commission adopts a proposal for a Council Decision on Community accession to the OIV and presents it to the Council;-  a Council Decision authorises the European Community to accede to the OIV; the instruments of accession are submitted to the French Ministry for Foreign Affairs (Article 15 of Chapter IX of the Agreement establishing the OIV);-  the Community's membership of the OIV takes effect under the terms of the relevant provision of the Agreement establishing the OIV.b) Rules of procedureUnder Article 2 of the general provisions of the OIV's Rules of Procedure, a protocol must be established between the OIV and the European Community in order to establish the specific membership conditions and the procedures for implementing voting rights.The protocol requires the agreement of the General Assembly, following a proposal by the Executive Committee. Nevertheless, the protocol must result from negotiations in which the European Community takes part on an equal footing with the OIV, not from a unilateral act by OIV bodies.In any event, joint action by the Member States within the Executive Committee will be needed when the proposal on the accession protocol is being drawn up. The cooperation of the Member States is all the more important with regard to certain key aspects of the accession negotiations, such as the terms on which the Community would participate in the bodies of the organisation, its participation in elective functions, the establishment of the amount of the financial contribution and in general all the practical aspects that will have to be considered in the OIV and in the accession protocol in order to allow the European Community to exercise its powers fully without facing legal or administrative restrictions. Such powers might be exercised without new voting rights having to be created.3.4 Coordination and division of competences between the European Community and its Member StatesOnce membership takes effect, the Commission and Member States will participate jointly as Members in the work of the OIV; they will have to establish internal coordination procedures ensuring an effective representation of Community interests within the OIV, based on the example of its participation in other international organisations.It is necessary in particular to establish specific procedures concerning:-  preparation for OIV meetings and in particular procedures for coordinating common positions and Community positions both in Brussels and at the meetings themselves, and arrangements for providing common replies to questionnaires sent by the organisation;-  the allocation of voting rights and the right of intervention, depending on the type of competence (exclusive, national, shared).The rules for coordination will have to be sufficiently detailed so as to ensure that they can be easily applied, but at the same time they will have to be sufficiently flexible to allow for the necessary adaptations.Coordination will take practical form with the conclusion of an arrangement between the Commission and the Council, annexed to the final Council Decision authorising the Community's accession to the OIV.Alongside the drawing up of effective rules for coordination and strictly related to them, upon joining the OIV, the European Community will have to draw up a general statement of competence; this statement can then be annexed to the accession decision taken by the Council on the Commission proposal and incorporated into the accession protocol concluded between the Community and the OIV. Thereafter, when the Community is participating in the activities of the OIV, a specific competence statement, based on the general statement of competence, will normally have to be drafted before any meeting.4. TRANSITIONAL MEASURESOn a transitional basis and in order to improve relations with the OIV with a view to its accession, the European Community must have a more appropriate status than at present.The Community needs to reinforce its institutional relations with the OIV by improving on its guest status so that it can, under Article 5 of the OIV's Rules of Procedure, intervene in all the OIV's bodies (apart from the Scientific and Technical Committee) by applying to the Director General (who will then have to seek the approval of the Executive Committee) for recurring guest status. Formally such status would not change the Community's position within the OIV, which would remain that of a guest, and would not therefore require Council authorisation.In addition, the Community and its Member States should work together to improve their internal coordination and systematically work out a common position on matters of Community competence. To that end the Member States and the Commission will have to consult on improving Community participation in the work of the OIV and ways of making it more effective.5. CONCLUSIONSThe Community has to become a member of the OIV because no other status could be considered politically and legally in line with Community competences in the OIV's areas of activity.Given the time the accession process and the negotiation involved will take, a transitional solution also needs to be found for improving and reinforcing internal procedures for coordinating positions in the OIV and the Community's institutional role in the organisation.In the light of the foregoing, the Commission recommends that the Council authorise it under Article 300 of the Treaty to open and conduct negotiations with the OIV on the terms and conditions of European Community accession to the OIV, appoint the committee to assist the Commission in this task and adopt the negotiating directives set out in the Annex.The negotiating directives in the Annex have been drawn up with a view to enabling the Community to become a member of the OIV. The status obtained must enable the Community, in the areas in which it has competence and on an equal footing with the OIV's Members:1. to express its views during negotiations, or at any meeting of the OIV bodies;2. in those areas in which decisions are voted on, to have a weighted voting right equivalent to that of its Member States represented in the OIV bodies concerned and bound by the Community legislation forming the basis for its competence in external relations;3. to express consent on its own behalf to the rights and obligations stemming from the instruments concluded in the OIV.In accordance with Article 300 of the EC Treaty, the Commission will have to conduct the negotiations in consultation with a special committee appointed by the Council. The Member States which are currently members of the OIV will have to give their full support to Community accession to the organisation.Once the negotiations have been completed and in the light of the outcome, the Commission will present a proposal for a Council Decision on accession of the European Community to the OIV.B. RECOMMENDATIONIn the light of the above, the Commission recommends that:-  the Council authorise the Commission to negotiate the terms and conditions of European Community accession to the OIV;-  so that the Commission can, in accordance with the Treaty, conduct these negotiations on behalf of the European Community, the Council appoint a special committee to assist it in this task;-  the Council adopt the negotiating directives set out in the Annex to this recommendation.ANNEXNegotiating Directives1. The Community must obtain the status of full member, putting it on an equal footing with the OIV's Members.2. The status obtained must enable the Community to participate in negotiations and meetings on an equal footing with the OIV's Members.3. The Community will not pay a financial contribution to the OIV budget. Should this position prove untenable or jeopardise the chances of the current OIV membership consenting to its accession, the Community could agree, as a fallback solution, to allocate a sum to cover certain expenses incurred in its accession. Such a sum cannot be fixed unilaterally by the OIV but must be agreed with the Community.4. As a full member the Community must be allowed to accede to all OIV instruments negotiated in the future in its areas of competence.[1] OJ L 148, 6.6.2008, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

31970H0121

70/121/EEC: Commission Recommendation of 22 December 1969 to the French Republic on the adjustment of the State monopoly of a commercial character in basic slag (Only the French text is authentic)

Official Journal L 031 , 09/02/1970 P. 0007 - 0008 Danish special edition: Series II Volume VI P. 0016  English special edition: Series II Volume VI P. 0016

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 22 December 1969 to the French Republic on the adjustment of the State monopoly of a commercial character in basic slag (Only the French text is authentic) (70/121/EEC) I    1. The Comité d'Organisation de la Sidérurgie (Organizing Committee for Iron and Steel) set up in France, by Decision of 5 February 1941 (la Société nationale pour la vente des scories Thomas) (SNST), a société anonyme with variable capital to which all French basic slag producers belong. The Decision of 5 February 1941 was incorporated, with amendments, in the Decree of the Minister for Industrial Production of 28 June 1947. In accordance with Annex III to that Decree the SNST is responsible for:      (a) ensuring that orders and deliveries of basic slag comply with the decisions issued by public authorities and bodies empowered to determine programmes, allocations and suballocations in accordance with the Law of 26 April 1946;           (b) allocating orders to factories in accordance with the production programmes for Bessemer steel and for raw slag grinding adopted by the Chambre syndicale de la sidérurgie;           (c) effecting all sales of slag both on the domestic market and for export;           (d) invoicing customers for deliveries made by factories and collecting the proceeds of such sales;           (e) withholding (or collecting) all necessary amounts in order to cover its own expenditure as well as equalization measures, compensations, grants or refunds provided for in laws, decrees or ordinances.             The SNST carries out these tasks under the supervision of the Director for the Iron and Steel Industry.        2. It follows from the foregoing that the SNST enjoys the exclusive rights of exportation and of sale on the domestic market. It also follows that there exists in effect an import monopoly in that, since the SNST is the only body authorized to sell basic slag on the French market, an importer can directly purchase slag manufactured abroad only in order to make direct use of it and not to sell it on the French market.  Until 31 December 1968 a system for the allocation of basic slag was in force. Under that system the tonnage of basic slag for direct agricultural use or for use in the form of compound fertilizers was fixed by periodic decisions of the public authorities. The tonnage for direct agricultural use was made available to the Ministry of Agriculture, which allocated it in accordance with the relevant regulations. The rest was directly allocated to the user industries by the allocating authority. Producers and their selling agency, the SNST, were required to ensure that the basic slag was delivered in accordance with that allocation.  Pursuant to a Decision of 30 January 1968 by the Director for the Iron and Steel Industries this system ceased to apply from 1 January 1969. However, since the Decree of 28 June 1947 has not been revoked, Article 37 of the EEC Treaty continues to apply to the SNST. Under that provision Member States are required progressively to adjust State monopolies of a commercial character so as to ensure that, when the transitional period has ended, no discrimination regarding the conditions under which goods are procured and marketed exists between nationals of Member States.       3. Imports into France of basic slag from other Member States and exports to those States have both followed a somewhat irregular course. Imports increased from 435 000 metric tons in 1960 to 890 000 metric tons in 1963 and decreased to 680 000 metric tons in 1966 ; in 1968 they reached 840 000 metric tons. Exports which amounted to 820 metric tons in 1960 went down to nil in 1964, and have remained stable at a little over 30 000 metric tons from 1966 to 1968. (It should be noted that Italy is at present the only country in the EEC importing French basic slag.)  Production has for several years averaged about 2 300 000 metric tons.       4. The Commission notes that until now no measures have been taken with a view to the adjustment of the monopoly in basic slag.   Since the end of the transitional period is approching, measures should now be adopted to bring to an end all discrimination between nationals of Member States regarding the conditions under which goods are procured and marketed.  Article 37, which comes under the Title relating to the free movement of goods and, more particularly, under the Chapter concerning the elimination of quantitative restrictions between Member States, aims at achieving by the end of the transitional period in respect of products subject to a State monopoly of a commercial character (or an equivalent system) the same result as that achieved for other products by the application of Article 30 to 34, that is to say the free movement of goods.  However, a different procedure was provided in order to achieve that result in the sectors covered by State monopolies. Their progressive adjustment was provided for partly in order to take account of the fact that in the view of the Member States concerned the products subject to a monopoly presented special problems and partly so that the elimination of quantitative restrictions and of measures having an equivalent effect in those sectors should not be without practical result. There were indeed grounds for fearing that the liberalization of trade in respect of the products subject to a monopoly would not take place if the monopolies, by virtue of their exclusive right to import, export and market certain products, were to remain free to decide to what extent and under what conditions products from other Member States could be allowed on the domestic market (or, conversely, to what extent domestic products could be exported to other Member States).  It is for that reason that Article 37 contains the provision designed "to ensure that when the transitional period has ended no discrimination regarding the conditions under which goods are procured and marketed exists between the nationals of Member States".  It should be stressed that the ending of discrimination resulting directly from the provisions applicable to products subject to a monopoly is not the only requirement laid down in Article 37 : that objective could be attained. in the absence of an Article governing State monopolies, by means of other provisions of the Treaty, in particular those prohibiting charges having an equivalent effect to customs duties and measures having an equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions. It follows from what has been said above in relation to the special characteristics of State monopolies and of the restrictions to which they can give rise that the objective of the "adjustment", i.e. of ensuring that "no discrimination exists", is to eliminate the possibility that the particular powers vested in the monopolies in respect of the importing and domestic marketing, or the exporting, of certain products might at the end of the transitional period still give rise to discrimination.  Since these are the objectives laid down in Article 37, it is incumbent upon France to adjust the monopoly in basic slag before the end of the transitional period in order that the objectives may be attained. On the other hand, it is for the Commission, in addition to its general duty to see that the Treaty is implemented, to make recommendations in accordance with Article 37 (6) as to the manner in which the adjustment provided for in that Article shall be carried out.       5. With regard to imports, the Commission is of the opinion that the SNST's exclusive right to sell slag on the domestic market is a discouragement to any potential buyer wishing to obtain slag produced abroad with a view to marketing it, since any quantity imported by him without the intervention of the SNST has to be sold to that body.  In these circumstances the SNST is in a position to decide on what terms the basic slag requirements of the domestic market will be covered by domestic production. This situation may give rise to discrimination in respect of the terms of sale against producers in other Member States who may consequently be prevented from exerting any competitive pressure on the French market.  With regard to exports, strict limitations are in force in order that domestic production may be reserved as a first priority for supplying the French market. French producers cannot, therefore, take advantage of the more favourable conditions they might find for their products in other Member States ; this gives rise at the same time to discrimination against consumers in those States in respect of the terms of supply.  For these reasons it seems to the Commission that the best solution for attaining the objective laid down in Article 37, because there is no doubt that it will be effective. is to abolish the exclusive domestic and export sales right of the SNST, in so far as those rights concern trade between Member States.   II  On these grounds the Commission of the European Communities recommend the French Republic to take the following measures, in accordance with Article 37 of the EEC Treaty:      1. To allow all operations necessary for the marketing of basic slag from other Member States to be freely carried out on the French market. To that end, in particular:        - to allow suppliers from other Member States to set up their own wholesale and retail trade network in France and to hold stocks there:               - to allow suppliers from other Member States to advertise their products freely:                - to allow prices for products from the other Member States to be freely agreed between sellers and buyers at the different stages of marketing.                          2. To allow, without restriction, exports to the other Member States of the EEC without the intervention of the SNST.   Done at Brussels, 22 December 1969.  For the Commission  The President  Jean REY