title: Council Recommendation of 10 July 2012 on the National Reform Programme 2012 of Belgium and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Belgium, 2012-15

text:
               24.7.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 219/5

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 10 July 2012
   on the National Reform Programme 2012 of Belgium and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Belgium, 2012-15
   2012/C 219/02
   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 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 Employment Committee,
   After consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission’s proposal to launch a new strategy for jobs and growth, 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 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, adopted a decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (3), 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 12 July 2011, the Council adopted a recommendation (4) on Belgium’s National Reform Programme for 2011 and delivered its opinion on Belgium’s updated Stability Programme for 2011-14.

               (4)

               On 23 November 2011, the Commission adopted the second Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the second European Semester of ex ante and integrated policy coordination, which is anchored in the Europe 2020 strategy. On 14 February 2012, the Commission, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011, adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it identified Belgium as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out.

               (5)

               On 1 December 2011, the Council adopted conclusions calling on the Social Protection Committee, in cooperation with the Employment and other Committees, to present its views on actions recommended within the Europe 2020 policy cycle. These views form part of the opinion of the Employment Committee.

               (6)

               The European Parliament has been duly involved in the European Semester, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, and, on 15 February 2012, adopted a resolution on employment and social aspects in the Annual Growth Survey 2012 and a resolution on the contribution to the Annual Growth Survey 2012.

               (7)

               On 2 March 2012, the European Council endorsed the priorities for ensuring financial stability, fiscal consolidation and action to foster growth. It underscored the need to give priority to 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.

               (8)

               On 2 March 2012, the European Council also invited the Member States participating in the Euro Plus Pact to present their commitments in time to be included in their Stability or Convergence Programmes and in their National Reform Programmes.

               (9)

               On 30 April 2012, Belgium submitted its Stability Programme covering the period 2012-15 and its 2012 National Reform Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two Programmes have been assessed at the same time. The Commission has also assessed in an in-depth review, under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011, whether Belgium is affected by macroeconomic imbalances. The Commission concluded in its in-depth review that Belgium is experiencing an external imbalance, although not an excessive one.

               (10)

               Based on the assessment of the Stability Programme pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the opinion that the macroeconomic scenario underpinning the budgetary projections in that Programme is plausible for the years 2012 and 2013 and optimistic for the years 2014 and 2015 as it foresees GDP growth to be substantially higher than the latest estimates of potential growth emerging from the Commission services 2012 spring forecast. The objective of the budgetary strategy outlined in the Stability Programme is to bring the deficit below 3 % of GDP in 2012 (to 2,8 % of GDP, down from 3,7 % of GDP in 2011) and to zero in 2015. The Stability Programme confirms the previous medium-term budgetary objective (MTO) of a surplus of 0,5 % of GDP in structural terms, which adequately reflects the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. The planned 2012 headline deficit complies with the deadline set by the Council for the correction of the excessive deficit and the planned fiscal effort complies with the Council recommendation under the excessive deficit procedure of a minimal average annual effort of ¾ % of GDP in structural terms. The planned growth rate of government expenditure, taking into account discretionary revenue measures, complies with the expenditure benchmark of the Stability and Growth Pact in the period 2013-15, but not in 2012. Based on the (recalculated) structural budget balance (5), the Stability Programme projects the structural balance to improve by 1,1 percentage point of GDP in 2012 and by about 0,8 % of GDP on average over the period 2013-15.
               However, there are risks stemming from the fact that the additional measures to be taken from 2013 onwards are not yet specified and that the macroeconomic scenario from 2014 onwards is too optimistic. According to the Stability Programme, the government debt, which at 98,0 % of GDP in 2011 is well above the 60 % threshold, is expected to stabilise and then to decline to 92,3 % in 2015, which would imply sufficient progress towards meeting the debt reduction benchmark of the Stability and Growth Pact.
               Moreover, implicit liabilities stemming from the guarantees given to the financial sector are particularly large. The rules-based multiannual framework for general government, particularly with regard to expenditure, would benefit from enforcement mechanisms and/or commitments from Belgium’s regions and communities, as well as from the local level, in order to meet their allocated deficit targets.

               (11)

               The costs associated with ageing should be addressed and a structural decline in the deficit should be achieved to reduce the high public debt. The new Federal Government agreed in December 2011 on a reform of the Belgian old-age social security system. An effective implementation and monitoring of the initiated statutory reforms is now necessary, with a view to raising the effective retirement age. Underpinning the reform of old-age social security by measures that stimulate active ageing and longer working are crucial, while further reforms, such as linking the statutory retirement age to life expectancy, would also help to achieve this goal.

               (12)

               The Belgian financial system still faces considerable challenges. Restructuring of the Belgian banks is ongoing, and state aid granted in 2008/09 as a response to the financial crisis has not yet been fully repaid. Moreover, given the high level of guarantees, the risks facing the banking and public sectors are interrelated.

               (13)

               The current account is gradually deteriorating over time. The improvement of the services balance does not make up for the deterioration in the trade balance for goods. Belgian exports of goods have lost ground not only with respect to expanding world trade, but also with respect to other euro area Member States and the euro area on average pointing to unfavourable domestic cost developments in unit labour costs compared to Belgium’s main trading partners (the Netherlands, France, Germany) and the euro area as a whole. Given the existence of an automatic wage-indexation system, the efforts of the Government to limit real wage increases to no more than 0,3 % in the period 2011-12 may not have prevented nominal wage growth from exceeding that pertaining in the neighbouring countries. Although productivity levels are high, Belgium’s growth is weak and also the costs of intermediary inputs, mainly energy, are high. Retail gas and electricity prices have been frozen in order to limit inflation, but no concrete measures have been taken with respect to reforming the wage-bargaining and wage-indexation system itself. The research and development (R & D) intensity of the private sector has stagnated in recent years and shortage of skilled professionals, particularly in sciences and engineering, could become a major barrier in terms of further improving the innovation performance of the Belgian economy.

               (14)

               Some structural measures have been taken to boost employment of younger and older workers and to bring more of the unemployed into the work force. Belgium has engaged in a wide reform of its unemployment benefit system. However structural problems in the labour market persist and more could be done to tackle them. Increasing the lifelong learning participation rate and pursuing the reforms in vocational education and training (VET) are crucial to improving the effectiveness of active labour market policies (ALMP), in particular for older workers and disadvantaged groups, such as people with a migrant background. No significant headway has been made on the reduction of the tax burden on labour. A new tax credit for the lowest wages was introduced in June 2011 but it has not proved sufficient to remedy the significant unemployment traps at the bottom of the pay scale. No shift of the fiscal burden away from labour towards consumption and/or eco-taxes has been undertaken.

               (15)

               Prices for many goods and services are generally higher than in other Member States, reflecting weak competitive pressures — especially in the retail sector and network industries — and a weak supervisory framework. In the retail sector, barriers and operational restrictions remain high. In particular, competition-restricting regulations still restrict opening hours, protect incumbents against new entry and inhibit the spread of new business models and technologies. A common competition problem in the network sectors in Belgium is the strong position of the incumbent and the high entry barriers compared to other Member States, meaning that former monopolists in these sectors can still charge higher prices than a competitive market would allow. The Belgian Competition authority is being reformed but it remains unclear whether the reformed authority will be sufficiently independent and have adequate resources.

               (16)

               While Belgium is on track to meet the target to increase the share of renewable energy in the economy, progress towards reaching the 15 % reduction target for greenhouse gas emissions in the non-ETS (6) sectors is forecast to be insufficient. Belgium did not adopt sufficient measures or policy initiatives in 2011 to address this situation.

               (17)

               Belgium has made a number of commitments under the Euro Plus Pact. These commitments, and the implementation of the commitments presented in 2011, relate to improving competitiveness, raising the employment rate, boosting the sustainability of public finances and strengthening financial stability. The Commission has assessed the implementation of the Euro Plus Pact commitments. The results of this assessment have been taken into account in the recommendations below.

               (18)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Belgium’s economic policy. It has assessed both the Stability Programme and the National Reform Programme and presented an in-depth review. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Belgium 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 to future national decisions. Its recommendations under the European Semester are reflected in recommendations (1) to (7) below.

               (19)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the Stability Programme and its opinion (7) is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below.

               (20)

               In the light of the results of the Commission’s in-depth review and this assessment, the Council has examined the National Reform Programme and the Stability Programme. Its recommendations under Article 6 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 are reflected in particular in recommendations (1), (4), (5) and (6) below,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Belgium take action within the period 2012-13 to:

               1.

               Implement the budget for the year 2012 to make sure that the excessive deficit is corrected by 2012. Additionally, specify the measures necessary to ensure implementation of the budgetary strategy for the year 2013 and beyond, thereby ensuring that the excessive deficit is corrected in a durable manner and that sufficient progress is made towards the MTO, including meeting the expenditure benchmark, and ensure progress towards compliance with the debt reduction benchmark. Adjust the fiscal framework to ensure that the budgetary targets are binding at federal and sub-federal levels, and increase transparency of burden-sharing and accountability across government layers.

               2.

               Continue to improve the long-term sustainability of public finances by curbing age-related expenditure, including health expenditure. In particular, implement the reform of pre-retirement and pension schemes and take further steps to ensure an increase in the effective retirement age, including through linking the statutory retirement age to life expectancy.

               3.

               Stimulate capital increase of the weakest banks to underpin the strength of the banking sector so that it can play its normal role in lending to the economy.

               4.

               To boost job creation and competitiveness, take steps to reform, in consultation with the social partners and in accordance with national practice, the system of wage bargaining and wage indexation. As a first step, ensure that wage growth better reflects developments in labour productivity and competitiveness, by (i) ensuring the implementation of ex post correction mechanisms foreseen in the ‘wage norm’ and promoting all-in agreements to improve cost-competitiveness and (ii) facilitating the use of opt-out clauses from sectoral collective agreements to better align wage growth and labour productivity developments at local level.

               5.

               Significantly shift taxes from labour to less growth-distortive taxes including for example environmental taxes. Pursue the initiated reform of the unemployment benefit system to reduce disincentives to work and strengthen the focus of employment support and activation policies on older workers and vulnerable groups, in particular people with a migrant background. Take advantage of the planned further regionalisation of labour market competencies to boost interregional labour mobility and to strengthen the coherence between education, lifelong learning, vocational training and employment policies. Extend existing activation efforts to all age groups.

               6.

               Continue to strengthen competition in the retail sector by lowering barriers and reducing operational restrictions. Introduce measures to strengthen competition in the network industries by revising regulatory barriers and reinforcing the institutional arrangements for effective enforcement of state aid rules.

               7.

               Take further measures to enhance the progress towards reaching the targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from non-ETS activities, in particular by ensuring a significant contribution to this goal from transport.

      Done at Brussels, 10 July 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         V. SHIARLY

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

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

      (3)  Maintained for 2012 by Council Decision 2012/238/EU of 26 April 2012 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (OJ L 119, 4.5.2012, p. 47).

      (4)  OJ C 209, 15.7.2011, p. 1.

      (5)  Cyclically-adjusted balance net of one-off and temporary measures, recalculated by the Commission services on the basis of the information provided in the Programme, using the commonly agreed methodology.

      (6)  In Belgium only 37,9 % of emissions come from sectors included in the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS). Of the more important non-ETS sectors, road transport (21,5 %) and energy use (38,9 %) are the most important sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the country.

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


Important legal notice

|

52004SC0918

Recommendation from the Commission on the transposition into national law of Directives affecting the internal market (Text with EEA-relevance)  /* SEC/2004/0918 final */

	[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 12.7.2004SEC(2004) 918 finalRECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSIONon the transposition into national law of Directives affecting the internal marketRECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSIONon the transposition into national law of Directives affecting the internal market(Text with EEA-relevance)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 211 thereof,Whereas:1.  Member States transposing Directives into national law can choose the form and methods for such transposition, but are bound by the terms of the Directive as to the result to be achieved and the deadline by which transposition should take place.2.  At several summit meetings, including those held in Stockholm in March 2001, Barcelona in March 2002 and Brussels in March 2003 and 2004, the European Council, recognising the importance of a properly functioning internal market[1] for the competitiveness of the European economy, has repeatedly urged Member States to accord high priority to the transposition into national law of Directives affecting the internal market.3.  The European Parliament[2], the European Economic and Social Committee[3] and the Committee of the Regions[4] have repeatedly expressed concern about the poor records of Member States in transposing internal market Directives correctly and on time. The Inter-institutional Agreement on better law-making of 16 December 2003[5] also emphasised the need for Member States to comply with Article 10 of the Treaty and called upon Member States to ensure that Community law is properly and promptly transposed into national law within the prescribed deadlines.4.  Despite these calls and the fact that timely and correct transposition is a legal obligation, Member States regularly do not transpose internal market Directives correctly by the deadlines they themselves have agreed, most Member States do not even meet the interim transposition targets set by the European Council, and many such Directives have still not been transposed into national law in all Member States long after the deadline for transposition has passed.5.  Late or incorrect transposition of internal market Directives is causing harm to businesses and citizens, as it often deprives them of their rights.6.  Late or incorrect transposition also deprives businesses and consumers of the full economic benefits of a properly functioning internal market and harms the competitiveness of the European economy as a whole, undermining the ability of the Community to generate economic growth while sustaining a high level of social cohesion.7.  In a European Union of twenty-five or more Member States, there is an increased risk that late or incorrect transposition of Directives will cause fragmentation of the internal market and a consequent dwindling of its economic benefits.8.  The Commission will continue, as a matter of priority, to take vigorous legal action against Member States for late or incorrect transposition, and to encourage peer pressure through the regular publication of the transposition records of Member States in the Internal Market Scoreboard; however, while these actions have had some success in the past, transposition deficits nevertheless persist and a more proactive approach by the Commission and Member States is therefore necessary.9.  The Commission indicated, in its 2002 Communication on better monitoring of the application of European Community law[6], how it can and does assist Member States with transposition of Directives into national law.10.  It is up to Member States, however, to ensure that they transpose Directives correctly and on time.11.  Article 10 of the Treaty requires Member States to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of their obligations arising out of the Treaty or resulting from action taken by the institutions of the Community.12.  The Court of Justice of the European Communities has consistently held that Member States may not plead provisions, practices or circumstances existing in their own internal legal systems to justify failure to comply with obligations and time limits laid down in Directives.13.  There is a need for Member States, given the repetitive nature of their failure to transpose Directives correctly and on time, to re-examine their procedures and practices to ensure that they consistently meet this legal obligation.14.  Some Member States have consistently much better transposition records than others, reflecting the existence or adoption of more effective structures, procedures and practices; however, the fact that no Member State has a perfect record suggests that all need to look to improve. In accordance with the Inter-institutional Agreement on better law-making, the Member States should draw up, for themselves and in the interests of the Community, correlation tables illustrating as far as possible the correspondence between Directives and transposition measures, and should make those tables public.15.  The Commission announced in its Communication ‘Internal Market Strategy 2003-2006’[7] that it would issue a Recommendation setting out a number of good practices which should be followed by Member States to ensure better and faster transposition of internal market Directives.16.  Member States have expressed an interest in learning from one another’s practices, and have been consulted, through the Internal Market Advisory Committee, on their good transposition practices and their different national constitutional, legal and administrative rules and practices insofar as they may affect transposition.17.  A number of good practices have been identified that help Member States to transpose internal market Directives into national law in a timely and correct way.18.  It is for each Member State to choose the procedures and practices best designed to ensure the correct and timely transposition of internal market Directives, having regard to what would be most effective in the context of that Member State, since procedures and practices that are effective in one Member State may not be as effective in another.19.  In view of the legal uncertainty and confusion engendered by the late transposition of internal market Directives, businesses and citizens should be informed when Directives are not transposed on time and of their legal rights in such cases.20.  Where draft implementing provisions are submitted to national Parliaments, they should be accompanied by a declaration concerning their compliance with Community law and informing the Parliament whether they transpose in full or in part the Directive concerned.21.  Without prejudice to the Commission’s role and obligations as guardian of the Treaty, the Commission should be informed, when national implementing provisions are notified to it, whether the Directive concerned is thus fully or partly transposed into national law and whether the provisions are believed to comply with Community law.22.  Where Member States decide to include the transposition of a Directive as part of a wider legislative exercise, this can lead to their not meeting the transposition deadline; the insertion of conditions and requirements additional to those necessary to transpose a Directive can also hinder the objectives pursued by the Directive concerned,HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT THE MEMBER STATES:(1) Take the steps, organisational or otherwise, that are necessary to deal promptly and effectively with the underlying causes of their persistent breaches of their legal obligation to transpose internal market Directives correctly and on time;(2) Examine the best practices set out in the Annex and, having regard to their national institutional traditions, adopt those practices that will, or can be expected to, lead to an improvement in the speed or quality of transposition of internal market Directives;(3) In a timely manner, publish a list of the internal market Directives which have not been fully transposed into national law on time and inform business and citizens that, notwithstanding non-transposition, they may in certain circumstances have legal rights under non-transposed Directives; this information should be made available at least on a Government web-site;(4) Ensure that, where draft national implementing provisions are submitted to national Parliaments, they are accompanied by a declaration that they are believed to comply with Community law and that they transpose a particular Directive in full or in part;(5) Declare to the Commission, when notifying national implementing provisions that, to the best of their knowledge, such provisions comply with Community law and declare whether they transpose the Directive concerned in full or in part;(6) Refrain from adding to national implementing legislation conditions or requirements that are not necessary to transpose the Directive concerned, where such conditions or requirements may hinder attainment of the objectives pursued by the Directive;(7) Ensure, when transposition of a Directive is included in a wider legislative exercise at national level, that this does not lead to missing the deadline for transposition.Done at Brussels, on xxxxxx 2004.For the CommissionANNEXIDENTIFIED PRACTICES OF MEMBER STATES THAT FACILITATE THE CORRECT AND TIMELY TRANSPOSITION INTO NATIONAL LAW OF DIRECTIVES AFFECTING THE INTERNAL MARKET23.  Making correct and timely transposition a permanent political and operational priority24.  One senior member of government, at Minister or Secretary of State level, is designated as being responsible for monitoring the transposition of all internal market Directives into national law and for improving the transposition record of the Member State. This member of government has the visible support of the Head of Government in this task and it is clear to Ministers and the administration that the government considers correct and timely transposition to be a priority.25.  All Ministers receive a report regularly (for example, once a month) on the transposition records of all Ministries/governmental bodies. Transposition records are discussed regularly at meetings of Ministers.26.  Sufficient resources are allocated to ensure correct and timely transposition.27.  Ensuring permanent monitoring and coordination of the transposition of internal market Directives at administrative and political level28.  One Ministry or government body is responsible for monitoring transposition as a whole. It coordinates transposition with the Ministries and sub-federal, regional and devolved government bodies responsible for transposition, and is sent the planning schedule for transposition. It ensures that progress on transposition is discussed with Ministries at high administrative level regularly (for example, once a month). It reports regularly (for example, once a month) to the Minister or Secretary of State responsible for monitoring transposition. It also acts as national coordinator for dealing with the Commission concerning the transposition record of the Member State.29.  Each Ministry and each sub-federal, regional and devolved government body that carries out transposition designates officials who are responsible for monitoring transposition in the Ministry or body and for acting as a contact point. A national network is established among these officials.30.  Guidelines are issued, setting out how transposition should be carried out and ensuring that there is a common approach to transposition throughout the administration.31.  A central national database is maintained on transposition. This database is accessible to all Ministries and sub-federal, regional and devolved government bodies involved in transposition. For each Directive, it contains: the references and subject-matter of the Directive; the Ministry or other government body responsible for transposition, and the persons responsible within the Ministry or government body; a list of other Ministries and government bodies involved in transposition and the persons responsible; the resources needed for transposition; the deadline for transposition; the measures to be taken to transpose the Directive; the planned time-schedule for transposition (including any parliamentary deliberations); the state of progress; any difficulties in transposition; and whether infringement proceedings have started for late or incorrect transposition. It is possible to establish at any time the transposition record of the Member State as a whole and by Ministry.32.  Reminders are sent to the Ministry or other government body responsible before the deadline for transposition (for example, three months and again one month before the deadline).33.  When a deadline has passed, a reminder is sent immediately at both administrative and Ministerial level, and the national Parliament is informed.34.  Member States are proactive in seeking the advice and assistance of the Commission on transposition issues in a timely way. The contact point database set up by the Commission is used to identify the officials responsible.35.  Ensuring that preparations for transposition take place at an early stage and that they have as their aim correct and timely transposition36.  A planning schedule for transposition is prepared during negotiations of the Directive by the Ministry or other government body responsible for negotiations, and in any event before the Directive is adopted. For each Directive, the planning schedule includes: the references and subject-matter of the Directive; the Ministry or other government body responsible for transposition, and the persons responsible within the Ministry or government body; a list of other Ministries and government bodies involved in transposition and the persons responsible; the resources needed for transposition; the deadline for transposition; a comparison of existing national law and the terms of the proposed directive; the measures to be taken to transpose the directive; and the planned time-schedule for transposition (including any parliamentary deliberations). This planning schedule is sent to the Ministry or government body responsible for monitoring transposition as a whole a short time (for example, four weeks) after publication of the directive in the Official Journal of the European Union , to ensure that the transposition database is kept up to date.37.  Drafting of legislation starts before or as soon as the Directive is published in the Official Journal of the European Union .38.  A correlation table is prepared by the Ministry or other government body responsible for transposition, setting out how each provision of a Directive is being transposed into national law. This table accompanies any draft national implementing legislation when it is sent to the Parliament or government to facilitate their deliberations, and accompanies any notification of the national implementing legislation to the Commission.39.  The addition of supplementary provisions that are not necessary to transpose a Directive is avoided. Where it happens, the Ministry or other government body responsible justifies why it is considered necessary and establishes that it will not result in delays in transposition.40.  To the extent possible, national officials responsible for negotiating a Directive are involved in its transposition into national law. If this is not possible, they cooperate closely with those that are responsible for transposition. In any event, officials who are negotiating a Directive keep those officials who will transpose it informed throughout negotiations of the Directive to ensure that any potential transposition problems are raised and dealt with before the Directive is adopted.41.  Representatives of any sub-federal, regional or devolved government body that will have to transpose a Directive are kept informed during negotiation of the Directive.42.  National implementing legislation is notified to the Commission electronically.43.  Working closely with national, regional and devolved Parliaments involved in transposition of internal market Directives to ensure correct and timely transposition44.  Parliaments are sent proposals for Directives as soon as they are presented by the Commission, and are kept advised of progress in negotiation of Directives.45.  Parliaments receive reports on a regular basis (for example, every three months) on progress in transposition, on Directives whose transposition is late and on infringement proceedings initiated by the Commission for late or incorrect transposition.46.  Together with draft national legislation, Parliaments are sent a timetable for transposition, a clear indication of the deadline, any correlation tables that have been prepared and a Government declaration that the national implementing measure is believed to comply with Community law.47.  Parliaments receive early warning (for example, three months before the transposition deadline) from government that the deadline for transposition is approaching. They are advised when the deadline has passed.48.  The government encourages Parliaments to set aside time to transpose Directives in good time.49.  Taking action quickly, visibly and effectively to transpose Directives whose transposition is late50.  All necessary measures are taken to ensure that any directives that have not been transposed on time are transposed as soon as possible after the deadline for transposition.51.  Where the transposition of one or more directives is late, Parliaments are encouraged to set aside additional time to transpose such directives as soon as possible and to deal with any procedural cause of delays.52.  Member States publish the list of directives they have not transposed on time and advise business and citizens that, notwithstanding non-transposition, they may in certain circumstances have legal rights under non-transposed Directives.53.  Where there is a persistent failure to transpose directives on time, Member States examine to what extent the legislative procedure before Parliament may be shortened for transposition of directives. Adoption in one reading or under an accelerated procedure is envisaged.54.  Where there is a persistent failure to transpose directives on time, and where this is permitted by a Member State’s Constitution or internal legal order, the use of governmental decrees or regulations to transpose is considered if it will speed up transposition.[1] The Internal Market also covers three EFTA States, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, as a result of their membership of the European Economic Area Agreement.[2] Harbour Report, A5 0026/2003, OJ C 234, 30.9.2003, p.55 ; Miller Report, A5 0116/2004.[3] OJ C 221, 7.8.2001, p. 25; OJ C 241, 7.10.2002, p. 180; OJ C 234, 30.9.2003, p. 55.[4] OJ C 128, 29.5.2003, p.48.[5] OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p. 1.[6] COM(2002)725 final of 11.12.2002.[7] COM(2003)238 final of 7.5.2003.


Important legal notice

|

52009PC0199(01)

Recommendation for a Council decision granting mutual assistance for Romania  /* COM/2009/0199 final */

	[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 21.4.2009COM(2009) 199 finalRecommendation for aCOUNCIL DECISIONGranting mutual assistance for RomaniaProposal for aCOUNCIL DECISIONProviding EU medium-term financial assistance for RomaniaRecommendation for aCOUNCIL DECISIONGranting mutual assistance for RomaniaandProposal for aCOUNCIL DECISIONProviding EU medium-term financial assistance for RomaniaEXPLANATORY MEMORANDUMINTRODUCTIONRomania has experienced a very high economic growth over the last years, averaging 6.5% since 2002, and even reaching 7.1% in 2008. Growth has been mainly driven by domestic demand for consumption and investment, fuelled by a foreign-financed boom in financial intermediation, and strong wage growth. High external borrowing has led to a rapid build-up of external debt, reaching 53% of GDP end-2008, and widespread foreign currency lending has increased households' and companies' balance sheet vulnerability to sudden shifts in the exchange rate. Domestic demand pressures have been further exacerbated by a pro-cyclical fiscal policy, with net public borrowing soaring from 1.2% of GDP in 2005 to 5.4% of GDP in 2008, despite successive Council Opinions and the June 2008 Commission Policy Advice calling for fiscal consolidation and for an improvement of budgetary management.The global economic downturn and increased risk-aversion towards home-grown vulnerabilities has resulted in a significant tightening of capital flows to Romania. Pressures on the exchange rate have increased, resulting in a more than 30% cumulative depreciation since August 2007. In the fourth quarter of 2008, domestic demand contracted by more than 4% yoy, mainly driven by a decline in private consumption, from double digit growth rates in the first three quarters. In addition, external competitiveness and productivity developments have been hampered by the slow pace of structural reforms undertaken since EU accession. The government is also facing increasing difficulties on the bond market with average yields up by about 300bps since one year ago and almost entirely based on short-term maturities.Against this background, on 6 March 2009, the Romanian authorities[1] have requested Balance of Payments support to the EC and have also approached the IMF and the World Bank with a similar request. While at the moment there is no acute crisis, they consider that external financial support at this stage is warranted to enhance Romania’s foreign reserve buffer, based on a scenario of significant strains on external financing for both the public and the private sector in the coming two years. A programme would also contribute to strengthening confidence in Romania’s ability to meet its external obligations.The Commission together with the Council Presidency announced on 9 March that the EU was ready to participate with the IMF in a coordinated financing package to underpin Romania's balance of payments stability. However, it was stressed that the financial assistance is contingent upon a strong commitment by the Romanian authorities to implement a supportive policy programme.Based on discussions with the Commission and the IMF, the Romanian authorities will send a Letter of Intent to the Commission and to the IMF highlighting the key elements of their economic adjustment programme. Council financial assistance to Romania is conditional on receipt of this letter. The principal aim of this adjustment programme is to cushion the effects of the sharp drop in private capital inflows while implementing policy measures to address the external and fiscal imbalances and to strengthen the financial sector. Against the background of this programme, the parent institutions of the nine largest foreign-owned banks incorporated in Romania subscribed to a coordinated commitment to maintain their overall exposure to Romania and to provide additional capital as necessary.MACROECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND OUTLOOKAfter several years of strong GDP growth, averaging 6.5% yoy since 2002, growth has declined sharply in the fourth quarter of 2008 to 2.9% yoy. This has been mainly driven by a contraction of private consumption by almost 4% yoy, which came alongside a virtual stop in bank lending. In the fourth quarter, gross fixed capital formation sharply decelerated from over 30% yoy in the first quarter to just below 3%. On the supply side, the slowdown was driven by a contraction in the industrial sector by about 8%, from an expansion by 5.5% in Q1-2008. Construction and services also registered a sharp slowdown.The sharp decline in domestic demand in the fourth quarter also led to decelerating imports, with yoy growth rates turning negative toward the end of the year (-18% yoy) and registering even further declines in January 2009 (-28% yoy, in RON terms). Export performance also weakened significantly (-8% yoy in December 2008 and -13% in January 2009). Overall, in 2008, the current account deficit slightly narrowed, but still remained at a high level of 12.3% of GDP, from 13.5% of GDP in 2007. On the financing side, FDI covered about 54% of the current account deficit in 2008. The remainder was mainly financed through (mostly private) external debt, which increased to around 53% of GDP end-2008.During the economic boom, labour shortages attributable to large migration outflows and a relatively high proportion of unskilled workforce contributed to the emergence of a wage-price spiral, with wage growth outstripping the poor productivity developments. Wage growth remained very strong in the first two quarters of 2008 (with nominal wages increasing by around 25% yoy), but have moderated since, reaching 13% yoy in January 2009. Notwithstanding falling commodity and food prices, CPI inflation picked-up again from 6.3% in December 2008 to 6.9% in February 2009 on the back of an 8% nominal effective depreciation over this time span.Given the sharp slowdown of economic activity in the fourth quarter of 2008 and the likely further weakening of the global economic outlook, GDP growth is projected to turn negative in 2009 to around -4%, driven by the contraction in consumption and investment, partly offset by a correction of the external deficit.PUBLIC FINANCESRomania pursued a pro-cyclical fiscal policy during the demand boom between 2005-2008, with headline deficits rising from 1.2% of GDP in 2005 to 5.4% of GDP in 2008, amidst an average real GDP growth of 6.5% and against repeated advice given in the February 2008 Council Opinion on Romania's Convergence Programme and the June 2008 Commission Policy Advice. This was due to a large degree to overall weak budgetary planning and execution. Windfall revenues were typically spent through the process of intra-year budgetary rectifications and no additional headroom was left for more difficult times. Weaknesses in the public administration also contributed to a recurrent under-execution of plans for capital expenditure and part of the resources budgeted for investment were subsequently shifted to current spending such as public wages and social transfers. Public sector wage growth has become the driver of private sector wage increases, with wage levels higher in the public sector. Over the period 2005-2008 the public sector wage bill doubled in nominal terms. Finally, large expenditure outlays are concentrated in the last weeks of the year, severely affecting budgetary credibility and predictability. Despite the recommendations of the June 2008 Commission Policy Advice, no progress has been made with the implementation of a binding medium-term fiscal framework.The 2009 budget submitted by the new Government and adopted by the Parliament at the end of February contains several measures with the aim of cutting the deficit from 5.4% of GDP in 2008 to 2.0% of GDP in 2009, against a 2.5% real GDP growth assumption. The measures include freezing recruitment and cutting various bonuses in the public sector, a reduction in the expenditure for goods and services, limiting increases of public sector wages and linking pensions to inflation rather than to wage developments. On the other hand, the government plans a substantial increase in public investment. However, at the date of adoption it was already clear that this deficit target was unrealistic, notably given that the underlying macroeconomic scenario and the revenue projections were too optimistic. In addition, in the absence of a comprehensive reform of expenditure policy, there were potential implementation risks concerning the spending measures.FINANCIAL MARKETSRomania's financial system is dominated by the banking sector, which has developed very quickly over the last couple of years. Total net assets of the Romanian banking sector amounted to some RON 315 billion at the end of 2008 (62% of GDP). Banks are largely foreign owned. In December 2008, credit institutions with majority foreign capital (including foreign bank branches) controlled around 88% of total net assets of all credit institutions operating in Romania. Banks from Austria, Greece, France and Italy are the most exposed in Romania.During the last few years, the Romanian banking sector promoted fast credit expansion with loans-to-deposit ratio increasing to 122% in 2008. Although credit growth started from a low base, the expansion of mainly foreign currency-denominated loans (representing some 59% of total domestic credit to the private sector in January 2009) made the Romanian banking sector heavily dependent on foreign financing. In the second half of 2008, lending activity slowed dramatically, with annual credit growth falling from above 60% in June 2008 to 36.5% in December 2008.Although at the moment the banking sector remains apparently relatively sound and well- capitalised (with the capital adequacy ratio at 12.3% at the end of 2008), financial stability in Romania could come under strain. The deteriorating macroeconomic outlook implies that the share of non-performing loans is likely to increase rapidly in the coming months. Furthermore, as the Romanian private sector is heavily relying on foreign currency-denominated credit, any further depreciation of the leu would weigh heavily on household and enterprise balance sheets.BALANCE OF PAYMENT AND EXTERNAL FINANCING REQUIREMENTSRomania's economic boom in recent years was characterized by the emergence of large external imbalances and an unsustainable build-up of external liabilities. The current account deficit increased from 5.8% of GDP in 2004 to 13.5% of GDP in 2007 and remained at above 12% of GDP in 2008. As a result, gross external debt reached 55% of GDP at the end of 2008.Romanian financial markets have been under continued pressure since the beginning of October 2008. Deleveraging, Romania's weak fundamentals and sub-investment grade are weighing heavily on currency, interbank, equity and bond markets. External financing is expected to remain under significant pressure for some time as the persistent, although declining, current account deficit, together with the need to roll over sizeable short-term and longer-term foreign currency-denominated debt, are likely not to be covered fully by FDI and other financial and capital account inflows in 2009-2011.In light of the above, the Commission is of the opinion that there is a serious threat to the Romanian balance of payments. The Commission thus recommends to the Council a decision granting mutual assistance. Total financing needs in the period up to the first quarter of 2011 are estimated at EUR 20 billion. This sum comprises allowance for the expected continued current account deficit, incomplete rollover of maturing loans, some capital outflows and official foreign reserve accumulation to a prudent level. Foreign banks’ rollover rate of their exposures to Romania is assumed at 100% once the mutual assistance is awarded, consistent with the required commitment of main foreign banks to maintain their exposure to Romania (as confirmed in their joint statement of 26 March 2009), whereas the rollover rate for corporate external debt to parents and for external debt of Romanian banks is assumed at 50% in 2009. For 2010 and 2011, all maturing foreign liabilities are assumed to be rolled over at 100% in line with the expected financial market stabilisation and start of the recovery in Romania's major export markets. Apart from sufficiently high foreign exchange reserve target (of more than 100% of short-term external debt at remaining maturity) conservative assumptions were made about other capital outflows such as non-resident deposit outflows, decreases in trade credits and portfolio outflows in order to incorporate additional buffers into the calculations. The underlying GDP growth assumption is -4% in 2009 and about 0% in 2010. The current account deficit is projected at 7½% of GDP in 2009 and 6½% of GDP in 2010.EU SUPPORT UNDER THE BALANCE OF PAYMENTS FACILITY, PART OF INTERNATIONAL EFFORTIn the light of the serious balance of payments difficulties being experienced by Romania and conditional on the Romanian authorities' firm commitment to implement a major programme of fiscal, financial and structural adjustment, the Commission, following consultation with the Economic and Financial Committee on 17 March 2009, recommends the Council grant mutual assistance foreseen by Article 119 of the Treaty.Furthermore, the Commission, following consultation with the Economic and Financial Committee, proposes that, after adopting the above-mentioned decision of the Council to provide mutual assistance to Romania on a recommendation from the Commission, the Council adopt a decision providing under the EU facility for Member States (as governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 332/2002 of 18 February 2002) a medium-term financial assistance to Romania of up to EUR 5 billion to underpin its balance of payments sustainability.Medium-term financial assistance for Romania under the balance of payments facility for Member States (in view of Regulation No 332/2002) appears to be appropriate under the current circumstances of reduced capital inflows and high fiscal and external imbalances. The immediate objective is to facilitate an orderly adjustment of the external deficit, thus easing excessive pressures on the exchange rate which could otherwise cause severe balance sheet effects on the corporate and household sectors, resulting in a sharper recession and strains in the banking sector.The total estimated financing needs up to the first quarter of 2011 are EUR 20 billion. The EU assistance for Romania comes in conjunction with IMF support through a Stand-by-Arrangement (SBA) in the amount of SDR 11.40 billion (about EUR 12.95 billion, 1085% of Romania's IMF quota). Additional multilateral support of EUR 2 billion will be provided in the following way: on top of their regular lending activities the World Bank provides EUR 1 billion and the EIB and the EBRD provide another EUR 1 billion.On 26 March 2009, the parent institutions of the 9 largest foreign-owned banks incorporated in Romania jointly committed to maintaining their overall exposures to Romania over the programme period, and agreed to support their Romanian subsidiaries in order to preserve their current good financial standing throughout the period of market turbulences and economic slowdown. This commitment will be reaffirmed in the individual comfort letters from the key banks to the National Bank of Romania (NBR) which will, in conjunction with home country supervisory authorities, monitor this commitment closely. The EU financial assistance is provided in support of the strong commitment by the Romanian authorities to implement a comprehensive economic programme. This programme has been agreed upon with the Romanian authorities.The Commission will verify at regular intervals in collaboration with the EFC that the economic policy conditions attached to the assistance are fulfilled, through missions and regular reporting by the authorities. Throughout the implementation of the programme, the Commission will also provide additional policy advice and technical assistance in specific areas. The main elements of this programme are:a. Fiscal consolidationThe government is committed to undertake additional fiscal adjustment efforts of 1.1% of GDP, on top of the measures amounting to 3% of GDP included in the 2009 budget adopted in February 2009. Based on the revised forecast of a contraction of GDP by 4% in 2009 and on the additional budgetary measures, the authorities target a general government deficit of 5.1% of GDP, implying an important structural adjustment compared to the 2008 outturn. An amended 2009 budget, based on the updated economic outlook and the further measures will be approved by the Parliament in the second quarter of 2009.The fiscal consolidation will be concentrated on the expenditure side. Primary government expenditure will be reduced by an additional 0.85 percentage point of GDP compared to the 2009 budget. This will be achieved through i) a cut (by an estimated 4 – 4½% with respect to the 2008 level) in the public sector wage bill by foregoing public sector wage increases (totalling 5 percent) scheduled for 2009 or equivalent further cuts in employment and by reducing public employment, including by replacing only 1 in 7 departing employees; ii) additional reduction in spending on goods and services and in subsidies to public enterprises; iii) some cuts in capital spending on items like vehicles and office equipment and ensuring a realistic timetable for EU-supported investment projects. Nevertheless, public investment is projected to substantially increase in 2009 compared to 2008 (some 6½ % of GDP in 2009 compared to 5¾% of GDP in 2008). On the revenue side, measures to eliminate certain tax deductions and allowances (in particular on company cars, and depreciation of revalued assets) are expected to generate an additional 0.25% of GDP. The government is committed to continue the expenditure-driven fiscal consolidation and reduce the deficit further to 4.1% of GDP in 2010 and to below 3% of GDP in 2011.Throughout the execution of the programme, the Commission will provide continued guidance and advice to the Romanian authorities with the aim of ensuring a sustainable correction of the deficit.b. Fiscal governance reformIn order to help a sustainable achievement of lower budgetary deficits, measures will be taken to improve the budgetary strategy and process. A key-component will be a fiscal responsibility law, which inter alia would require setting up procedures for improved multiyear budgeting, establish limits on budget revisions during the year and lay-out fiscal rules in order to improve budgetary implementation and achieve full compliance with the requirements of the SGP. The law should also create a fiscal council to provide independent and expert scrutiny.In order to improve budgetary predictability and transparency, the public compensation system will be restructured, including by unifying and simplifying the pay scales and reforming the bonuses system. This is aimed at tackling the major problems with the public compensation system: bonuses comprise too much of the total compensation, there is not unified wage scale and there is a large number of laws regulating wages in different part of the compensation system.To help improve the long-term sustainability of public finances, key parameters of the pension system will be reformed. Changes will include moving toward indexing public pensions to consumer prices and limiting the scope for discretionary pension increases and gradually increasing further the retirement age beyond the currently agreed plans (particularly for women), taking into account the evolution of life expectancies. In addition, groups of public employees currently excluded from pension contributions will have such contributions phased-in. The programme foresees the continuation of the implementation of the second pension pillar with regularly scheduled increases in contributions as originally planned.c. Monetary and financial sector policyMonetary policy will remain geared towards price stability and the achievement of the NBR’s inflation target (currently 3.5% ±1 percent at end-2009). Regarding the financial sector, the NBR will perform stress tests of individual bank balance sheets and lending portfolios under different scenarios following EU guidelines on valuation, which will be used to assess the potential increases in own funds needed to ensure that solvency ratios remain above 10 percent throughout the programme period. Once stress tests are completed, in line with their commitment to adequately support their subsidiaries (confirmed in their joint statement of 26 March 2009), parent banks will be required to secure, by the end of September 2009, sufficient resources to cover any potential shortfalls revealed by the stress tests.Moreover, the programme foresees that banking and winding-up laws will be amended to be able to respond in a timely and effective fashion in the event of bank distress . A key objective of the amendments will be to strengthen the powers of the administrators of banks placed under special administration. Beyond bank resolution, other measures aim at strengthening the NBR’s remedial powers with provisions allowing it to request that significant shareholders increase their share capital and financially support the bank, and to prohibit or limit profit distributions. Financial supervision will be strengthened in line with the relevant EU legislation. In addition, more detailed reporting requirements on liquidity will be introduced and, at an appropriate time, the regulatory minimum level of the capital adequacy ratio should increase from 8 percent to 10 percent. Furthermore, procedures for the activation of deposit insurance will be modified to simplify and accelerate payouts. Under modified legislation, deposit insurance will be activated upon the NBR’s determination within the 21-day period. Finally, in order to guarantee sufficient liquidity provision, the NBR is committed to widening the range of assets acceptable as collateral.d. Structural reformsThe economic programme will also include structural reform measures, in line with the policy areas covered in the Country Specific Recommendations issued by the Council in the in the framework of the Lisbon strategy. Reforms will include policies towards improving the efficiency and effectiveness of public administration, enhancing the quality of public expenditure, sound use and increased absorption of EU funds, the improvement of the business environment and tackling undeclared work. The Commission also contributes to local capacity building via the structural funds, a specific part of which has been earmarked for technical assistance.This programme is reflected in the economic policy conditionality included in the Commission recommendation for a Council decision. The detailed economic policy conditionality attached to EU loan disbursements will be set out in a Memorandum of Understanding to be concluded with the Romanian authorities. This programme will also be fully reflected in an update of the Romanian Convergence ProgrammeThe proposed decision would expire three years after entry into force. To ensure the necessary flexibility in the current market context, it is proposed to allow the option of using interest rate swaps for the borrowing operation which finances the loan. In order to safeguard the EU budget, the counterparties of a potential swap would have to be of the highest credit quality .In line with the stipulations of the Commission proposal of 8 April 2009 for a Council Regulation, amending Regulation (EC) No 332/2002, establishing a facility providing medium-term financial assistance for Member States' balances of payments, the Commission, including the European Anti-Fraud Office, and the European Court of Auditors can send their own agents or duly authorised representatives to carry out any technical or financial controls or audits that they consider necessary in relation to the management of this assistance. Investigation and satisfactory treatment of any suspected and actual cases of fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity in relation to the management of the EC balance of payments assistance, detrimental to the EC's financial interests, will be ensured. All such cases as well as measures related thereto taken by national competent authorities will be reported to the Commission without delay. The Memorandum of Understanding and the Loan Agreement will also already integrate the new technical provisions of the Commission proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 332/2002.In parallel to the policy conditionality of this programme, the Commission will also continue monitoring progress in the area of judicial reform and fighting corruption under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism. The lifetime of this mechanism is independent of the duration of the assistance programme. The February 2009 Interim Report concluded that the Romanian authorities should regain momentum on judicial reform and the fight against corruption so as to reverse certain backward movements of recent months. This means in particular adopting the codes needed to modernise the legal system and showing, through an expeditious treatment of high-level corruption cases, that the legal system is capable of implementing the laws in an independent and efficient way.In addition to the policy conditionality, the Commission will also continue monitoring the correct use of pre-and post-accession EU transfers, among others through the compliance assessments and regular reviews.Recommendation for aCOUNCIL DECISIONGranting mutual assistance for RomaniaTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 119,Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission made after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,Whereas:1.  Romanian capital and financial markets have recently come under increasing pressure, reflecting the global economic downturn and rising concerns about the health of the Romanian economy, given its wide external deficit, and the rapidly increasing public deficit. Pressures on the exchange rate have also increased and entail a considerable risk to the wider banking sector stability.2.  In response, the government and the National Bank of Romania (NBR) have developed a comprehensive strategy to firmly anchor macroeconomic policies and reduce financial market stress and outlined this strategy in a letter of intent received by the Commission on […]. A cornerstone of the economic programme is the reduction of the fiscal deficit from 5.4% of GDP in 2008 to 5.1% of GDP in 2009 and to below 3% of GDP by 2011. In order to help a sustainable achievement of lower budgetary deficits, measures will be taken to improve the budgetary strategy and process. This economic programme and in particular the fiscal targets will be reflected in the Government budget as well as in the convergence programme.3.  The Council is reviewing on a regular basis the economic policies implemented by Romania, in particular in the context of the annual reviews of Romania's update of the convergence programme and implementation of the National Reform Programme and the regular review of progress made by Romania in the context of the Convergence Report and of the Annual Progress Report.4.  External financing is expected to remain under significant pressure as the persistent, although declining, current account deficit, together with the need to roll over sizeable short-term and longer-term foreign currency-denominated debt, are likely not to be covered fully by FDI and other financial and capital account inflows in 2009-2011. External financing needs are estimated at around EUR 20 billion in the period until the first quarter of 2011. Foreign banks’ rollover rate of their exposures to Romania is assumed at 100% once the mutual assistance is awarded, consistent with the required commitment of main foreign banks to maintain their exposure to Romania (as confirmed in their joint statement of 26 March 2009), whereas the rollover rate for corporate external debt to parents and for external debt of Romanian banks is assumed at 50% in 2009. For 2010 and 2011, all maturing foreign liabilities are assumed to be rolled over at 100% in line with the expected financial market stabilisation and start of the recovery in Romania's major export markets. Apart from sufficiently high foreign exchange reserve target (of more than 100% of short-term external debt at remaining maturity) conservative assumptions were made about other capital outflows such as non-resident deposit outflows, decreases in trade credits and portfolio outflows in order to incorporate additional buffers into the calculations.5.  The Romanian authorities have requested substantial financial assistance from the EU and other international financial institutions to support balance of payments sustainability and bring international currency reserves to a prudent level.6.  There is a serious threat to the Romanian balance of payments which justifies the urgent granting of mutual assistance by the Community.HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 1The Community shall grant mutual assistance to Romania.Article 2This Decision is addressed to the Member States.Done at Brussels,For the CouncilThe PresidentProposal for aCOUNCIL DECISIONProviding Community medium-term financial assistance for RomaniaTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 332/2002[2] of 18 February 2002 establishing a facility providing medium-term financial assistance for Member States' balance of payments and in particular Article 3(2),Having regard to the proposal from the Commission made after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee (EFC),Whereas:7.  By Decision [….] the Council has decided to grant mutual assistance to Romania.8.  Despite the expected improvement in the current account, Romania's external financing needs in the period until the first quarter of 2011 are estimated by the Commission, IMF and Romanian authorities in March 2009 at EUR 20 billion, as in view of the recent financial market developments the capital and financial account could substantially deteriorate.9.  It is appropriate to provide Community support to Romania of up to EUR 5 billion under the Facility providing medium-term financial assistance for Member States' balance of payments established by Regulation (EC) No 332/2002. That assistance should be provided in conjunction with a loan from the International Monetary Fund of SDR 11.40 billion (around EUR 12.95 billion) under a Stand-by arrangement expected to be approved on 6 May 2009. The World Bank has also agreed to provide a loan to Romania of EUR 1 billion and the EIB and EBRD will provide a total EUR 1 billion of additional support.10.  The Community assistance should be managed by the Commission. The specific economic policy conditions agreed with the authorities of Romania after consultation of the EFC should be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. The detailed financial terms should be laid down by the Commission in the Loan Agreement.11.  The Commission should verify at regular intervals that the economic policy conditions attached to the assistance are fulfilled through missions and regular reporting by the Romanian authorities.12.  Throughout the implementation of the programme, the Commission will provide additional policy advice and technical assistance in specific areas.13.  The European Court of Auditors shall have the right to carry out any financial controls or audits that it considers necessary in relation to the management of this assistance. The Commission, including the European Anti-Fraud Office, shall have the right to send its own officials or duly authorised representatives to carry out technical or financial controls or audits that it considers necessary in relation to the management of the Community medium-term financial assistance.14.  In parallel to the policy conditionality of this programme, the Commission will also continue monitoring progress in the area of judicial reform and fighting corruption under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism. The lifetime of this mechanism is independent of the duration of the assistance programme. In addition to the policy conditionality, the Commission will also continue monitoring the correct use of pre-and post-accession EU transfers, among others through the compliance assessments and regular reviews.15.  The assistance should be provided with a view to supporting the balance of payments sustainability in Romania and, in this way, contributing to the successful implementation of the Government's economic policy programme,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 116.  The Community shall make available to Romania a medium-term loan amounting to a maximum of EUR 5 billion, with a maximum average maturity of seven years.17.  The Community financial assistance shall be made available during three years starting from the first day after the entry into force of this Decision.Article 218.  The assistance shall be managed by the Commission in a manner consistent with Romania's undertakings and recommendations by the Council, in particular the Country Specific Recommendations in the context of the implementation of the National Reform Programme as well as of the convergence programme.19.  The Commission shall agree with the authorities of Romania, after consulting the EFC, the specific economic policy conditions attached to the financial assistance as laid down in Article 3(5). Those conditions shall be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding consistent with the undertakings and recommendations referred to in paragraph (1). The detailed financial terms shall be laid down by the Commission in the Loan Agreement.20.  The Commission shall verify at regular intervals in collaboration with the EFC that the economic policy conditions attached to the assistance are fulfilled. To this end, the Romanian authorities shall place all the necessary information at the disposal of the Commission and cooperate in full with the latter. The EFC shall be kept informed by the Commission of possible refinancing of the borrowings or restructuring of the financial conditions.21.  Romania shall be ready to adopt and implement additional consolidation measures to ensure macro-financial stability, in case such measures will be necessary during the assistance programme. The Romanian authorities shall consult the Commission in advance of the adoption of any such additional measures.Article 322.  The Community financial assistance shall be made available by the Commission to Romania in maximum five instalments, the size of which will be laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding.23.  The first instalment shall be released subject to the entry into force of the Loan Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding.24.  If required in order to finance the loan, the prudent use of interest rate swaps with counterparties of the highest credit quality shall be permitted.25.  The Commission shall decide on the release of further instalments after having obtained the opinion of the EFC.26.  The disbursement of each further instalment shall be made on the basis of a satisfactory implementation of the new economic programme of the Romanian Government to be included in the Convergence Programme of Romania, in the National Reform Programme and, more particularly, the specific economic policy conditions laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding. These shall include, inter alia,27.  Adoption of a clearly-set medium-term fiscal programme designed to lower by 2011 the general government deficit to not more than the Treaty reference level of 3% of GDP.28.  Adoption and execution of an amended budget for 2009 (by the second quarter of 2009), targeting a general government deficit of no higher than 5.1% of GDP in ESA 95 terms.29.  Reduce the public sector wage bill in nominal terms compared to the 2008 outcome by foregoing public sector wage increases (totalling 5 percent in nominal terms) scheduled for 2009 (or equivalent further cuts in employment) and by reducing public employment, including by replacing only 1 of 7 departing employees.30.  Additional reductions in spending on goods and services and in subsidies to public enterprises.31.  Improving the budgetary management by the adoption and implementation of a binding medium-term fiscal framework, establish limits on budget revisions during the year, including fiscal rules and create a fiscal council to provide independent and expert scrutiny.32.  Reforming the public compensation system, including by unifying and simplifying the pay scales and reforming the bonus system.33.  Reforming key parameters of the pension system by moving towards indexation of pensions to consumer prices rather than wages, gradually adjusting retirement age beyond the currently agreed plans, especially for women, and phasing in pension contributions of groups of public employees currently excluded from such contributions.34.  Amending banking and winding-up laws to be able to respond in a timely and effective fashion in the event of bank distress . A key objective of the amendments will be to strengthen powers of the administrators of banks placed under special administration. Beyond bank resolution, the NBR’s remedial powers should be strengthened with provisions allowing it to request that significant shareholders increase their share capital and financially support the bank, and to prohibit or limit profit distributions. Financial supervision will be strengthened in line with the relevant EU legislation. In addition, more detailed reporting requirements on liquidity will be introduced and, at an appropriate time, the regulatory minimum level of the capital adequacy ratio should increase from 8 percent to 10 percent. Furthermore, procedures for the activation of deposit insurance should be modified to simplify and accelerate payouts. Under modified legislation, deposit insurance will be activated upon the NBR’s determination within the 21-day period. Finally, in order to guarantee sufficient liquidity provision, the NBR is committed to widening the range of assets acceptable as collateral.35.  Structural reform measures in the areas of the Country Specific Recommendations issued in the context of the Lisbon strategy. These will include measures towards improving the efficiency and effectiveness of public administration, enhancing the quality of public expenditure, sound use and increased absorption of EU funds, reducing administrative, fiscal and legal burdens on business and tackling undeclared work, thereby broadening the tax base.36.  In order to ensure the smooth implementation of the programme conditionality and to help restoring imbalances in a sustainable way, the Commission will provide continued advice and guidance on fiscal, financial market and structural reforms.37.  Romania shall open a special account with the National Bank of Romania for the management of the Community medium-term financial assistance.Article 4This Decision is addressed to Romania.Article 5It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union .Done at Brussels,For the CouncilThe PresidentBUDGETARY IMPACT STATEMENT(cf. Article 16 of the Internal Rules)POLICY AREA: TITLE 01 – ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRSACTIVITY: FINANCIAL OPERATIONS AND INSTRUMENTSTITLE OF ACTION: EU MEDIUM-TERM FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR ROIMANIA1. NAME OF THE PROPOSAL: BUDGET HEADING CONCERNED AND TITLE01 04 01 01 EC guarantee for Community loans raised for balance-of-payments support2. LEGAL BASIS:Art. 119 EC and 308 EC; Council Regulation N° 332/2002 of 18 February 2002.3. OVERALL FIGURES FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR (IN EUROS)This item constitutes the structure for the guarantee provided by the European Union. It will enable the Commission to service the debt (principal, interest and other costs) should the debtor (Romania) default.The budget entry ("p.m.") reflecting the budget guarantee will be activated only in the case of an effective call on the guarantee. It is expected that normally the budget guarantee will not be called.3a – Current yearNot applicableCA |Initial appropriation for the financial year (budget) |Transfers |Additional appropriation |Total appropriation |Appropriations already set aside by another work programme |Balance available |Amount for the action proposed |3b – Carry oversNot applicableCA |Carry-overs |Appropriations already set aside by another work programme |Balance available |Amount for the action proposed |3c – Next financial yearNot applicableCA |Initial appropriation for the financial year (budget) | p.m. |Transfers |Additional appropriation |Total appropriation |Appropriations already set aside by another work programme |Balance available |Amount for the action proposed | p.m. |4. DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIONThe proposed medium-term financial assistance to Romania consists of a Community loan (to be financed by Community borrowings in the international capital markets) in the amount of EUR 5 billion. It will be provided in the context of an international financing package, and in particular by an IMF loan of SDR 11.40 billion (around EUR 12.95 billion) supported by the stand-by facility. The World Bank has committed a total of EUR 1 billion, and the EIB and the EBRD will also provide a total of EUR 1 billion. The Community medium-term financial support to Romania is intended to support the balance of payments sustainability of Romania which is seriously threatened and thereby also to support the new economic programme of the government aiming, among other things, at restoring investor confidence and alleviating the stress recently experienced in financial markets. At the same time, this assistance makes a contribution to financial stability that goes beyond the beneficiary country in view of the important international (including interbank) links. The new economic package hereby supported includes an accelerated deficit reduction in the period 2009-2011, which would decrease the government's financing need. Finally, the assistance managed by the Commission in consultation with the Economic and Financial Committee is a way to ensure that the EU remains closely involved in the shaping of economic policies in Romania and that those policies are consistent with Romania's undertakings in the EU context and recommendations by the Council, in particular as concerns the implementation of the National Reform Programme as well as of the convergence programme.On 26 March 2009, the parent institutions of the 9 largest foreign-owned banks incorporated in Romania jointly committed to maintaining their overall exposures to Romania over the programme period, and agreed to support their Romanian subsidiaries in order to preserve their current good financial standing throughout the period of market turbulences and economic slowdown. Together with the assistance provided by the Community, the IMF, the World Bank, the EIB and the EBRD, this declaration underscores the broad-based character of support to the Romanian authorities.The Community borrowings raised on the capital markets or from financial institutions for the purpose of extending the loan to Romania are covered by the Community guarantee. The loan is raised on the capital markets or from financial institutions. The amount in principal of loans which will be granted to Romania amounts to EUR 5 billion.The structure for the guarantee provided by the European Union will enable the Commission to service the debt should Romania default.In order to honour its obligations, the Commission may draw on its cash resources to service the debt provisionally. In this case, Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000 implementing Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom on the system of the Communities’ own resources (OJ L 130, 31.5.2000, p. 1) will apply.5. METHOD OF CALCULATION ADOPTEDNot applicable.6. PAYMENT SCHEDULE (IN EURO)Not applicable.Heading | Appropriations | Payments |Year n | Year n+1 | Year n+2 | Year n+3 | Subsequent financial years |Year n |Year n+1 |Year n |Year n+1 |Total |[1] In line with the Terms of Reference on non-Community loans to EU Member States adopted by the EFC on 29 September 2008, this was done by a letter of Finance Minister Gheorghe Pogea to Commissioner Joaquin Almunia. A similar letter was written by EFC Member Stefan Nanu to Odile Renaud Basso and Marco Buti, respectively Secretary of and Commission Member at the EFC.[2] OJ L 53, 23.2.2002, p. 1.


title: 2014/63/EU: Commission Recommendation of 6 February 2014 on measures to control Diabrotica virgifera virgifera Le Conte in Union areas where its presence is confirmed

text:
               7.2.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 38/46

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

   of 6 February 2014
   on measures to control Diabrotica virgifera virgifera Le Conte in Union areas where its presence is confirmed
   (2014/63/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

                  Diabrotica virgifera virgifera Le Conte (hereinafter: ‘Diabrotica’) is a non-native insect pest of maize. It has spread and established in over half of the Union maize growing area.

               (2)

               The measures to prevent the spread of Diabrotica within the Union carried out pursuant to Commission Decision 2003/766/EC (1) did not prove to be successful. Moreover, according to an impact assessment carried out by the Commission it is neither feasible to pursue an eradication of this pest from the Union territory nor to prevent its further spread into the areas which are currently free from that harmful organism. Therefore the Commission has decided by Implementing Directive 2014/19/EU (2) and Implementing Decision 2014/62/EU (3) to withdraw the recognition of Diabrotica as a regulated harmful organism with quarantine status, by deleting it from Annex I to Council Directive 2000/29/EC (4), and to repeal Decision 2003/766/EC, respectively.

               (3)

               Under Decision 2003/766/EC crop rotation was compulsory only for the eradication of isolated outbreaks of Diabrotica. Nevertheless, scientific studies have shown that crop rotation is the most effective technique to also slow down the spread of Diabrotica and to reduce its impact. In addition to being an effective method to control Diabrotica, crop rotation has several other advantages from an environmental point of view. These include the improvement or maintenance of soil fertility and structure, and the breaking of pest and weed cycles with the potential to reduce the farmers’ reliance on chemical inputs of fertilisers and plant protection products. Consequently, crop rotation has also a positive impact on water and air quality, and on biodiversity. However, from other studies carried out on this pest, it became clear that with its further spread there is a potential for increased reliance on insecticides, since in some cases it may be difficult to find an economically attractive alternative crop to maize in the rotation.

               (4)

               Therefore, an effective and sustainable control of Diabrotica should be envisaged by Member States, also after the withdrawal of the recognition of Diabrotica as a regulated harmful organism with quarantine status. Article 14 of Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) provides for Member States to establish appropriate incentives to encourage professional users to implement, on a voluntary basis, crop or sector specific guidelines for integrated pest management, which should be drawn up by public authorities or organisations representing particular professional users. Pursuant to the general principles of integrated pest management, prevention of the occurrence of pests has a key role in reducing the need of intervention with plant protection products. Moreover, sustainable biological, physical and other non-chemical methods should be preferred to chemical methods, if they provide adequate pest control.

               (5)

               In accordance with these general principles of integrated pest management, application of crop rotation, of appropriate monitoring of Diabrotica populations and other relevant measures preventing spreading of harmful organisms, such as hygiene measures as cleansing the agricultural machinery, should be included in crop or sector-specific guidelines.

               (6)

               Furthermore, in order to enhance the respect by users of Article 55 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) where insecticides are used to control Diabrotica, crop or sector specific guidelines for integrated pest management concerning this pest should be in line with the rules on proper use of plant protection products as set out in that provision.

               (7)

               Professional users of plant protection products should have at their disposal information and tools for monitoring Diabrotica, as well as advisory services on integrated pest management, including specific prevention and control methods for Diabrotica. The results of the monitoring should help farmers to decide whether and when there is still need to apply plant protection measures. It is relevant that robust and scientifically sound Diabrotica population threshold values are defined for a region, since these are essential components for decision making.

               (8)

               Member States ensuring, in compliance with Article 5 of Directive 2009/128/EC, that all professional users have access to training on specific subjects should therefore include also the provisions of this Recommendation in the respective training programme.

               (9)

               Research and technological development on tools for the sustainable control of Diabrotica should be promoted to ensure more cost effective and environmentally sustainable measures against that harmful organism,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

               1.

               Member States should take into account the general principles of integrated pest management laid down in Annex III to Directive 2009/128/EC for the control of Diabrotica virgifera virgifera Le Conte (hereinafter ‘Diabrotica’) in Union areas where its presence is confirmed. For the purposes of this Recommendation ‘control’ means the suppression of the population density of the pest to a level not causing significant economic losses, with a view to ensuring an economically sustainable production of maize.

               2.

               Member States should ensure that the crop or sector specific guidelines for integrated pest management, drawn up by public authorities or organisations representing particular professional users, concerning Diabrotica addressed to farmers of maize and professional users of plant protection products are in line with the rules on proper use of plant protection products as set out in Article 55 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

               3.

               Sustainable biological, physical and other non-chemical methods should be preferred to chemical methods, if the former provide satisfactory pest control. Therefore, control of Diabrotica by the professional users should be achieved or supported by the following actions:

                           (a)

                           crop rotation;

                           (b)

                           use of biocontrol agents;

                           (c)

                           adaptation of maize sowing date to avoid that germination coincides with larval hatching;

                           (d)

                           cleansing of agricultural machinery and removal of volunteer maize plants and other hygiene measures.

                     Crop rotation should be preferred in view of its high effectiveness to control Diabrotica and its environmental and longer term agronomical benefits.

               4.

               All measures set out in point 3 should be accompanied by monitoring of the presence of Diabrotica to identify the need and proper timing for protective actions. Member States should ensure that effective monitoring of the population of Diabrotica is carried out using adequate methods and tools. Scientifically sound Diabrotica population threshold values should be established regionally, since these are essential components for decision making on the application of any control measures.

               5.

               Member States should ensure, in accordance with Article 14(2) of Directive 2009/128/EC, that professional users of plant protection products have at their disposal information and tools for monitoring Diabrotica.

               6.

               Member States should ensure that advisory services on integrated pest management, as provided for in Article 14(2) of Directive 2009/128/EC, provide also specific advice on Diabrotica control to all professional users of plant protection products. Member States should also establish appropriate incentives to encourage professional users to implement the crop or sector-specific guidelines referred to in point 2.

               7.

               Member States should ensure that all professional users of plant protection products have access to training concerning the sustainable control of Diabrotica. The provisions of this Recommendation should become part of the training ensured by the Member States pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 2009/128/EC.

               8.

               Member States should promote research and technological development on tools for the sustainable control of Diabrotica.

      Done at Brussels, 6 February 2014.

            For the Commission

         Tonio BORG

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  Commission Decision 2003/766/EC of 24 October 2003 on emergency measures to prevent the spread within the Community of Diabrotica virgifera Le Conte (OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 49).

      (2)  Commission Implementing Directive 2014/19/EU of 6 February 2014 amending Annex I to Council Directive 2000/29/EC on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community. See page 30 of this Official Journal.

      (3)  Commission Implementing Decision 2014/62/EU of 6 February 2014 repealing Decision 2003/766/EC on emergency measures to prevent the spread within the Community of Diabrotica virgifera Le Conte. See page 45 of this Official Journal.

      (4)  Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1).

      (5)  Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 71).

      (6)  Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1).


Avis juridique important

|

31975K0097

75/97/ECSC: Commission Recommendation of 23 December 1974 to the Governments of the Member States on the movement of scrap iron and similar products within the Community

Official Journal L 038 , 12/02/1975 P. 0019 - 0020 Finnish special edition: Chapter 2 Volume 2 P. 0033  Swedish special edition: Chapter 2 Volume 2 P. 0033  Spanish special edition: Chapter 02 Volume 2 P. 0230  Portuguese special edition Chapter 02 Volume 2 P. 0230

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION  of 23 December 1974  to the Governments of the Member States on the movement of scrap iron and similar products within the Community  (75/97/ECSC)   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, in particular the second paragraph of Article 73 thereof;  Having consulted the Council;  Whereas the exportation to third countries of scrap iron and similar products as listed in the Annex is prohibited or subject to restriction;  Whereas compliance with such measures implies controls to ensure that only products which have an export licence properly issued by the competent authorities of the exporting Member State are exported to third countries;  Whereas, however, such controls must accord with the requirements of free circulation of goods within the Community;  Whereas it is essential that the controls should not be more restrictive than the situation demands;  Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 542/69 (1) of 18 March 1969 introduced a procedure for Community transit ; whereas, based on this Regulation, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1279/71 (2) of 17 June 1971, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2766/71 (3) of 23 December 1971, provided for the use of Community transit documents for the purpose of applying certain measures on the exportation of certain goods;  Whereas the application of the provisions of these Regulations to the intra-Community movement of scrap iron and similar products guarantees compliance with the prohibition of, or restrictions on, the exportation of such products to third countries and at the same time is a considerable simplification of formalities compared with the control of final destination procedure with which the products in question have until now had to comply as a result of the Decision of 19 November 1957 by the representatives of the Governments of the Members States meeting in the Council ; whereas the formalities and procedures laid down by the latter Decision should be replaced by the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1279/71, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2766/71;  Whereas the effectiveness of an export prohibition or restriction to third countries pre-supposes that each Member State, whichever Member State the goods come from, can impose appropriate penalties,  RECOMMENDS:     Article 1 1. Member States shall take appropriate measures, to ensure that the intra-Community movement of scrap iron and similar products as listed in the Annex to this recommendation, which are subject to prohibition or restrictions on exportation to third countries, is governed by the conditions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1279/71 of 17 June 1971 on the use of Community transit documents for the purpose of applying certain measures to the exportation of certain goods, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2766/71 of 23 December 1971.  2. Member States shall revoke the measures taken to implement the earlier Decisions taken by the representatives of the Governments of Member States meeting in the Council relating to formalities and procedures to be followed for the intra-Community of scrap iron and similar products.   Article 2 Member States shall take any general or specific measure necessary to penalize offences against provisions relating to the prohibition of, or restrictions on, the exportation of scrap iron and similar products to third countries from whichever Member State the goods come.   Article 3 Member States shall inform the Commission of any difficulties they may encounter in the implementation of the measures laid down in Articles 1 and 2.  (1)OJ No L 71, 29.3.1969, p. 1. (2)OJ No L 133, 19.6.1971, p. 32. (3)OJ No L 283, 24.12.1971, p. 33.   The Commission shall communicate the information to the other Member States with a view to considering the steps to be taken.   Article 4 Member States, shall, not later than 1 January 1975, adopt the measures laid down in Articles 1 and 2 and inform the Commission thereof without delay.   Article 5 This recommendation is addressed to Member States.     Done at Brussels, 23 December 1974.  For the Commission  F.O. GUNDELACH  Member of the Commission    ANNEX List of goods referred to in Article 1    1. Waste and scrap metal of iron or steel (ECSC) (including used railway rails less than 1.50 m in length) (CCT heading No 73.03).       2. Used railway rails less than 2.50 m but 1.50 m or more in length (CCT subheading ex 73.16 A II b)).       3. Waste or scrap alloy steel in ingot form (CCT subheading 73.15 B I b) 1 aa)).       4. Products for re-use regarded as scrap by virtue of the Decision of 8 October 1957 by the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting in the Council.