title: Council Recommendation of 14 July 2015 on the 2015 National Reform Programme of Romania and delivering a Council opinion on the 2015 Convergence Programme of Romania

text:
               18.8.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 272/1

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 14 July 2015
   on the 2015 National Reform Programme of Romania and delivering a Council opinion on the 2015 Convergence Programme of Romania
   (2015/C 272/01)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 121(2) and 148(4) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1), and in particular Article 9(2) thereof,
   Having regard to 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 resolutions of the European Parliament,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Social Protection Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission's proposal to launch a new strategy for growth and jobs, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies. The strategy focuses on the key areas where action is needed to boost Europe's potential for sustainable growth and competitiveness.

               (2)

               On 14 July 2015, the Council, on the basis of the Commission’s proposals, adopted a Recommendation on the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and the Union and, on 21 October 2010, it adopted a decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (3). Together these form the ‘integrated guidelines’ which Member States were invited to take into account in their national economic and employment policies.

               (3)

               On 8 July 2014, the Council adopted a Recommendation (4) on Romania's National Reform Programme for 2014 and delivered its opinion on Romania's updated Convergence Programme for 2014.

               (4)

               On 28 November 2014, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2015 European Semester for economic policy coordination. On the same day, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011, the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which Romania was identified as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out.

               (5)

               On 18 December 2014, the European Council endorsed the priorities for fostering investment, intensifying structural reforms and pursuing responsible growth-friendly fiscal consolidation.

               (6)

               On 26 February 2015, the Commission published its 2015 country report for Romania. This assessed Romania's progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted on 8 July 2014. The country report also includes the results of the in-depth review under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. The Commission's analysis leads it to conclude that Romania is experiencing macroeconomic imbalances, which require policy action and monitoring. In the three consecutive EU-IMF programmes, external and internal imbalances have been significantly reduced. However, risks from Romania's relatively large negative net international investment position and a weak medium-term export capacity merit attention. External and internal vulnerabilities persist in the banking sector.

               (7)

               On 30 April 2015, Romania submitted its 2015 National Reform Programme and its 2015 Convergence Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (8)

               On 22 October 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/531/EU (5), in which it committed itself to providing medium-term financial assistance of up to EUR 2 billion to Romania, over the period until September 2015. This assistance is conditional upon the implementation of a comprehensive economic policy. While, under present market conditions, Romania does not intend to request the disbursement of any instalment, the precautionary assistance is expected to help consolidate macroeconomic, budgetary and financial stability and, through the implementation of structural reforms, to increase the economy's resilience and potential for growth. Once Romania has exited the programme, it will be fully re-integrated into the European Semester framework.

               (9)

               Romania is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact. In its Convergence Programme, Romania has requested a temporary deviation of 0,5 % of GDP from the required adjustment path towards the medium-term objective because of planned structural reforms. As the Programme did not provide sufficiently detailed information on the planned structural reforms, the Council is not in a position to assess their plausibility. Romania also requested the application of the pension reform clause. The eligibility of the reform is subject to confirmation by Eurostat. Based on the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, the projected structural deficit of 3,4 % of GDP in 2016 would not ensure an appropriate safety margin with respect to the 3 %-of-GDP Treaty reference value. Therefore, the Council is of the opinion that Romania does not fulfil the requirements to benefit from the requested temporary deviation in 2016.

               (10)

               In its 2015 Convergence Programme, the Government plans to keep the headline deficit at 1,5 % of GDP in 2015 and to reduce it to 0,8 % of GDP in 2018. The Government plans to meet the medium-term objective — a structural deficit of 1,0 % of GDP — from 2016 onwards. According to the Convergence Programme, the government debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to peak at 40,1 % in 2015 and to gradually decline thereafter, reaching 37,1 % in 2018. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning these budgetary projections is favourable. Important deficit-increasing measures approved by the Government on 25 March and the Senate on 27 April (6) which have been taken into account in the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, are not included in the Convergence Programme, while this is required by the Conduct of Conduct. Measures needed to support the planned deficit targets from 2016 onwards have not been sufficiently specified. Based on the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, in 2015 the structural balance is forecast to deviate by 0,3 % of GDP from the medium-term objective. This slightly exceeds the 0,25 % of GDP deviation granted under the Balance-of-Payments programme on the condition that the co-financing of EU funded projects is in line with what was foreseen in the budget.The deviation is set to become significant in 2016 at 2,4 % of GDP, whereas an adjustment of 0,3 % of GDP is required. Therefore, further measures will be needed in 2015 and 2016. Based on its assessment of the Convergence Programme and taking into account the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, the Council is of the opinion that there is a risk that Romania will not comply with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact.

               (11)

               Romania's fiscal framework is broadly sound but not effectively applied. The medium- and long-term demographic trends and low level of development of the labour market may jeopardise the long-term sustainability of the pension system. The pension reform launched in 2010 has already brought some improvements, but the law equalising the statutory retirement age for men and women as of 2035, proposed by the Government in December 2013, has not yet been adopted by the lower chamber of Parliament.

               (12)

               The recent cut in employers' social security contributions has reduced the labour tax wedge, but in an untargeted way. The tax wedge for lower income earners remains high (40 %) relative to other European countries. Tax fraud and tax avoidance remain a major challenge and eat into tax revenue. The first steps have been taken in what is set to be an ongoing reorganisation of the Romanian tax administration. A pilot compliance project targeting undeclared labour, under-declared wages and tax evasion was implemented in two regions in 2014, and is to be rolled out further in 2015. The level of environmental taxation was increased in 2014, bringing it close to the EU average.

               (13)

               While some improvements were seen in 2014, employment and activity rates continue to be especially low among women, young people, older workers and Roma. Active labour market policies have been revised, but the overall participation in and financing for active labour market measures remain low, particularly for vocational training, schemes leading to the recognition of prior learning, mobility incentives, and measures targeting the long-term unemployed. Romania has taken steps to address youth unemployment, in particular through the Youth Guarantee, but there have been delays in implementation. No progress has been made in setting transparent guidelines for setting the minimum wage. In order to allow for personalised services and more coherent delivery across target groups, the Public Employment Service would need increased capacity, in particular in terms of staffing, and an integrated delivery framework for measures co-financed through European Structural and Investment funds.

               (14)

               Romania faces several challenges in the area of education: the early school leaving rate remains well above the EU average; the availability and access of early childhood education and care services is limited, especially in rural areas and for the Roma community; participation in lifelong learning remains far below the EU average; the quality and labour market relevance of higher education is inadequate; and the tertiary attainment rate remains the second lowest in the Union. Romania has started addressing these challenges, with varying degrees of progress being made in the different areas, and, to date, little visible end-effect. Romania adopted two national strategies, the lifelong learning national strategy and the national strategy for reducing early school leaving, in June 2015. It is now important that it takes action for their swift implementation. A national programme for early childhood education and care was designed for the period 2014-2019, and will come into effect in the new school year, 2015-2016. A strategy on tertiary education has been drafted, the aim of which is to increase the relevance of higher education by aligning it more closely with labour market needs and to improve the accessibility of higher education for disadvantaged groups. Measures have been implemented to improve vocational education and training and apprenticeships schemes.

               (15)

               The Romanian healthcare system is characterised by poor results of treatment, poor financial and geographical accessibility, low funding and inefficient use of resources. There is high reliance on in-patient services and the system suffers from the extensive inefficient hospital network, the weak and fragmented referral networks, and the low proportion of spending directed to primary healthcare. In addition, the widespread use of informal payments in the public healthcare system further reduces the accessibility, efficiency and quality of the system. Various measures and healthcare reforms that have been introduced have narrowed the funding gap and improved the standard and efficiency of services. The National Health Strategy 2014-2020, which sets the strategic base for health sector reforms, was approved in December 2014 and is now to be implemented. The Ministry of Health and the National Health Insurance House are considering various measures to improve the system for financing healthcare.

               (16)

               Reducing poverty and social exclusion remains a major challenge for Romania. Although decreasing, the rate of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion remains high at 40 % in 2013, far above the EU average. The effectiveness of social transfers (excluding pensions) in reducing poverty appears limited, and is particularly low in the case of children. Social transfers are not adequately linked to activation measures. The implementation of the 2011 social assistance reform is still behind schedule. The strategy for social inclusion and combating poverty and the associated action plans were approved on 27 May 2015. Limited progress was made in introducing the minimum insertion income, which would simplify social assistance by combining three existing social transfers, and would also strengthen the link with activiation measures. A social economy law designed to regulate the field of social economy and improve labour participation of vulnerable population was adopted by the Government in 2013, but is still under debate in the Parliament. Few effective measures were taken to integrate the Roma population. A revised strategy for the integration of Roma was, however, adopted with some delay in January 2015, but implementation is behind schedule.

               (17)

               Romania's administrative capacity is low, fragmented, and characterised by an unclear delegation of responsibilities, as a result of which it acts as a drag on the competitiveness of the economy. The root causes of the structural weaknesses have been identified, and a strategy to tackle the challenges in public administration and in policy prioritisation and coordination was adopted in October 2014, together with an action plan for its implementation over the period 2014-2020. Implementation has, however, been considerably delayed. Irregularities in public procurement procedures have resulted in significant delays in implementing EU fund programmes. They have a negative impact on the business environment and hold back much needed investment in infrastructure.

               (18)

               Some progress has been made in increasing the independence, quality and efficiency of the judicial system, fighting corruption at all levels, and ensuring the effective implementation of court decisions. Nonetheless, the implementation of court decisions remains weak in many cases and more limited progress was made in preventing and fighting low-level corruption. These important policy areas will be covered by the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism.

               (19)

               State-owned companies suffer from sub-standard productivity, contribute to the illiquidity in the economy, place a burden on the general government budget — as contingent liabilities —, and account for 50 % of the tax arrears of all companies combined. Corporate governance is a critical factor determining the performance of state-owned companies. Their current governance set-up does not prevent political interference in the day-to-day management of the companies, or guarantee a separation between the authorities' ownership and policy-making functions. Specific rules for state-owned companies were not systematically introduced until the emergency government ordinance 109/2011 was passed. Various areas remain uncovered and in practice the rules are not always respected. No progress has been made regarding reform of the corporate governance of state-owned companies in the energy and transport sectors.

               (20)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Romania's economic policy and published it in the 2015 country report. It has also assessed the Convergence Programme and the National Reform Programme and the follow-up given to the recommendations addressed to Romania in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Romania but also their compliance with EU rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the overall economic governance of the Union by providing EU-level input into future national decisions. The recommendations under the European Semester are reflected in recommendations (1) to (4) below.

               (21)

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

               (22)

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

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Romania take action in 2015 and 2016 to:

               1.

               Take all the necessary measures to complete the financial assistance programme.

               2.

               Limit the deviation from the medium-term budgetary objective in 2015 to a maximum of 0,25 % of GDP as specified under the 2013-15 balance-of-payments programme and return to the medium-term budgetary objective in 2016. Implement the comprehensive tax compliance strategy, strengthen verification control systems in order to tackle undeclared work, and push ahead with the equalisation of the pensionable age for men and women.

               3.

               Strengthen the provision of labour market measures, in particular for unregistered young people and the long-term unemployed. Ensure that the national employment agency is adequately staffed. Establish, in consultation with the social partners and in accordance with national practices, clear guidelines for setting the minimum wage transparently. Introduce the minimum insertion income. Increase the provision and quality of early childhood education and care, in particular for Roma. Take action to implement the national strategy to reduce early school leaving. Pursue the national health strategy 2014-2020 to remedy issues of poor accessibility, low funding and inefficient resources.

               4.

               Adopt the law on reforming corporate governance of state-owned enterprises.

      Done at Brussels, 14 July 2015.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. GRAMEGNA

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

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

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

      (4)  Council Recommendation of 8 July 2014 on the National Reform Programme 2014 of Romania and delivering a Council opinion on the Convergence Programme of Romania, 2014 (OJ C 247, 29.7.2014, p. 109).

      (5)  Council Decision 2013/531/EU of 22 October 2013 providing precautionary Union medium-term financial assistance to Romania (OJ L 286, 29.10.2013, p. 1).

      (6)  Tax cuts embodied in the new draft fiscal code.

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


title: Commission Recommendation of  11 April 2006  on risk reduction measures for the substances: Dibutylphthalate; 3,4-Dichloroaniline; Di- isodecyl  phthalate; 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C 9-11 -branched alkyl esters, C 10 -rich; Di- isononyl  phthalate; 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C 8-10 -branched alkyl esters, C 9 -rich; Ethylenediaminetetraacetate; Methyl acetate; Monochloroacetic acid; n-Pentane; Tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate   (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               13.4.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 104/45

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

   of 11 April 2006
   on risk reduction measures for the substances: Dibutylphthalate; 3,4-Dichloroaniline; Di-‘isodecyl’ phthalate; 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C9-11-branched alkyl esters, C10-rich; Di-‘isononyl’ phthalate; 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C8-10-branched alkyl esters, C9-rich; Ethylenediaminetetraacetate; Methyl acetate; Monochloroacetic acid; n-Pentane; Tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2006/283/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances (1) and in particular Article 11(2) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In the framework of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 the following substances have been identified as priority substances for evaluation in accordance with Commission Regulations (EC) No 1179/94 (2), (EC) No 2268/95 (3) and (EC) No 143/97 (4) respectively concerning the first, second and third list of priority substances as foreseen under Regulation (EEC) No 793/93:

                           —

                           Dibutylphthalate;

                           —

                           3,4-Dichloroaniline;

                           —

                           Ethylenediaminetetraacetate;

                           —

                           Methyl acetate;

                           —

                           Tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate;

                           —

                           Di-‘isodecyl’ phthalate;

                           —

                           1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C9-11-branched alkyl esters, C10-rich;

                           —

                           Di-‘isononyl’ phthalate;

                           —

                           1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C8-10-branched alkyl esters, C9-rich;

                           —

                           n-Pentane;

                           —

                           Monochloroacetic acid.

               (2)

               The rapporteur States designated pursuant to those Regulations have completed the risk evaluation activities with regard to man and the environment for those substances in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 of 28 June 1994 laying down the principles for the assessment of risks to man and the environment of existing substances (5) and have suggested a strategy for limiting the risks in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 793/93.

               (3)

               The Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment (SCTEE) has been consulted and has issued opinions with respect to the risk evaluations carried out by the rapporteurs. The opinions have been published on the website of the Scientific Committee.

               (4)

               The results of the risk evaluation and further results of the strategies for limiting the risks are set out in the corresponding Commission Communication (6).

               (5)

               It is appropriate, on the basis of that evaluation, to recommend certain risk reduction measures for certain substances.

               (6)

               The risk reduction measures recommended for workers should be considered within the framework of the legislation for workers protection, which is considered to provide an adequate framework to limit the risks of the relevant substances to the extent needed.

               (7)

               The risk reduction measures provided for in this recommendation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee set up pursuant to Article 15(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS:
   SECTION 1
   DIBUTYLPHTHALATE
   (CAS No 84-74-2; EINECS No 201-557-4)
   Risk reduction measures for the environment (1, 2)

               1.

               The competent authorities in the Member States concerned should lay down, in the permits issued under Council Directive 96/61/EC (7), conditions, emission limit values or equivalent parameters or technical measures regarding dibutylphthalate, in order for the installations concerned to operate according to the best available techniques (hereinafter BAT) by the end of October 2007, taking into account the technical characteristic of the installations concerned, their geographical location and the local environmental conditions.

               2.

               Member States should carefully monitor the implementation of BAT regarding dibutylphthalate and report any important developments to the Commission in the framework of the exchange of information on BAT.

         SECTION 2
   3,4-DICHLOROANILINE
   (CAS No 95-76-1; EINECS No 202-448-4)
   Risk reduction measures for workers (3) and the environment (4, 5)

               3.

               The employers using 3,4-dichloroaniline in production and further processing for the uses indicated as a concern in the risk assessment should take note of any sector specific guidance for cleaning, maintenance and repair work developed at national level based on the practical non-binding guidance, available from the Commission as provided for in Article 12(2) of Council Directive 98/24/EC (8).
               The legislation currently in force at Community level for plant protection products (Council Directive 91/414/EEC (9)) and for biocides (Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (10)) is considered to give an adequate framework to limit the risks of the substance to the extent needed and shall apply.
               Within this framework:

               4.

               The information from the risk assessment of 3,4-dichloroaniline released from diuron used as a herbicide on sealed surfaces should be considered.

               5.

               Misuse of diuron in small packages should be prevented.

         SECTION 3
   ETHYLENEDIAMINETETRAACETATE
   (CAS No 60-00-4; EINECS No 200-449-4)
   Risk reduction measures for the environment (6, 7, 8, 9)

               6.

               For the river basins where emissions of Ethylenediaminetetraacetate (EDTA) may cause a risk, the relevant Member State should establish Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) and the national pollution reduction measures to achieve those EQS by 2015 should be included in the river basin management plans in line with the provisions of Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament anf of the Council (11).

               7.

               The competent authorities in the Member States concerned should lay down, in the permits issued under Directive 96/61/EC, conditions, emission limit values or equivalent parameters or technical measures regarding EDTA in order for the installations concerned to operate according to the BAT by the end of October 2007, taking into account the technical characteristic of the installations concerned, their geographical location and the local environmental conditions.

               8.

               Member States should carefully monitor the implementation of BAT regarding EDTA and report any important developments to the Commission in the framework of the exchange of information on BAT.

               9.

               Local emissions to the environment should, where necessary, be controlled by national rules to ensure that no risk for the environment is expected.

         SECTION 4
   METHYL ACETATE
   (CAS No 79-20-9; EINECS No 201-185-2)
   Risk reduction measures for workers (10)

               10.

               Employers using products for flooring works in the building trade containing methyl acetate should take note of any sector specific guidance developed at national level based on the practical non-binding guidance, available from the Commission as provided for in Article 12(2) of Directive 98/24/EC.

         SECTION 5
   MONOCHLOROACETIC ACID
   (CAS No 79-11-8; EINECS No 201-178-4)
   Risk reduction measures for workers (11) and the environment (12, 13, 14)

               11.

               Employers using Monochloroacetic acid (MCAA) for uses identified as a concern in the risk assessment should take note of any sector specific guidance developed at national level based on the practical non-binding guidance, available from the Commission as provided for in Article 12(2) of Directive 98/24/EC.

               12.

               The competent authorities in the Member States concerned should lay down, in the permits issued under Directive 96/61/EC, conditions, emission limit values or equivalent parameters or technical measures regarding MCAA in order for the installations concerned to operate by the end October 2007 according to BAT and taking into account the technical characteristic of the installations concerned, their geographical location and the local environmental conditions.

               13.

               Member States should carefully monitor the implementation of BAT regarding MCAA and report any important developments to the Commission in the framework of the exchange of information on BAT.

               14.

               Local emissions to the environment should, where necessary, be controlled by national rules to ensure that no risk for the environment and man exposed indirectly via the environment is expected.

         SECTION 6
   TETRASODIUM ETHYLENEDIAMINETETRAACETATE
   (CAS No 64-02-8; EINECS No 200-573-9)
   Risk reduction measures for the environment (15, 16, 17, 18)

               15.

               For the river basins where emissions of Tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate (Na4EDTA) may cause a risk, the relevant Member State should establish Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) and the national pollution reduction measures to achieve those EQS in 2015 should be included in the river basin management plans in line with the provisions of Directive 2000/60/EC.

               16.

               The competent authorities in the Member States concerned should lay down, in the permits issued under Directive 96/61/EC, conditions, emission limit values or equivalent parameters or technical measures regarding Na4EDTA in order for the installations concerned to operate by the end October 2007 according to BAT and taking into account the technical characteristic of the installations concerned, their geographical location and the local environmental conditions.

               17.

               Member States should carefully monitor the implementation of BAT regarding Na4EDTA and report any important developments to the Commission in the framework of the exchange of information on BAT.

               18.

               Local emissions to the environment should, where necessary, be controlled by national rules to ensure that no risk for the environment is expected.

         SECTION 7
   ADDRESSEES

               19.

               This Recommendation is addressed to all sectors importing, producing, transporting, storing, formulating into a preparation or other processing, using, disposing or recovering the substances and to the Member States.

      Done at Brussels, 11 April 2006.

            For the Commission

         Stavros DIMAS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 84, 5.4.1993, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 131, 26.5.1994, p. 3.

      (3)  OJ L 231, 28.9.1995, p. 18.

      (4)  OJ L 25, 28.1.1997, p. 13.

      (5)  OJ L 161, 29.6.1994, p. 3.

      (6)  OJ C 90, 13.4.2006.

      (7)  OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26.

      (8)  OJ L 131, 5.5.1998, p. 11.

      (9)  OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.

      (10)  OJ L 123, 24.4.1998, p. 1.

      (11)  OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.


title: Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 23 January 2014 amending Recommendation ECB/2011/24 on the statistical reporting requirements of the European Central Bank in the field of external statistics (ECB/2014/2)

text:
               22.2.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 51/1

         RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
   of 23 January 2014
   amending Recommendation ECB/2011/24 on the statistical reporting requirements of the European Central Bank in the field of external statistics
   (ECB/2014/2)
   (2014/C 51/01)
   THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
   Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 5.1 and the third indent of Article 34.1 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2533/98 of 23 November 1998 concerning the collection of statistical information by the European Central Bank (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The first sentence of Article 5.1 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank (hereinafter the ‘Statute of the ESCB’) requires the European Central Bank (ECB), assisted by national central banks (NCBs), to collect either from the competent authorities other than NCBs, or directly from economic agents, the statistical information necessary for it to undertake the tasks of the ESCB. The second sentence of Article 5.1 provides that for these purposes it will cooperate with Union institutions or bodies, with the competent authorities of the Member States or third countries, and with international organisations. Article 5.2 stipulates that the NCBs will carry out, to the extent possible, the tasks described in Article 5.1.

               (2)

               In cases where, in accordance with national rules and established practices, the reporting agents provide the necessary information to competent authorities other than NCBs, such authorities and their respective NCBs have to cooperate with each other to ensure that the ECB’s statistical requirements are met. Such cooperation should include the establishment of a permanent structure for transmission of data, unless the same result is already achieved by national legislation. At present, this requirement concerns cooperation between the Central Statistics Office in Ireland and the Central Bank of Ireland, and between the National Statistics Office in Malta and the Central Bank of Malta. Moreover, in Finland, from 1 January 2014, Statistics Finland will take over from Suomen Pankki the task of collecting and compiling the necessary information in the field of external statistics. In order to meet the abovementioned statistical requirements, Suomen Pankki and Statistics Finland should cooperate with each other.

               (3)

               In view of the need to address Recommendation ECB/2011/24 to Statistics Finland and the fact the ECB will establish, maintain and publish on its website a list of competent authorities in Member States that have been notified to the ECB by the relevant NCBs as being involved in the collection and/or compilation of external statistics and to which Recommendation ECB/2011/24 should be addressed in future, Recommendation ECB/2011/24 should be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
   SECTION I

      Amendment

   Section IV of Recommendation ECB/2011/24 is replaced by the following from the day following the date of publication of this Recommendation in the Official Journal of the European Union:

      ‘SECTION IV

         Final provisions

                  1.

                  This Recommendation replaces Recommendation ECB/2004/16 from 1 June 2014.

                  2.

                  References to Recommendation ECB/2004/16 should be construed as references to this Recommendation.

                  3.

                  This Recommendation is addressed to the Central Statistics Office in Ireland, the National Statistics Office in Malta, Statistics Finland in Finland, and to such other competent authorities that may be entrusted from time to time with the collection and/or compilation of external statistics in Member States and are included in a list of competent authorities that is established, maintained and published by the ECB on its website.

                  4.

                  The addressees are requested to give effect to this Recommendation from 1 June 2014, or from the date of their inclusion in the list of competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where such date is after 1 June 2014.’.

   SECTION II

      Addressees

   This Recommendation is addressed to the Central Statistics Office in Ireland, the National Statistics Office in Malta, and Statistics Finland in Finland.

      Done at Frankfurt am Main, 23 January 2014.

            The President of the ECB

         Mario DRAGHI

      (1)  OJ L 318, 27.11.1998, p. 8.


title: Recommendation of the EFTA Surveillance Authority No 150/06/COL of 17 May 2006 concerning a coordinated inspection programme in the field of animal nutrition for the year 2006

text:
               21.12.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 366/96

      RECOMMENDATION OF THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY

   No 150/06/COL
   of 17 May 2006
   concerning a coordinated inspection programme in the field of animal nutrition for the year 2006
   THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,
   Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 109 and Protocol 1 thereof,
   Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, and in particular Article 5(2)(b) and Protocol 1 thereof,
   Having regard to the Act referred to at point 31a of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 95/53/EC of 25 October 1995 fixing the principles governing the organization of inspections in the field of animal nutrition
       (1)), as amended, and as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, and in particular Article 22(3) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In 2005 the EFTA States identified certain issues as worthy of a coordinated inspection programme to be carried out in 2006.

               (2)

               Although the Act referred to at point 33 of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 2002/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 May 2002 on undesirable substances in animal feed
                   (2)), as amended, establishes maximum contents of aflatoxin B1 in feedingstuffs, there are no EEA rules for other mycotoxins, such as ochratoxin A, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol, fumonisins., T-2 and HT-2 toxins. Gathering information on the presence of those mycotoxins through random sampling could provide useful data for an assessment of the situation with a view to the development of the legislation. Furthermore, certain feed materials such as cereals and oil seeds are particularly exposed to mycotoxin contamination because of harvesting, storage and transport conditions. As mycotoxin concentration varies from year to year, it is appropriate to collect data from consecutive years for all mycotoxins mentioned.

               (3)

               Previous results of checks for the presence of antibiotics and coccidiostats in certain feedingstuffs intended for animal species or category for which those active substances are not authorized indicate that this type of infringement still occurs. Furthermore, in accordance with the provisions of Article 11(2) of the Act referred to at point 1a of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition
                   (3)), it is important to ensure that the phasing out of antibiotic feed additives is effectively enforced.

               (4)

               The participation of Norway and Iceland in the programmes within the scope of Annex II of this Recommendation concerning substances not authorised as feed additives will have to be evaluated with respect to their exemptions from Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement and, in particular, from the Act referred to at Point 1a of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement, Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

               (5)

               It is important to ensure that restrictions on the use of feed materials of animal origin in feedingstuffs, as laid down in relevant EEA legislation, are effectively enforced.

               (6)

               The participation of Iceland in the programmes within the scope of Annex III of this Recommendation concerning restrictions on the production and use of feed materials of animal origin will have to be evaluated with respect to its exemptions from Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement.

               (7)

               It is appropriate to ensure that the levels of the trace elements copper and zinc in compound feedingstuffs for pigs do not exceed the maximum content laid down by the Act referred to at Point 1zq of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1334/2003 of 25 July 2003 amending the conditions for authorisation of a number of additives in feedingstuffs belonging to the group of trace elements
                   (4)), as amended. The participation of Norway in the programmes within the scope of Annex IV will have to be evaluated with respect to its exemptions from Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement.

         The measures provided for in this Recommendation are in accordance with the opinion of the EFTA Plants and Animal Feedingstuffs Committee assisting the EFTA Surveillance Authority,
   HEREBY RECOMMENDS:

               1.

               It is recommended that the EFTA States carry out during 2006 a coordinated inspection programme aimed to check:

                           (a)

                           the concentration of mycotoxins (aflatoxin B1, ochratoxin A, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol, fumonisins, T-2 and HT-2 toxins) in feedingstuffs, indicating the methods of analysis; the method of sampling should comprise both random and targeted sampling; in the case of targeted sampling, the samples should be feed materials suspected of containing higher concentrations of mycotoxins, such as cereal grains, oil seeds, oil fruits, their products and by-products, and feed materials stored for a long time or transported by sea over a long distance; in the case of aflatoxin B1, particular attention should also be paid to compound feedingstuffs for dairy animals other than dairy cattle; the results of the checks should be reported using the model set out in Annex I;

                           (b)

                           coccidiostats and/or histomonostats, whether or not authorised as feed additives for certain animal species and categories, that occur frequently in non-medicated pre-mixtures and compound feedingstuffs in which these substances are not authorised; the checks should target those substances in pre-mixtures and compound feedingstuffs if the competent authority considers that there is a greater probability of finding irregularities; the results of the checks should be reported using the model set out in Annex II;

                           (c)

                           the implementation of the phasing out of antibiotics as feed additives as set out in Annex II;

                           (d)

                           the implementation of restrictions on the production and use of feed materials of animal origin, as set out in Annex III;

                           (e)

                           the levels of copper and zinc in compound feedingstuffs for pigs, as set out in Annex IV.

               2.

               It is recommended that EFTA States include the results of the coordinated inspection programme provided for in paragraph 1 in a separate Chapter in the annual report on inspection activities to be transmitted to the EFTA Surveillance Authority by 1 April 2007 in accordance with Article 22(2) of Act referred to at Point 31a of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 95/53/EC) and the latest version of the harmonised reporting model.

      Done at Brussels, of 17 May 2006.

            For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

         Kristján Andri STEFÁNSSON

            College Member

         Niels FENGER

            Director

      (1)  OJ L 265, 8.11.1995, p. 17. Directive as last amended by Directive 2001/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 234, 1.9.2001, p. 55).

      (2)  OJ L 140, 30.5.2002, p. 10. Directive as last amended by Commission Directive 2006/77/EC (OJ L 271, 30.9.2006, p. 53).

      (3)  OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 29. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 378/2005 (OJ L 59, 5.3.2005, p. 8).

      (4)  OJ L 187, 26.7.2003, p. 11. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1980/2005 (OJ L 318, 6.12.2005, p. 3).

      ANNEX I
      Concentration of certain mycotoxins (aflatoxin B1, ochratoxin A, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol, fumonisins, T-2 and HT-2-toxins) in feedingstuffs
      Individual results of all tested samples; model for reports as referred to in paragraph 1(a)

                  Feedingstuffs

                  Sampling (random or targeted)

                  Type and concentration of mycotoxins (μg/kg relative to a feedingstuff with a moisture content of 12 %)

                  Class (1)

                  Type (2)

                  Country of origin

                  Aflatoxin B1

                  Ochratoxin A

                  Zearalenone

                  Deoxynivalenol

                  Fumonisins (3)

                  T-2 and HT-2-toxins (4)

            The competent authority should also indicate:

                  —

                  the action taken when maximum levels for aflatoxin B1 are exceeded;

                  —

                  the methods of analysis used;

                  —

                  the limits of detection.

         (1)  Select one of the following classes: feed material, feed additive, premixture, complementary feed, complete feed, compound feed.

         (2)  Select one of the following types: (a) for feed materials, the name of the feed material as laid down in part B of the Annex to the Act referred to at point 14a of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 96/25/EC of 29 April 1996 on the circulation of feed materials, amending Directives 70/524/EEC, 74/63/EEC, 82/471/EEC and 93/74/EEC and repealing Directive 77/101/EEC); (b) for other feedingstuffs, the target species.

         (3)  The concentration of fumonisins B1 and B2 can be reported as the sum of both.

         (4)  The concentration of the T-2 and HT-2 toxins can be reported as the sum of both.

      ANNEX II
      Presence of certain medicinal substances not authorised as feed additives
      Certain medicinal substances may be legally present as additives in pre-mixtures and compound feedingstuffs for certain species and categories of animals, when fulfilling the requirements of Article 10 of the Act referred to at Point 1a of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003).
      The presence of unauthorised medicinal substances in feedingstuffs constitutes an infringement.
      The medicinal substances to be controlled should be chosen from the following:

                  1.

                  Medicinal substances authorised as feed additives for certain animal species or categories only:

                              decoquinate (Deccox)

                              diclazuril (Clinacox 0,2 %)

                              halofuginone hydrobromide (Stenorol)

                              lasalocid A sodium (Avatec 15 %)

                              maduramicin ammonium alpha(Cygro 1 %)

                              monensin sodium (Elancoban G100, 100, G200, 200)

                              narasin

                              narasin — nicarbazin (Maxiban G160)

                              robenidine hydrochloride (Cycostat 66G)

                              salinomycin sodium (Sacox 120G, 120)

                              semduramicin sodium (Aviaz 5 %)

                  2.

                  Medicinal substances no longer authorised as feed additives:

                              amprolium

                              amprolium/ethopabate

                              arprinocid

                              avilamycin

                              avoparcin

                              carbadox

                              dimetridazole

                              dinitolmid

                              flavophospholipol

                              ipronidazol

                              meticlorpindol

                              meticlorpindol/methylbenzoquate

                              nicarbazin

                              nifursol

                              olaquindox

                              ronidazol

                              spiramycin

                              tetracyclines

                              tylosin phosphate

                              virginiamycin

                              zinc bacitracin

                              other antimicrobial substances

                  3.

                  Medicinal substances never authorised as feed additives:
                  other substances
                  Individual results of all non-compliant samples; model for reports as referred to in paragraph 1(b)

                              Type of feedingstuff (animal species and category)

                              Substance detected

                              Level found

                              Reason for the infringement (1)

                              Action taken

            The competent authority should also indicate:

                  —

                  the total number of samples tested;

                  —

                  the names of the substances which have been investigated;

                  —

                  the methods of analysis used;

                  —

                  the limits of detection.

         (1)  Reason leading to the presence of the unauthorised substance in the feedingstuff, as concluded after an investigation carried out by the competent authority.

      ANNEX III
      Restrictions on the production and use of feed materials of animal origin
      Without prejudice to Articles 3 to 13 and 15 of Directive 95/53/EC, EFTA States should during 2006 undertake a coordinated inspection programme to determine whether restrictions on the production and use of feed materials of animal origin have been complied with.
      In particular, in order to ensure that the ban on feeding processed animal protein to certain animals, as laid down in Annex IV of the Act referred to at Point 7.1.12 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies
          (1)), are effectively applied, EFTA States should implement a specific control programme based on targeted controls. In accordance with Article 4 of Directive 95/53/EC, that control programme should be based on a risk-based strategy where all stages of production and all types of premises where feed is produced, handled and administered are included. The EFTA States should pay special attention to the definition of criteria that can be related to a risk. The weighting given to each criterion should be proportional to the risk. The inspection frequency and the number of samples analysed in the premises should be in correlation to the sum of weightings allocated to those premises.
      The following indicative premises and criteria should be considered when drawing up a control programme:

                        Premises

                        Criteria

                        Weighting

                  Feed mills

                              —

                              Double-stream feed mills producing ruminant compound feed and non-ruminant compound feed containing derogated processed animal proteins.

                              —

                              Feed mills with previous history, or suspicion, of non-compliance.

                              —

                              Feed mills with a large amount of imported feedingstuffs with high protein content such as fishmeal, soybean meal, corn gluten meal and protein concentrates.

                              —

                              Feed mills with a high production of compound feed.

                              —

                              Risk of cross-contamination resulting from internal operational procedures (dedication of silos, control of the effective separation of lines, control of ingredients, internal laboratory, sampling procedures).

                  Border Inspection Posts and other points of entry into the Community

                              —

                              Large/small amount of imports of feedingstuffs.

                              —

                              Feedingstuffs with high protein content.

                  Farms

                              —

                              Home mixers using derogated processed animal proteins.

                              —

                              Farms keeping ruminants and other species (risk of cross feeding).

                              —

                              Farms purchasing feedingstuffs in bulk.

                  Dealers

                              —

                              Warehouses and intermediate storage of feedingstuffs with high protein content.

                              —

                              High volume of bulk feedingstuffs traded.

                              —

                              Dealers in compound feedingstuffs produced abroad.

                  Mobile mixers

                              —

                              Mixers producing for both ruminants and non-ruminants.

                              —

                              Mixers with previous history, or suspicion, of non-compliance.

                              —

                              Mixers incorporating feedingstuffs with high protein content.

                              —

                              Mixers with high production of feedingstuffs.

                              —

                              Large number of farms served including farms which keep ruminants.

                  Means of transportation

                              —

                              Vehicles used for the transportation of processed animal proteins and feedingstuffs.

                              —

                              Vehicles with previous history, or suspicion, of non-compliance.

            As an alternative to these indicative premises and criteria, the EFTA States may forward their own risk assessment to the EFTA Surveillance Authority before 31 May 2006.
      Sampling should be targeted on batches or events where cross-contamination with prohibited processed proteins is most likely (first batch after the transport of feedingstuffs containing animal protein prohibited in this batch, technical problems or changes in production lines, changes in storage bunkers or silos for bulk material).
      Controls could also be extended to the analyses of dust in vehicles, manufacturing equipment and storage areas.
      The minimum number of inspections per year in an EFTA State should be 10 per 100 000 tonnes of compound feed produced. The minimum number of official samples per year in an EFTA State should be 20 per 100 000 tonnes of compound feed produced. Pending the approval of alternative methods, microscopic identification and estimation as described in the Act referred to at Point 31i of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement (Commission Directive 2003/126/EC on the analytical method for the determination of constituents of animal origin for the official control of feedingstuffs
          (2)) should be used for analysing samples. Any presence of prohibited constituents of animal origin in feedingstuffs should be considered as a breach of the feed ban.
      The results of the inspection programmes should be communicated to the EFTA Surveillance Authority using the following formats.
      Summary of checks concerning feeding restrictions for feed of animal origin (feeding of prohibited processed animal proteins)
      A.   Documented inspections

                  Stage

                  Number of inspections comprising checks on the presence of processed animal proteins

                  Number of breaches based on documentary checks etc. rather than laboratory testing

                  Import of feed materials

                  Storage of feed materials

                  Feed mills

                  Home mixers/mobile mixers

                  Intermediaries of feedingstuffs

                  Means of transport

                  Farms keeping non-ruminants

                  Farms keeping ruminants

                  Others:

            B.   Sampling and testing of feed materials and compound feedingstuffs for processed animal proteins

                  Premises

                  Number of official samples tested for processed animal proteins

                  Number of non-compliant samples

                  Presence of processed animal protein from terrestrial animals

                  Presence of processed animal protein from fish

                  Feed materials

                  Compound feedingstuffs

                  Feed materials

                  Compound feedingstuffs

                  Feed materials

                  Compound feedingstuffs

                  for ruminants

                  for non-ruminants

                  for ruminants

                  for non-ruminants

                  for ruminants

                  for non-ruminants

                  At import

                  Feed mills

                  Intermediaries/storage

                  Means of transport

                  Home mixers/mobile mixers

                  On farm

                  Others:

            C.   Summary of prohibited processed animal proteins found in samples of feedingstuffs intended for ruminants

                  Month of sampling

                  Type degree and origin of contamination

                  Sanctions (or other measures) applied

                  1

                  2

                  3

                  4

                  5

                  …

         (1)  OJ L 147, 31.5.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1993/2004 (OJ L 344, 20.11.2004, p. 12).

         (2)  OJ L 339, 24.12.2003, p. 78.

      ANNEX IV
      Individual results of all samples (both compliant and non-compliant) concerning the content of copper and zinc in compound feedingstuffs for pigs

                  Type of compound feedingstuff (animal category)

                  Trace element (copper or zinc)

                  Level found (mg/kg of complete feedingstuff)

                  Reason for exceeding the maximum content (1)

                  Action taken

         (1)  As concluded after an investigation carried out by the competent authority.


				|

		52014PC0434

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL DECISION abrogating Decision 2010/407/EU on the existence of an excessive deficit in Denmark /* COM/2014/0434 final */

			   	Recommendation for a
COUNCIL DECISION
abrogating Decision 2010/407/EU on the
existence of an excessive deficit in Denmark
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 126(12)
thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation from
the Commission,
Whereas:
(1)       By Council Decision 2010/407/EU
of 13 July 2010[1],
following a recommendation from the Commission, it was decided that an
excessive deficit existed in Denmark. The Council noted that according to the
data notified by the Danish authorities in April 2010, the general government
deficit planned for 2010 was 5.4% of GDP, thus above the 3% of GDP Treaty
reference value. The general government gross debt was expected at 45.1% of GDP
in 2010, well below the 60% of GDP Treaty reference value[2].
(2)       On 13 July 2010, in
accordance with Article 126(7) TFEU and Article 3(4) of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of
the excessive deficit procedure[3],
the Council, based on a recommendation from the Commission, addressed a
recommendation to Denmark with a view to bringing the excessive deficit
situation to an end by 2013 at the latest. The recommendation was made public.
(3)       In accordance with Article
4 of the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaties,
the Commission provides the data for the implementation of the procedure. As
part of the application of this Protocol, Member States are to notify data on
government deficits and debt and other associated variables twice a year,
namely before 1 April and before 1 October, in accordance with Article 3 of
Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2009 of 25 May 2009 on the application of the
Protocol (no 12) on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty
establishing the European Community[4].

(4)       When considering whether a
decision on the existence of an excessive deficit should be abrogated, the
Council should take a decision on the basis of notified data. Moreover, a
decision on the existence of an excessive deficit should be abrogated only if
the Commission forecasts indicate that the deficit will not exceed the 3% of
GDP reference value over the forecast horizon[5].
(5)       Based on data provided by
the Commission (Eurostat) in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 479/2009
following the notification by Denmark before 1 April 2014 and on the
Commission 2014 spring forecast, the following conclusions are warranted:
–
The general government deficit stayed within the
3% of GDP reference value in the period 2010-2013, except in 2012, when the
balance was negatively affected by a one-off reimbursement related to a pension
reform in 2011. The one-off reimbursement is estimated to have weakened the
fiscal balance by 1.6% of GDP in 2012. The general government deficit amounted to
2.5% of GDP in 2010, 1.9% of GDP in 2011, 3.8% of GDP in 2012 and 0.8% of GDP
in 2013. The improvement of the fiscal balance was driven by consolidation
measures both on the revenue and expenditure side, in particular through
restricted growth in public consumption.
–
Denmark’s 2014 convergence
programme projects a general government deficit of 1.3% of GDP in 2014 and 2.9%
of GDP in 2015. In 2013-2014, public finances are affected by one-off revenues
coming from the restructuring of existing capital pensions, giving the
opportunity to pay off tax liability of future capital pensions at a favourable
rate. This measure is estimated to boost the fiscal balance by close to 1.8% of
GDP in both years. In 2015, this measure will have no impact, leading to an
expected increase in the public finance deficit. The Commission 2014 spring forecast
projects the general government deficit to 1.2% of GDP in 2014 and to 2.7% of
GDP in 2015. Thus, the deficit is set to remain below the reference value of 3%
of GDP over the forecast horizon.
–
After having improved by 0.7% of GDP in cumulative
terms between 2011 and 2013, the structural balance, i.e. adjusted for the
economic cycle and net of one‑off and other temporary measures, is
forecast to deteriorate by 0.8% of GDP in 2014 (to -0.2% of GDP) and by further
0.3% of GDP in 2015, based on a no‑policy‑change assumption.
–
The Commission 2014 spring forecast
projects the general government gross debt to decrease to 43.5% of GDP in 2014 and
to increase to 44.9% of GDP in 2015, below the 60% of GDP Treaty reference
value.
(6)       The Council recalls that,
starting in 2014, which is the year following the correction of the excessive
deficit, Denmark is subject to the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact
and should maintain its structural balance at or above its medium-term
objective.
(7)       In accordance with Article
126(12) of the Treaty, a Council Decision on the existence of an excessive
deficit is to be abrogated when the excessive deficit in the Member State concerned has, in the view of the Council, been corrected.
(8)       In the view of the
Council, the excessive deficit in Denmark has been corrected and Decision 2010/407/EU
should therefore be abrogated,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
From an overall assessment it follows that
the excessive deficit situation in Denmark has been corrected.
Article 2
Decision 2010/407/EU is hereby abrogated.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Denmark.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
[1]               OJ L 189, 22.7.2010, p. 15.
[2]               The general government deficit for 2010 has subsequently
been revised to 2.5% of GDP, while the general government gross debt has been
revised to 42.8% of GDP.
[3]               OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 6.
[4]               OJ L 145, 10.6.2009, p. 1.
[5]               In line with the “Specifications on the
implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact and Guidelines on the format
and content of Stability and Convergence Programmes”, of 3 September2012. See:
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/pdf/coc/code_of_conduct_en.pdf


title: Council Recommendation of 8 July 2014 on Slovakia’s 2014 national reform programme and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Slovakia, 2014

text:
               29.7.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 247/122

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 8 July 2014
   on Slovakia’s 2014 national reform programme and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Slovakia, 2014
   2014/C 247/23
   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 the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the resolutions of the European Parliament,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Social Protection Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission's proposal to launch a new strategy for growth and jobs, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies, which focuses on the key areas where action is needed to boost Europe's potential for sustainable growth and competitiveness.

               (2)

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

               (3)

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

               (4)

               On 9 July 2013, the Council adopted a Recommendation (3) on Slovakia's National Reform Programme for 2013 and delivered its opinion on Slovakia's updated Stability Programme for 2012‐2016. On 15 November 2013, in line with Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), the Commission presented its opinion on Slovakia's draft budgetary plan for 2014.

               (5)

               On 13 November 2013, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2014 European Semester for economic policy coordination. Also, on 13 November 2013, the Commission, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5), the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which Slovakia was not identified as one of the Member States for which an in‐depth review would be carried out.

               (6)

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

               (7)

               On 23 April 2014, Slovakia submitted its 2014 National Reform Programme and its 2014 Stability Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (8)

               The objective of the budgetary strategy outlined in the 2014 Stability Programme is to ensure the sustainability of the correction of the excessive deficit and to reach the medium‐term objective of a structural deficit of around 0,5 % of GDP by 2017. This medium‐term objective is more stringent than what the Stability and Growth Pact requires. Slovakia's general government deficit was sustainably brought below 3 % of GDP in 2013. The planned (recalculated) change in the structural balance for 2014 would imply that Slovakia deviates significantly from the adjustment path toward its medium‐term objective. In 2015, the planned improvement of 0,3 % of GDP would be in line with Stability and Growth Pact rules. In the later years, the Stability Programme would not ensure adequate adjustment towards the medium‐term objective. Expenditure would grow at a pace consistent with the expenditure benchmark both in 2014 and 2015. The Stability Programme envisages that the largest part of the consolidation effort to reach the medium‐term objective would take place in 2016 and 2017. Overall, the adjustment path towards the medium‐term objective presents risks with respect to compliance with the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. The Stability Programme foresees the general government debt to remain below the 60 %‐of‐GDP reference value during the whole programming period. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning the budgetary projections in the Stability Programme, which has been endorsed by an independent body (Macroeconomic Forecasting Committee), is plausible.
               The already quantified measures do not ensure that the fiscal targets defined by the authorities will be reached. Moreover, not all revenue measures are sufficiently specified and cost‐saving reforms of the State administration remain subject to implementation risks while the public wage bill may miss the budgeted values, as in the past. On the other hand, the figures presented in the Stability Programme do not yet take into account the savings stemming from the activation of the domestic debt brake. According to the Commission services 2014 Spring forecast, which incorporates the impact of the expenditure savings due to the debt brake, the deviation from the adjustment path would be smaller in 2014 than foreseen in the Stability Programme, while a sufficient structural adjustment is projected in 2015, with the expenditure benchmark being met both in 2014 and 2015.

               (9)

               While both the Stability and National Reform Programmes declare an intention to increase growth‐enhancing spending, this does not appear to be fully supported by the underlying plans. Spending on education from the State budget increases in 2014 but declines in the following years. Based on the assessment of the Stability Programme and the Commission forecast, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the opinion that there is a risk of deviation from the adjustment path towards the medium‐term objective in 2014 whereas an appropriate correction is expected in 2015.

               (10)

               In response to requirements of the Treaty on Stability Coordination and Governance, Slovakia introduced a balanced budget rule in November 2013. The budgetary framework is, however, weakened by the lack of binding and enforceable expenditure ceilings. While their introduction was envisaged by the 2013 Stability Programme, the commitment has, so far, not been implemented Slovakia remains a country with a medium risk with respect to the sustainability of public finances and healthcare expenditure is projected to be the main driver of the rising costs of ageing contributing 2 % of GDP, the second highest projected increase in healthcare expenditure of all the Member States. The problems are felt mainly in in‐patient care and primary care. In December 2013, the Government adopted a 2014‐30 Strategic Framework for Health to improve cost‐effectiveness. The Strategy now requires detailed implementation plans.

               (11)

               Slovakia has made progress in improving tax compliance and the implementation of the Action plan to combat tax fraud is in progress with around half of the measures in place. As a result the efficiency of the Slovak tax system appears to have improved in 2013, especially for VAT, although the need to consolidate efforts and strengthen the analytical and audit capacity of the tax administration remains and the unification of the collection of taxes, customs duties and social insurance contributions is behind schedule. To continue growth‐friendly fiscal consolidation, Slovakia could rely more on taxes less detrimental to growth, in particular recurrent property and environmental taxation. In this respect, there has been no progress in reforming recurrent property taxation and linking it to the market value of the property. The revenues from this tax remain low and unchanged in relative terms since 2000. In 2013, the Government implemented measures to reduce a large discrepancy in the tax wedge between employees and self‐employed people, but the substantial gap in the effective tax rates of the two groups observed in 2012 persists.

               (12)

               The labour market continues to face a number of challenges. Most unemployment, which remains at around 14 %, is long term, pointing to the structural nature of the unemployment problem in Slovakia. Slovakia made some progress towards reducing the tax wedge for low‐paid workers who enter the labour market after long‐term unemployment, but the effectiveness of the measures needs to be monitored and assessed. Only limited progress has been made in other areas, namely enhancing the capacity of the public employment services to provide personalised services and strengthening the link between activation measures and social assistance. As regards youth unemployment, the public employment service has limited capacity for early intervention and for tailoring services to job‐seekers profiles and for reaching out to non‐registered youth. There is thus a need to act in these areas, in line with the objectives of a youth guarantee. More targeted measures are needed for the most disadvantaged jobseekers, including Roma, whose employment rate remains very low. The lack of adequate childcare facilities in particular for children under three makes it more difficult for mothers to return to the labour market.

               (13)

               The limited labour market relevance of education hampers the supply of skilled labour. The performance of pupils in compulsory education is below the EU average and has decreased significantly. Public expenditure on education remains low despite recent increases in teachers' salaries; initial training of teachers is being strengthened and practical experience reinforced, but these efforts need to continue. Despite government efforts to reform vocational education and training and subsidise jobs for young people, the youth unemployment rate remains among the highest in the Union and school‐to‐job transition remains cumbersome. The relatively low percentage of job‐oriented bachelor‐level programmes and insufficient cooperation with employers reduces the labour market relevance of tertiary education. Improving the quality of higher education and of cooperation between businesses and education institutions would also help to enhance the innovation capacity of the economy. The plans in the Smart Specialisation Strategy go in the right direction, but need to be effectively implemented. The persistently low provision of good quality early childhood education and care weighs on educational achievements, in particular for Roma. So far, initiatives aimed at improving educational outcomes for Roma pupils are overly reliant on EU co‐financed projects.

               (14)

               In energy, Slovakia has made progress on work for more electricity and gas interconnections with neighbouring countries; however, measures to make the Slovak energy market function better, and in particular to improve the transparency of the tariff‐setting mechanism, are still needed. A package of measures to improve energy efficiency has been proposed for EU financing in the new programming period.

               (15)

               The ongoing reform of public administration will improve client‐orientation, however, the public administration continues to underperform in terms of both quality and efficiency. Persistently high staff turnover linked to the political cycle together with weak human resource management and weak analytical capacity impairs evidence‐based policy‐making. Slovakia continues to score poorly in international indicators of corruption and it has made little progress in improving the efficiency and transparency of its judicial system. The quality of the business environment in Slovakia has deteriorated and support for fast‐growing firms has stagnated. Slovakia recently reformed its public‐procurement rules with the aim to improve transparency and efficiency, but application of these rules remains a challenge and the impact of the 2013 public procurement reform remains limited.

               (16)

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

               (17)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the Stability Programme, and its opinion (6) is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below.

               (18)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has also carried out an analysis of the economic policy of the euro area as a whole. On this basis, the Council has issued specific recommendations addressed to the Member States whose currency is the euro (7). As a country whose currency is the euro, Slovakia should also ensure the full and timely implementation of those recommendations,

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

               1.

               Following the correction of the excessive deficit, reinforce the budgetary measures for 2014 in the light of the emerging gap of 0,3 % of GDP relative to the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact requirements based on the Commission services 2014 Spring forecast. In 2015, ensure the required adjustment of 0,1 % of GDP towards the medium‐term objective taking into account the expected weak economic conditions. Thereafter, until the medium‐term objective is achieved, pursue an annual structural adjustment of 0,5 % of GDP as a benchmark. Further strengthen the fiscal framework, also by ensuring binding and enforceable expenditure ceilings. Improve the long‐term sustainability of public finance by increasing the cost‐effectiveness of the healthcare sector, in particular by rationalising hospital care and management and by strengthening primary care.

               2.

               Improve the efficiency of the tax administration by strengthening its audit, risk assessment and debt collection capacity. Link the basis for real‐estate taxation to the market value of the property.

               3.

               More effectively address long‐term unemployment through activation measures, second‐chance education and tailored quality training. Enhance the capacity of public employment services for case management, personalised counselling and activation of jobseekers, and strengthen the link between activation and social assistance. Effectively tackle youth unemployment by improving early intervention, in line with the objectives of a youth guarantee. Improve incentives for women's employment, by enhancing the provision of childcare facilities, in particular for children below three years of age.

               4.

               Take measures to increase the quality of teaching in order to raise educational outcomes. Reinforce the provision of work‐based learning in companies in vocational education and training. Adapt accreditation, funding and governance measures to encourage the creation of profession‐oriented bachelor‐level programmes. Improve the quality and relevance of the science base and implement plans to foster effective knowledge transfer and cooperation between academia, research and business. Adopt systemic measures to improve access to high quality and inclusive pre‐school and school education for marginalised communities, including Roma and take steps to increase their wider participation in vocational training and higher education.

               5.

               Step up efforts to make the energy market function better, in particular by increasing the public transparency of the regulatory framework and by exploring the determinants of the high electricity network charges, in particular for industrial consumers. Building on the progress made so far, further develop interconnections with neighbouring countries, including with Ukraine, in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding signed in April.

               6.

               Take measures, including by amending the Act on Civil Service, to increase the independence of the public service. Adopt a strategy to improve the management of human resources in public administration. Step up efforts to strengthen analytical capacity in key ministries with a view to adopting evidence‐based policies, and improving the quality of policy impact assessment. Take steps to fight corruption and accelerate efforts to improve the efficiency and quality of the judicial system. Introduce measures to improve the business environment including for SMEs. Step up efforts to improve the efficiency of public procurement.

      Done at Brussels, 8 July 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. C. PADOAN

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

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

      (3)  OJ C 217, 30.7.2013, p. 71.

      (4)  Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on common provisions for monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area (OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p.11).

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

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

      (7)  See page 141 of the current Official Journal.


title: Council Recommendation of 21 February 2017 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (tenth EDF) for the financial year 2015

text:
               23.2.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 58/3

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 21 February 2017
   concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (tenth EDF) for the financial year 2015
   (2017/C 58/03)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) and amended by the Agreement signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (2),
   Having regard to the Internal Agreement between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and on the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies (3) (the ‘Internal Agreement’) setting up, amongst others, the tenth European Development Fund (tenth EDF), and in particular Article 11(8) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 of 18 February 2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund (4), and in particular Articles 142 to 144 thereof,
   Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the tenth EDF as at 31 December 2015 and the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2015, together with the Commission’s replies (5) contained in that Annual Report,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 11(8) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the tenth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

               (2)

               The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the tenth EDF during the financial year 2015 has been satisfactory,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the tenth EDF for the financial year 2015.

      Done at Brussels, 21 February 2017.

            For the Council

            The President

         E. SCICLUNA

      (1)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

      (2)  OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 27.

      (3)  OJ L 247, 9.9.2006, p. 32.

      (4)  OJ L 78, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ C 375, 13.10.2016, p. 287.


title: Council Recommendation of 18 February 2014 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (ninth EDF) for the financial year 2012

text:
               29.8.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 289/3

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 18 February 2014
   concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (ninth EDF) for the financial year 2012
   2014/C 289/02
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) and amended by the Agreement signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (2),
   Having regard to the Internal Agreement between Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the Financing and Administration of Community Aid under the Financial Protocol to the Partnership Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Community and its Member States signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000 and the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies (3) (the ‘Internal Agreement’), setting up, amongst others, the ninth European Development Fund (ninth EDF), and in particular Article 32(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the 9th European Development Fund (4), and in particular Articles 96 to 103 thereof,
   Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the ninth EDF as at 31 December 2012 and the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds (EDFs) (5), concerning the financial year 2012, together with the Commission’s replies contained in that Annual Report,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 32(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the ninth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

               (2)

               The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the ninth EDF during the financial year 2012 has been satisfactory,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the ninth EDF for the financial year 2012.

      Done at Brussels, 18 February 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         G. STOURNARAS

      (1)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

      (2)  OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4.

      (3)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 355.

      (4)  OJ L 83, 1.4.2003, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ C 331, 14.11.2013, p. 261.