title: RECOMMANDATION FOR A REGULATION (EEC) OF THE COUNCIL rectifying Article 3 of Protocol N. 1 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway and adopting provisions for implementation thereof (submitted to the Council by the Commission)

text:
ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DE LA COMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEE DES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM (73) 1781
Vol. 1973/0307
 ---pagebreak--- Disclaimer
Conformément au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983,
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit
règlement.
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Economic
Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243,
27.9.2003, p. 1), this file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom 1.
Februar 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI. L 43 vom 15.2.1983,
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. September 2003
(ABI. L 243 vom 27.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.
 ---pagebreak--- COMMISSION OF THE BUR02BAN COMMUMÏIE:
                                                        COM(73)1781 final
                                                        Brussels , 23 October 1973
                            RECOMMANDATION FOR A
                       REGULATION (EEC ) OF THE COUNCIL
                                                               \
             rectifying Article 3 of Protocol N. 1 "to the
             Agreement "between the European Economic Community
             and the Kingdom of Norway and adopting provisions
             for implementation thereof
                                                                 »
                                                                                'Y
                   ( submitted to the Council by the Commission)
   COM(73 ) 1781 final
 ---pagebreak---                              EIFLuîATCÏîY KEMOR/JTOITM
1 . The Office of the Irish Permanent Representation has found that the time
    table of tariff reductions on various aluminium products which appears
    in Article 3 of Protocol No . 1 to the EEC-Norway Agreement refers only to
    the basic duties of the Common Customs Tariff and that reference ±o the .
    Irish tariff was omitted by mistake .
2 . As the timetable stands , Ireland would have to introduce customs duties for
    certain products hitherto imported at a zero rate of duty , whereas for other
    products the reduction in duties would by far exceed that laid down for the
    Community as originally constituted. This would conflict with other provi
    sions in the Agreement .
3 . However , in order to appreciate the relative importance of this omission ,
    it should be noted that according to the statistics supplied by the Irish
    authorities during negotiations with Norway , there were no imports of the
    produces in question during the period 1968 to 1971 •
4. As the error is one of form , it would seem appropriate to rectify it "by sn
    exchange of letters . It was proposed that the Commission submit to the
    Council for approval the attached drafts of a letter and a regulation to
    implement the corrections .
    The Norwegian authorities have expressed their agreement with the wording
    of the attached letter . It is proposed that Mr. Wellenstein sign on behalf
    of the Community . In this case the Norwegian Ambassador could sign on behalf
    of the Norwegian Government .
 ---pagebreak---                         COMMUNICATION FROM THE C OIcMISS I ON
Tiuetable of tariff reductions on aluminium in the EEC-Norway Agreement
      The Office of the Irish Permanent Representation has drawn the Commission' s
attention to the fact that the timetable of tariff reductions set out in Article 3
of Protocol No . 1 to the Agreement signed on 14 May 1973 between the European
Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway refers only to the basic duties
of the CCT . Reference to the Irish tariff was omitted by mistake .
      If this error were not rectified , Ireland would , as a result , have to intro
duce customs duties on products at present imported at a zero rate of duty and
rnalce excessive reductions for other products . Such a situation would conflict
with other provisions of the Agreement , in particular Articles 3 ( l ) and 5 ( l ) .
      From the wording of the Agreement itself and of Protocol No . 1 , it is evident
that an error is involved and not an intentional oaissioru In this connection
it should be noted that , as regards aluminium , the Council Directives of
5 February 1973 ( Doc . I/30/73 (N 5 ) of 13 February 1973 ) refer both to the
duties to be applied by the Commmity as originally constituted at the various
dates in the transitional period and to the percentage of the basic duty to
which the tariff is to be reduced on those dates . The latter reference permits
the case of Ireland to be covered .
      As the error is one of form, it would seem appropriate to rectify it by an
exchange of letters .
 ---pagebreak---                               RECOMMENDATION FOB A.
                          REGULATION (EEC ) OF THE COUNCIL
           rectifying .article 3 of Protocol N. 1 to the Agreement
           between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom
           of Norway and adopting provisions for implementation
                                     thereof .    .
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community , and
in particular Article 113 thereof ?
Having regard to the recommendation of the Commission ?
Having regard to the Agreement signed on 14 Kay 1973 between the European
Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway ?
Whereas Article 3 of Protocol No , 1 to the Agreement between the European
Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway should be rectified and the
exchange of letters to this effect between the European Economic Community
and the Kingdom of Norway on                 197 3 approved :
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION :
                                    Article 1
The exenange of letters of                1973 between the European Economic
Community and the Kingdom of Norway for the purpose of rectifying Article 3
of Protocol No . 1 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community
and the Kingdom of Norway is hereby approved and confirmed on behalf on the
Community . The texts of the letters are annexed to this Regulation .
 ---pagebreak---                               Article   2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following it3
publication in th-3 Official journal of the   European Communities .
      This Regulation shall "be "binding in its entirety and
      directly applicable in all Member States .
      Done at Brussels                            For the Council
                                                  The President
 ---pagebreak--- Sir .
        I would like to draw to your attention an error of fomh in . Artie, 1$ 3
of Protocol No . 1 to the Agreement between the CES and Norway . This Article
provides for a special; timetable for the reduction of customs duties on. im
ports into the Community as originally constituted and Ireland of products
of subheading No . 76.01 A and of heading No . 76.02 or 76.03              Common
Customs Tariff#
        Owing to          • error the timetable of Article 3 of Protocol No . 1
contains only the schedule of tariff reductions based on the basic duties – as
defined in Article 5       O)       of the .Agreement – applied on 1 January 1972
by the Community as originally constituted . The basic duties applied by Ire
land on 1 January 1972 being different , the schedule of tariff reductions for
Ireland ought to be mentioned separately , as has been done for other products
in Article 1 ( 2 ) and Article 2             l?r.pt,0£<53i No s 1 ,
        The Irish duty applied on 1 January 1972 to products of subheading No
                                                      No
76,01 A and of certain subheadings of headings 76.02 or 76#03 was zero
( Annex '.)• According to Article 3      (1)          of the Agreement these duties
will ramain zero .
        Consequently , it is the understanding of the Community that the time
table of Article 3 should read as follows in respect to those subheadings of
Leadings Ncs76.02 und 76.03 where a positive basic duty on imports into
Ireland was in force on 1 January 1972 s
 ---pagebreak---                                                                         Irelcind
   Timetable          Community as originally constituted. '
                      Rates of duty applicable - percentage    Percentage of basic duties
                                    ad valorem                         applicable
                    Headings Nos     76.02 and ( Subheading ( HeadingsNos76.02 and 76.03 )
                             76.03 )            Ko . 76.01 A )
On the date of
entry into force              11.4                    6,6                  95 %
of the Agreement
1 January 1974                10.3                    6.3                  90 %
1 January 1975                10.2                    5*9                  85 % ■
1 January 1976                 9                      5.6                  75 %
1 January 1977                 7.2                    4.2                  60 %
1 January 1978                 3                      3                    25 >
1 January 1979                 2.7                    2.7                  22.5 1o
1 January 1980                 0                      0                     0 %
             Further proof that this form of timetable corresponds to the intention
    of the negotiators is given in Article 4 ( f.) of Protocol No . 1 ^hich determines
    the duties that can be reimposed when a ceiling has been reached. As far as
    the new Member' States aire concerned this Article    takes account of the progres
    sive realignment of their customs tariff with the Common Customs tariff :
    " In this event , prior to 1 July 1977 *
    ( ii ) Ireland shall reimpose customs duties applicable to third countries".
             I should be grateful if you would confirm the agreement of the Kingdom
    of Norway with the content of this letter .
             Please accept , Sir
 ---pagebreak---                                                                                A3BEX
                                 Tariff Pleading                       Rate of Dirty on imports into Ireland
  L'                        :                                           in force on 1 January 1972
 | 76.01          Unwrotght aluminium ;       aluminium waste
                  and scrap                                                            Pree
i '
| 16.02           Wrought "bars , rods , angles , shapes
                  and sections , of aluminium ; aluminium wire :
'                 ( ii)   Of which no cross-sectional dimension
I ;                       exceeds 5 inches .                                            30%
; 1               ( B ) Other                                    *                     Free
 I 76.03          Wrought plates , sheets and strip , of
                  aluminium :
|                 ( A)    Strip not exceeding 14 inches in width
i                         and -g- inch in thickness , slotted or
!
r
                          otherwis e perforat ed «                                      40%
j                 (B) Other :
                          ( l ) Hot exceeding      inch in thickness                    30%
                          ( 2 ) Other                                I                 Pree
  I
         \ mv _      J
    ( 1 ; The Operation of this duty is at present suspended in so far as it relates to goods of which the thickness
           of ijhe aluminium exceeds l/50th inch, other than pieces of such goods of circular or approximately circular
           shape , the greatest cross-sectional dimension of which does not exceed 25 inches .
                  I
    / \
    F r\ \      ''
           rm . _
    ( 2 ; The operation of this duty is at present suspended in so far as it relates to strip which is -
           (sJ)        imported in rolls ,
           ( t>)       formed to a concave shape ,
           ( c)        of a width not exceeding 2-£- inches ,
           Id}         color red or lacquered on "both sides , and
           (e )        not less than 17/2000 inch nor more than 13/1000 inch in thickness inclusive of colouring or lacquering.


Avis juridique important

|

31995H0326

95/326/EC: Council Recommendation of 10 July 1995 on the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Community

Official Journal L 191 , 12/08/1995 P. 0024 - 0028

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 10 July 1995 on the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Community (95/326/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 103 (2) thereof,Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the Monetary Committee,Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council in Cannes of 26 and 27 June 1995,HEREBY RECOMMENDS:1. Introduction Since the summer of 1994, when the previous broad guidelines were adopted, economic growth in the Community has become firmly established. However, as the recent foreign exchange turmoil following the decline of the dollar has highlighted, significant risks and important policy issues remain unresolved. In order to ensure that the growth prospects are fully taken advantage of to increase employment and enhance convergence, economic policies must respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by the emerging economic expansion.The present set of policy guidelines - prepared and adopted according to Article 103 (2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community - will constitute the reference for the conduct of economic polices in the Community and the Member States. It re-affirms both the objectives proposed in the earlier versions and the conclusions on fighting unemployment reached by the European Council, notably those of the Essen meeting which recommended five years where action had to be intensified. Full implementation of these guidelines will make possible a strengthening of convergence and a realization of the good growth and employment prospects, thus achieving significant reductions in the rate of unemployment, thereby also contributing to the alleviation of the problem of social exclusion.Two policy concerns should be given prominence in the present environment. First, there is the possibility that the favourable impact of economic growth could give rise to 'adjustment neglect`. This may take the form of a weakening commitment, induced by the cyclical improvement of the budget deficit, to resolve in a durable manner the structural fiscal imbalances, or, as employment begins to recover, it may be reflected in a reluctance to initiate and implement those measures which are necessary to remove labour market imperfections. It is essential that either type of 'adjustment neglect` should be vigorously resisted.Secondly, some of the recent exchange-rate changes have not only contributed to greater risks of inflation dispersion. They have also contributed to disturbances in the operation of the internal market and thus threaten the beneficial achievements of economic integration. Those exchange-rate changes which do not correspond to fundamentals will have detrimental effects for all the Member States.It is clear that, in order to minimize the occurrence of such episodes, creating the conditions for exchange-rate stability reflecting economic fundamentals must become a key priority of economic polices in the Community.The present guidelines re-affirm the policy objectives set in the December 1993 and July 1994 guidelines: it is essential for the Community and the Member States to turn the present recovery into strong, sustainable, non-inflationary medium-term growth which respects the environment. Such growth is important in order to reduce unemployment substantially and to make possible the achievement of the necessary degree of convergence to facilitate the transition to stage III of EMU. Achievement of these objectives will continue to require a stable, investment-enhancing, short- and medium-term macroeconomic framework characterized by:- a stability-oriented monetary policy whose task is not undermined by inappropriate budgetary and wage developments,- sustained efforts to consolidate the public finances in most Member States consistent with the objectives of their convergence programmes,- nominal wage trends consistent with the price stability objective; at the same time, real wage developments should be below the increase in productivity in order to strengthen the profitability of employment-creating investment.An essential complement of this framework must be provided by structural reforms aimed at fostering the competitiveness of the economies of the Member States and at improving the functioning of their labour markets. The policies necessary for sustaining long-term growth, increasing employment, and strengthening convergence are mutually consistent.2. Economic Policy Guidelines Price and exchange rate stabilitySubstantial progress in reducing inflation in the Community and the Member States has been made since the beginning of the decade. Nine Member States are now expected on the basis of the spring forecasts published by the Commission to see a rate of inflation in the range of between 2 and 3 per cent in 1996, consistent with the objective of the 1993 and 1994 guidelines, with a further two Member States forecast to experience rates of inflation just above this range next year.Further progress towards price stability must be made. This means, above all, enlarging substantially the group of Member States where inflation performance is in line with the 1994 guidelines. Those Member States that are currently expected to experience rates of inflation between 2 and 3 per cent should maintain a policy aimed at preventing any resurgence of inflationary pressures and at progressing towards or going below 2 %. Other countries need to increase their efforts, in some cases substantially, if they are to meet the guidelines.Exchange-rate changes could have important implications for inflation convergence. Thus, in most Member States which have experienced currency appreciations, inflation convergence is expected to strengthen. In these Member States wage trends are expected in most cases to develop broadly in line with the objective of price stability too. However, it will be necessary to ensure that wage developments do not lead to reductions in investment profitability, particularly in the export-oriented sectors. On the other hand, in the Member States which have experienced currency depreciations, price tensions have increased as well as the risk of an acceleration of inflation. In these countries utmost caution is needed. In particular, in the context of strong economic growth, it will be important to prevent increases in import prices from generating a vicious circle of price and wage inflation. Otherwise, the achieved credibility of moving towards a stability-oriented policy framework would be rapidly lost.The combination of the marked depreciation of the dollar, of unresolved structural problems, of uncertain fiscal and inflation prospects and of other uncertainties in some Member States has led to substantial exchange-rate instability within the Community. Exchange-rate changes exceeding those which are warranted by the differentials in the rates of inflation are detrimental to all Member States; in those where currencies have appreciated, growth prospects, while still generally favourable, have been reduced, while in those where currencies have depreciated inflation prospects will increase and call for additional efforts if medium-term inflation objectives are to be achieved. Moreover, the proper functioning of the internal market has been disturbed as business decisions may be made on the basis of misaligned exchange rates, thereby providing false incentives to special interest groups.By making further progress towards price stability, Member States will improve the prospects for lasting exchange-rate stability, which will, in its turn, help price stability. In this respect, a key role will be played by budgetary policy and by the credibility of fiscal consolidation commitments. Exchange-rate stability will also contribute to reaping the full benefits of the internal market and to improving resource allocation within the Community. All Member States must continue to treat their exchange-rate policies as a matter of common interest within the framework of the European Monetary System and, where appropriate, its exchange-rate mechanism.Sound public financesDespite the consolidation of economic growth, prospects for the resolution of the fiscal imbalances remain uncertain and fiscal convergence continues to be elusive.The failure to realize greater progress in budgetary consolidation leads, in many cases, to a situation where fiscal policy is severely constrained by a high and rising burden of interest payments. It also undermines sustainable price- and exchange-rate stability, increases uncertainty about the course of fiscal policy and erodes the credibility of policies. It contributes to an unbalanced policy mix, and it undermines the task of monetary policy. Over the medium term, persistent fiscal imbalances will have adverse implications for economic growth and for employment creation. A sound fiscal position is a positive supply factor as it opens up the possibility for tax reductions and for increases in productive public investment. Indeed the arguments for budgetary consolidation based on growth and employment considerations are at least as important as those based on the need to improve the sustainability of debt positions and nominal convergence. If budget deficits and debt ratios cannot be reduced in a durable manner now, during a period of relatively strong growth, when will they be reduced?The clear task confronting virtually all the Member States is to ensure that advantage is taken of all growth opportunities to promote fiscal consolidation by reducing structural deficits. The Member States should aim to bring their budget deficits below 3 per cent of GDP as soon as possible, as a first step towards the medium term goal, as set out in the December 1993 guidelines, of close to balance. In some countries, the structure of the pension system calls for surpluses in the public accounts.The current estimates suggest that all the Member States, including those where the forecast deficit for this year will be below the 3 per cent mark, ought to exploit any room provided by economic growth higher than in budget plans, or by a decline in interest rates, to accelerate the process of budget consolidation. This is particularly urgent in the countries which have a high debt-to-GDP ratio. In the event that the exchange-rate turbulence lowers economic growth this year, the efforts to achieve the targets of the convergence programmes should not be relaxed.The forecast for 1996 indicates that, on the basis of the adjustment measures which have been clearly specified so far among those Member States which have set fiscal ceilings in their convergence programmes, the fiscal objectives will not be uniformly met. In several cases adjustment effort is needed to reach the targets set out in convergence programmes. On the basis of Commission forecasts and 'unchanged policy` assumptions, only seven Member States will have deficits below 3 % of GDP. This underlines the high importance of respecting convergence programmes and the need to updated them regularly so that they assist in fulfilling the objectives of the Treaty.In many countries, remaining expenditure increases should be the preferred approach since, apart from their impact on employment, there are undoubtedly limits to higher taxation and social charges. But the rationalization of the public expenditure and taxation systems can also contribute to economic growth and employment creation. In particular, as proposed in the 1994 guidelines, Member States should, where necessary, modify their tax structures in ways which are likely to favour employment and benefit the environment, while public expenditure should be re-allocated away from consumption and in favour of productivity-enhancing spending; in the latter category, strengthening public investment and investment in human capital should be accorded a priority. In this context as well, non-wage labour costs should be reduced, especially, in some countries, at the lower end of the wage and productivity scale. It is important, however, that the necessary reduction in budget deficits is not endangered, which implies that compensatory additional revenues should be found.Fiscal difficulties continue to characterize the public finances of several Member States. In Greece, some progress was made in 1994. However, it is essential that fiscal imbalances be reduced much further in order not to inhibit progress towards convergence. Decisive measures are required, especially on the expenditure side, in a multi-annual framework in order to increase confidence in the course of economic polity. In Italy, the fiscal consolidation measures taken over recent years are beginning to bear fruit. These efforts should be continued through the full implementation of the recently announced three-year plan. In the case of Sweden, which is also confronted with a large deficit, a multiannual adjustment fiscal framework has already been adopted; it is necessary that the adjustment path be adhered to. In Belgium, the high indebtedness necessitates that the fiscal component of the Global Plan be fully implemented and that further progress in reducing the deficit below the 3 per cent of GDP mark be made in order also to achieve a more significant reduction in the debt ratio. In Spain and Portugal, greater efforts are required in the area of fiscal consolidation. Ambitious fiscal objectives are also necessary in the cases of Austria and France. While Finland has not yet prepared a convergence programme, the forecasts suggest that its fiscal objectives are ambitious; efforts to realize these objectives should be sustained. Denmark, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom should continue with the vigorous implementation of their programmes of fiscal consolidation in line with their convergence programmes to ensure that their deficit is below 3 % in 1996. Fiscal developments and prospects in Germany, Ireland and Luxembourg suggest, on the basis of the Commission's forecasts, that they will continue to show no excessive deficit. In Ireland, the decline in the debt ratio is projected to continue at a healthy pace, while the state of the public finances in Luxembourg continues to be robust.Where Member States have to follow stringent budgetary policies to ensure that deficits come below 3 % of GDP, the Community itself should adopt a cautious stance towards the financial perspective established by the European Council in Edinburgh - this perspective sets ceilings and not targets.Promotion of competitiveness and sustainable growthFollowing the proposals of the White Paper on 'Growth, Competitiveness, Employment`, Member States are implementing reforms aimed at strenghtening the forces contributing to growth potential and at enhancing the dynamism and competitiveness of the Community economies.In order to benefit fully from the opportunities offered by the internal market, the transposition of Community directives into national law now stands at 92,4 per cent, the dispersion among the Member States ranging from 86,3 per cent to 98,6 per cent. Progress is required, however, in the areas of insurance, intellectual and industrial property, public procurement, new technologies and services and freedom of movement. Moreover, progress has been slow in the extension of the single market to telecommunication and energy, while the internal market in transport remains incomplete. Furthermore, additional progress is necessary in reinforcing competition rules, reducing State aids, and reducing the role of the public sector. Privatization, to the extent that Member States judge it compatible with their objectives, could further the progress already made in this direction. Several initiatives have been taken at the Community level. Following the recommendation of the Essen Council, a Competitiveness Advisory Group was set up and it prepared a report for the Cannes European Council on the state of Community competitiveness and related issues; moreover, the Group for Legislative and Administrative Simplification has been established. In order to enhance overall competitiveness, several issues are being reviewed at the Community level, including improving financing for SMEs, enhancing labour market flexibility, and improving the quality of vocational training.The growth and employment possibilities flowing from efforts to safeguard the environment should be fully exploited. The report to be prepared for the December 1995 European Council by the Ecofin Council on 'the interrelationship between economic growth and the environment and the consequences this has for economic policy` is of particular importance in this respect.It is essential for the dynamism of the Community economies that investment be stepped up. This relates in particular to investment in education and training and in the infrastructure of the Community, which needs to be developed to match the requirements of the 21st century. The trans-european networks should be realized and the action plan on the information society should be carried through. In addition, for the active promotion of research and development initiatives, greater coordination between Member States' activities is essential. Parallel, coordinated efforts at the level of the Community and of the Member States is an essential building block to realizing the potential for job creation and growth.Employment and the labour marketThe economic recovery, if it progresses as predicted, will absorb the cyclical component of unemployment by 1997. Nevertheless, to continue to reduce unemployment in a significant and progressive manner, it is necessary to achieve a high rate of economic growth over many years and to increase the capacity of that growth to generate jobs. In many Member States, there is a need for stronger differentiation of wages by sectors, geographical areas and qualifications. An essential component of the efforts to achieve the goals is represented by more active and more efficient labour market policies. These must aim at a comprehensive, integrated and coherent effort to bring about structural chance in the fields of the educational systems, labour law, work contracts, contractual negotiation systems and the social security system to improve the functioning of the labour market as a whole.In the context of the White Paper, the European Council identified in Essen the following five priorities for the Member States to address:- improving the employment opportunities for the labour force by promoting investment in vocational training,- increasing the employment intensiveness of growth,- reducing non-wage labour costs,- improving the effectiveness of labour-market policies,- improving measures to help groups which are particularly hard hit by unemployment.Member States were invited by the European Council meeting in Essen to implement measures adapted to their own specific situation and to prepare multiannual programmes spelling out their policy intentions. It is now important that the Member States rapidly adopt these multiannual programmes. As requested by the European Council in Essen, the Council and the Commission will keep close track of employment trends, will monitor the relevant policies of the Member States and will report annually to the European Council on further progress on the employment market, starting in December 1995.Various measures have already been taken, but greater and more determined efforts are needed.Examples of the ways in which active and more efficient labour-market policies contribute to the goal of increasing employment are:(i) they improve the employment opportunities for the labour force by promoting investment in vocational training, notably in SMEs, and thus raise the quality of human capital which improves competitiveness, potential output and the flexibility of, and opportunities for, the workforce;(ii) they increase the employment intensity of growth, without affecting negatively the rate of growth itself, by:- the social partners examining at the appropriate levels whether employment could be promoted, without endangering competitiveness, through innovative forms of work arrangements such as reorganization and new patterns of working time and new combinations of work and leisure,- increasing the incentives to employment by reducing non-wage labour costs, especially at the lower end of the wage and productivity scale, without harming other parts of the labour market; from a macroeconomic point of view this must be achieved in ways which do not compromise the reduction of budgetary deficits or the competitiveness of enterprises. Reforms including, where appropriate, alternative financing sources of social protection systems are therefore required,- encouraging the development of new employment opportunities and activities especially at the regional and local level, e.g. in the environmental and social service spheres;(iii) they promote the employability of people when new jobs become available by:- improving the effectiveness of labour market policy through enhancing flexibility with respect to professional and geographical mobility (particularly for those workers readily employable),- improving measures to help groups which are particularly hard hit by unemployment, through special retraining schemes which concentrate on target groups hit by exclusion.Labour market policies contributing the exploiting these three channels constitute not only an indispensable complement to macroeconomic policies and structural policies in the area of competitiveness but they also contribute to maintaining and reinforcing cohesion and the social consensus inside the Union in the long and difficult process of absorbing unemployment.Done at Brussels, 10 July 1995.For the CouncilThe PresidentP. SOLBES MIRA


title: COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 16 March 1992 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) for the financial year 1990 (92/171/EEC) #

text:
Avis juridique important

|

31992H0171

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 16 March 1992 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) for the financial year 1990 (92/171/EEC)  -

Official Journal L 075 , 21/03/1992 P. 0053 - 0053

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  of 16 March 1992  concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) for the financial year 1990  (92/171/EEC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 206b thereof,  Having regard to the ACP-EEC Convention of Lomé, signed on 28 February 1975,  Having regard to Council Decision 76/568/EEC of 29 June 1976 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community (1),  Having regard to the Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid (2), signed on 11 July 1975, and in particular Article 31 (3) thereof,  Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 27 July 1976 applicable to the Fourth European Development Fund (3), and in particular Articles 64 to 67 thereof,  Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) as at 31 December 1990 and the Court of Auditors' report relating to the financial year 1990  together with the Commission's replies (4),  Whereas, pursuant to Article 31 (3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the management of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) must be given to the Commission according to the procedure provided for in Article 206 of the Treaty;  Whereas the overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) during the financial year 1990 has been satisfactory,  HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1975) (Fourth EDF) for the financial year 1990.Done at Brussels, 16 March 1992.For the  Council  The President  Jorge BRAGA DE MACEDO   (1) OJ No L 176, 1. 7. 1976, p. 8.(2) OJ No L 25, 30. 1. 1976, p. 168.(3) OJ No L 229, 20. 8. 1976, p. 9.(4) OJ No C 324, 13. 12. 1991, pp. 194 to 209 and 305 to 316.


title: Council Recommendation of 12 July 2016 on the 2016 National Reform Programme of Belgium and delivering a Council opinion on the 2016 Stability Programme of Belgium

text:
               18.8.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 299/36

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 12 July 2016
   on the 2016 National Reform Programme of Belgium and delivering a Council opinion on the 2016 Stability Programme of Belgium
   (2016/C 299/09)
   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 November 2015, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2016 European Semester for economic policy coordination. The priorities of the Annual Growth Survey were endorsed by the European Council on 17-18 March 2016. On 26 November 2015, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it identified Belgium as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out. On the same day, the Commission also adopted a recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area. This Recommendation was endorsed by the European Council on 18-19 February 2016 and adopted by the Council on 8 March 2016 (3). As a country whose currency is the euro and in view of the close interlinkages between the economies of the economic and monetary union, Belgium should ensure the full and timely implementation of the Recommendation.

               (2)

               The 2016 country report for Belgium was published on 26 February 2016. It assessed Belgium's progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted by the Council on 14 July 2015 and included an in-depth review under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. On 8 March 2016, the Commission presented the results of the in-depth review. The Commission's analysis leads it to conclude that Belgium is experiencing no macroeconomic imbalances. Weakened external performance combined with high public indebtedness may pose risks in the future. However, recent developments point to an improvement in competitiveness. Corrective measures — comprising wage moderation and reductions in social security contributions — have led to a slowdown in labour cost growth. Public debt is not falling, but short-term risks appear contained.

               (3)

               On 29 April 2016, Belgium submitted its 2016 National Reform Programme and its 2016 Stability Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (4)

               Relevant country-specific recommendations have been addressed in the programming of the European Structural and Investment Funds for the 2014-2020 period. As foreseen in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), where it is necessary to support the implementation of relevant Council recommendations, the Commission may request a Member State to review and propose amendments to its Partnership Agreement and relevant programmes. The Commission has provided further details on how it would make use of this provision in guidelines on the application of the measures linking effectiveness of the European Structural and Investment Funds to sound economic governance.

               (5)

               The 2016 Stability Programme indicates that the budgetary impact of the exceptional inflow of refugees in 2015 and 2016 and of the exceptional security measures in 2016 is significant, and provides adequate evidence of the scope and nature of these additional budgetary costs. According to the Commission, the eligible additional expenditure for refugees amounted to 0,03 % of GDP in 2015, while the incremental impact in 2016 is estimated at 0,17 % of GDP for refugee-related expenditure and at 0,12 % of GDP for security measures. The provisions set out in Article 5(1) and Article 6(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 cater for this additional expenditure, in that the inflow of refugees as well as the severity of the terrorist threat are exceptional events, their impact on Belgium's public finances is significant and sustainability would not be compromised by allowing for a temporary deviation from the adjustment path towards the medium-term budgetary objective. Therefore, the required adjustment towards the medium-term budgetary objective for 2015 has been reduced to take into account additional refugee-related costs. Regarding 2016, a final assessment, including on the eligible amounts, will be made in spring 2017 on the basis of observed data as provided by the Belgian authorities.

               (6)

               Belgium is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact and subject to the transitional debt rule. On 18 May 2016, the Commission issued a report under Article 126(3) of the TFEU, as Belgium did not make sufficient progress towards compliance with the debt rule in 2015. The analysis concluded that the debt criterion should be considered as complied with. In its 2016 Stability Programme, the Government plans a gradual improvement of the headline balance from a deficit of 2,6 % of GDP in 2015 to — 0,2 % of GDP in 2019. The revised medium-term budgetary objective, set at a balanced budgetary position in structural terms, is expected to be reached by 2018. However, the recalculated structural balance (5) still points to a structural deficit of 0,4 % of GDP in 2018. According to the Stability Programme, the government debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to peak at 106,2 % of GDP in 2016 and to decline to 99,6 % by 2019. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning these budgetary projections is plausible. However, the measures needed to support the planned deficit targets from 2017 onwards have not been sufficiently specified. Based on the Commission 2016 spring forecast, there is a risk of a significant deviation from the recommended adjustment in 2016 as well as in 2016 and 2017 taken together, under unchanged policies. In case the budgetary impact of the exceptional inflow of refugees as well as of exceptional security measures was excluded from the assessment, the projected deviation in 2016 is no longer significant. Belgium is not forecast to comply with the transitional debt rule in 2016 and, following the end of the transition period, with the debt reduction benchmark in 2017. Based on its assessment of the Stability Programme and taking into account the Commission 2016 spring forecast, the Council is of the opinion that there is a risk that Belgium will not comply with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact. Therefore further measures will be needed to ensure compliance in 2016 and 2017.

               (7)

               High public indebtedness is coupled with weak export and competitiveness performance. External performance has deteriorated since 2000, as global market share losses show, and has been aggravated by exports being oriented mainly towards less dynamic markets. While the negative trend in market shares has been halted in recent years, the accumulated losses remain substantial. Specialisation in market segments with a higher exposure to price competition also hampers the country's export capacity. This is particularly difficult to reconcile with the country's high labour costs. Unit labour costs have risen fast until recently as a result of low productivity growth and, in particular, fast wage growth. The latter can be attributed to certain features of the wage-setting system. On the one hand, margins for real wage growth were repeatedly set too high. On the other hand, inflation repeatedly exceeded expectations and inflation in neighbouring countries. The structural difference in core inflation rates between Belgium and neighbouring countries is caused mainly by higher price growth for services and a suboptimal functioning of the retail market. This inflation was transmitted to wage growth through the general practice of automatic wage indexation. Together, these factors eroded the effectiveness of the highly coordinated wage-setting system. To halt the decline in competitiveness and its negative impact on export performance and employment, the Belgian authorities have intervened in the wage-setting process in recent years. Wage moderation measures have been imposed, including limits on real wage increases and the suspension of wage indexation schemes. In addition, reductions in social security contributions are being enacted. However, to ensure the durability of the correction, structural reforms of the wage-setting framework are needed in line with the Council recommendations in past years. Although the Government intends to revise the Law of 1996 on the promotion of employment and the safeguarding of competitiveness, which provides the basis on which social partners set the ‘wage norm’ every two years, little progress has been made so far. Ensuring a more formal link between wages and productivity would help lock in recent gains and prevent a recurrence of past problems.

               (8)

               Some progress has been made on the overall functioning of the labour market. Incentives to work have been strengthened by measures to reduce the tax wedge and changes in the unemployment benefit system. However, sizeable employment differentials between specific population groups continue to result in a chronic underutilisation of labour, especially among the low-skilled, young people, older people and people with migrant backgrounds. In addition, marginal tax rates upon entering or re-entering the labour market create inactivity and low wage traps for second income earners and specific household types such as single people and single parents. It is therefore important to fine-tune and implement policies aimed at encouraging moves from inactivity or unemployment to employment. Educational inequalities linked to socioeconomic background are amongst the highest in the Union and poor educational outcomes partly explain the observed underperformance on the labour market of people with a migrant background. The education reforms currently being introduced are particularly designed to tackle early school leaving, and improve the provision of early childhood care and early childhood education. The relevant authorities seek to improve the quality and relevance of the vocational system. These reforms could facilitate a smoother transition towards a knowledge-intensive and increasingly service-oriented economy and alleviate skills mismatches and persistent labour shortages in certain occupations. In addition, the very low activity and employment rates of older workers call for policies to promote active ageing and to support the labour market demand for older workers. Finally, additional tax measures to facilitate the take-up of work could be warranted.

               (9)

               There is still considerable scope for improving the non-cost dimension of external competitiveness. To safeguard and enhance current welfare levels, more emphasis should be placed on productivity gains and investment in knowledge-based capital. This requires a sustained push towards products and associated services higher up the value chain, on the basis of stronger performance in innovation and utilising the results of R & D. Despite its high-quality public research system, Belgium has relatively few fast-growing firms in innovative sectors. Furthermore, the business climate is hampered by administrative and regulatory burdens, which inhibit the creation and expansion of companies. Shareholding requirements and restrictions on voting rights, legal form and multidisciplinary activities hold back the market dynamism for business services. Operational restrictions and restrictions on where retailers can establish their premises have the same effect in the retail sector. Moreover, there are shortcomings in the efficiency of the justice system, with low penetration of information and communications technology. Together, these factors constitute significant barriers to private investment. Substandard infrastructure and lengthy bottlenecks also undermine productivity growth and investment. The transport network represents the most pressing investment gap. Belgium's geographical location, coupled with the presence of international organisations, has enabled the country to attract many distribution centres, logistics bases and the international headquarters of various companies. However, there is a growing problem of peak-hour traffic congestion, which undermines the country's attractiveness for foreign investors and has major economic and environmental costs. Belgium is also expected to fall short of its 2020 greenhouse gas emission reduction target and suffers from serious air pollution problems. Given the high concentration of economic activity around the capital and the ports, the most urgent challenges are upgrading basic rail and road transport infrastructure and eliminating missing links between the main economic hubs. At the same time, it is important to tackle peak-hour congestion by improving public transport services, optimising traffic management and eliminating market distortions and adverse tax incentives, such as favourable treatment for company cars.

               (10)

               Another challenge relates to the adequacy of domestic power generation and the security of supply in general. Unplanned outages of several nuclear installations have raised concerns about the way to balance electricity demand and supply, while the repeatedly revised timetable for phasing out the nuclear park has created a climate that is not conducive to taking long-term investment decisions. This is reflected in higher imports and increasingly impaired security of supply. Although short-term supply risks have abated, longer-term investment needs are still considerable. In addition to substantial new domestic production capacity and a further increase in interconnections, smart grids are needed to develop demand-side management. Given the considerable lead time for large projects in the energy sector and the high need for replacement capacity over the next decade, swift action will be required, in particular in the form of a suitable legal framework that promotes the increase in generation capacity.

               (11)

               Belgium has made some progress in reforming the tax system, in particular by shifting taxes from labour to other tax bases, which will gradually reduce the tax wedge on labour. Reductions in personal income taxation and employers' social security contributions will also help narrow the gap. Nevertheless, the tax system remains complex, with tax bases eroded by specific exemptions, deductions and reduced rates. Some of these involve revenue losses, economic distortions, and a heavy administrative burden. In addition, the tax shift does not seem to be neutral from a budgetary point of view. There is still considerable scope for improving the design of the tax system by further broadening tax bases, allowing for both lower statutory rates and fewer distortions. There is also considerable potential for a ‘green’ tax shift which stems from, among other things, the favourable tax treatment of company cars and fuel cards, which contribute to pollution, congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.

               (12)

               In recent years, Belgium has made important progress in reforming its pension system. The law of 10 August 2015 on the rise in pensionable age, the conditions for early pensions and the minimum age for survivors' pensions establishes a new minimum age and career length criteria for ordinary pensions. However, even after the recent reforms, the projected increase in the pension expenditure ratio remains substantial. An automatic link to changes in life expectancy, as recommended in the past, would reduce medium- and long-term sustainability risks. In this respect, the Government has announced its intention to introduce a credit-based pension system, which could allow for automatic adjustment mechanisms in response to demographic developments. These issues will continue to be monitored closely under the European Semester.

               (13)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Belgium's economic policy and published it in the 2016 country report. It has also assessed the Stability Programme and the National Reform Programme and the follow-up given to the recommendations addressed to Belgium in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Belgium but also their compliance with EU rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the EU's overall economic governance by providing EU-level input into future national decisions. The recommendations under the European Semester are reflected in recommendations (1) to (3) below.

               (14)

               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,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Belgium take action in 2016 and 2017 to:

               1.

               Achieve an annual fiscal adjustment of at least 0,6 % of GDP towards the medium-term budgetary objective in 2016 and in 2017. Use windfall gains to accelerate the reduction of the general government debt ratio. Agree on an enforceable distribution of fiscal targets among all government levels. Simplify the tax system and remove distortive tax expenditures.

               2.

               Carry out the intended review of the Law of 1996 on the promotion of employment and the safeguarding of competitiveness in consultation with the social partners. Ensure that wages can evolve in line with productivity. Ensure the effectiveness of labour market activation policies. Move forward with education and vocational training reforms and provide training support for disadvantaged groups, in particular people from a migrant background.

               3.

               Boost the capacity to innovate, in particular by fostering investment in knowledge-based capital. Increase competition in the business services sector and the retail sector by removing unwarranted operational and establishment restrictions. Address shortfalls in investment in transport infrastructure and energy generation capacity.

      Done at Brussels, 12 July 2016.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. KAŽIMÍR

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  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).

      (3)  OJ C 96, 11.3.2016, p. 1.

      (4)  Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

      (5)  The structural balance as recalculated by the Commission based on the information in the Stability Programme, following the commonly agreed methodology.

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


title: Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/193 of 10 February 2016 addressed to the Hellenic Republic on the urgent measures to be taken by Greece in view of the resumption of transfers under Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

text:
               13.2.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 38/9

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2016/193
   of 10 February 2016
   addressed to the Hellenic Republic on the urgent measures to be taken by Greece in view of the resumption of transfers under Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The transfer of applicants for international protection under Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) (hereafter ‘the Dublin Regulation’) has been suspended by Member States since 2011, following two judgments the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union (2) which identified systemic deficiencies in the Greek asylum system which risked to constitute a violation of the fundamental rights of applicants for international protection transferred from Member States to Greece under Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 (3).

               (2)

               The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has been monitoring the situation in Greece since the M.S.S v Belgium and Greece judgment was delivered by the European Court of Human Rights in 2011 on the basis of progress reports that Greece is required to submit as evidence of the execution of the judgment and on the basis of evidence from NGOs and international organisations, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), that operate in Greece.

               (3)

               As a result of the M.S.S judgment, Greece committed to reform its asylum system on the basis of a national Action Plan on Asylum Reform and Migration Management presented in August 2010 and revised in January 2013 (hereafter ‘the Greek Action Plan’).

               (4)

               With a view to addressing the serious shortcomings in the Greek asylum system, the Greek authorities also requested the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) to provide emergency support to Greece in 2011. Operational support was provided by EASO from 1 April 2011 to 31 December 2014. During this period, the deployment of Asylum Support Teams assisted Greece to support the establishment of the three new services, as well as with the reception of vulnerable persons, the treatment of the pending applications for international protection, in particular at second instance, and with capacity-building in absorption of European Union funds. On 4 December 2014, Greece made a further request to EASO for Special Support, and support is now committed to be provided until the end of May 2016.

               (5)

               The situation in Greece also prompted the Commission to bring a number of infringement proceedings against Greece, concerning, inter alia, insufficient access to the asylum procedure, insufficient reception capacity and poor reception conditions, including in detention facilities, failure to fingerprint irregular migrants and asylum applicants, the lack of appropriate treatment of unaccompanied minors, and the lack of adequate legal assistance for appeals. The present recommendation is without prejudice to any pending or future infringement proceedings which the Commission may bring related to matters raised in the present recommendation.

               (6)

               At the same time, the Commission has been taking concerted action to help remedy the shortcomings in Greece's asylum system. The Commission has monitored the implementation by Greece of the measures envisaged in the Greek Action Plan and provided financial and technical support, placing an emphasis, inter alia, on the actions aimed at addressing the concerns raised in its infringement proceedings. A Commission Staff Working Document was presented to the Council in October 2014 (4) which provided an assessment of the implementation of the Greek Action Plan and highlighting the remaining short-comings in the Greek asylum system which needed urgent attention.

               (7)

               The Commission has worked very closely with all interested Member States and Norway, through regular ad hoc meetings of the so-called ‘Friends of Greece’ Group, chaired by the Commission. This Group is a forum for the exchange of information on the state of implementation of the Greek Action Plan, inter alia, allowing interested Member States to propose practical cooperation measures and was last held on 27 February 2015. In addition, the participation of EASO, Frontex, UNHCR and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) aims to ensure the availability of up-to-date information on the situation on the ground.

               (8)

               Greece has been allocated a significant amount of European Union funding for the period 2014-2020 to assist it with national measures taken in the field of asylum and migration. Under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund it has been allocated a total of EUR 294,5 million, and under the Internal Security Fund — Borders and Visas a total of EUR 214,8 million. A further EUR 133 million has been awarded to Greece under emergency assistance since 2014. In addition, significant funding was provided to Greece under the European Refugee Fund in the years 2008-2013, including emergency funding totalling over EUR 50,6 million.

               (9)

               The challenges faced by Greece have been significantly exacerbated by the very large increase in arrivals of migrants during the course of 2015, placing enormous pressures on Greece's resources and capacity to deal with the large influx of migrants from outside the European Union, including large numbers of persons likely to be in need of international protection. In 2015, over 868 000 irregular migrants arrived in the Greek islands, creating an unprecedented migratory and humanitarian crisis requiring urgent action.

               (10)

               In May 2015, the Commission presented its European Agenda on Migration (5), and on 14 September 2015, the Council adopted a Decision to relocate 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection from Italy and Greece, of which 16 000 are to be relocated from Greece (6). On 22 September 2015, the Council adopted a Decision to relocate a further 120 000 persons from Italy and Greece, among which at least 50 400 persons are to be relocated from Greece (7). Altogether, under these two Council Decisions at least 66 400 persons are thus due to be relocated from Greece to other Member States over a period of 2 years (8).

               (11)

               In September 2015, the implementation of the ‘hotspot’ approach started in Greece and Italy, with support from the Commission, Frontex, EASO and Europol agencies. On 29 September 2015, the Commission adopted a Communication outlining the immediate operational, budgetary and legal measures under the European Agenda on Migration, and calling for the full roll-out of the Relocation Scheme and Migration Management Support Teams working in ‘hotspot’ areas. To this end, Greece presented a Roadmap on the implementation of the relocation scheme and hotspots to the Council on 1 October 2015 that outlines certain actions to be prioritised to ensure implementation of agreed pending actions in the areas of asylum and reception.

               (12)

               Following the European Leaders' Summit of 25 October 2015, Greece committed to increase reception capacity to 30 000 places by the end of 2015, and to provide rent subsidies and host family programmes for at least 20 000 more persons with the support of UNHCR. This total of 50 000 accommodation places is aimed at addressing the reception needs of both irregular migrants and asylum seekers in Greece, including of those potentially eligible for relocation to other Member States.

               (13)

               At its meeting on 8-9 December 2015, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe assessed the execution of the M.S.S judgment. It welcomed the creation of the new administrative authority for immigration; took note of the increase of the accommodation capacity for asylum seekers as well as of the planned further increase and called upon the authorities to ensure sustainable and undisrupted operation of open reception facilities and provision of services that meet adequate standards. It strongly invited the authorities to pursue their efforts, regarding the living conditions of asylum seekers generally and unaccompanied minors in particular (9).

               (14)

               On 15 December 2015, the Commission adopted a Communication on the progress made by Greece on the implementation of the hotspots that outlined the developments in Greece in connection with the establishment of the hotspots scheme on the Aegean islands (10). This report highlighted the new commitments made by Greece and the UNHCR to increase reception capacity, but also stressed the need for Greece to improve reception capacity at the hotspots and on the mainland, in particular for unaccompanied minors and vulnerable persons.

               (15)

               There have been some significant improvements in the Greek asylum system, as part of Greece's reforms under its Action Plan (2010-2014). Three new administrative services independent from the Hellenic Police have been established: the First Reception Service, the Appeal Authorities (established in 2011, but currently not operational) and the Asylum Service (since 2013). Material conditions in reception and detention centres have shown some improvement since 2011, and some of the detention facilities with the poorest conditions have been shut down. However, further efforts still need to be made by Greece in order to ensure that its asylum system is functioning in full alignment with the requirements of Union law.

               (16)

               The Greek Asylum Service has seven operational Regional Offices in Attica, Lesvos, Northern Evros, Southern Evros, Rhodes and Thessaloniki, including a newly opened Regional Asylum Office at the island of Samos in 2016. Three Asylum Units are also operational in the areas of Amygdaleza, Patra and Xanthi, which examine applications for international protection submitted by irregular migrants in detention. Adequate staffing needs to be in place for these offices and units to be fully operational. The Greek authorities have moreover committed to open a total of 13 Asylum Regional Offices. Greece still needs to complete the establishment and adequate staffing of all remaining Regional Asylum Offices, as foreseen in the 2015 Relocation Roadmap, in order to allow for effective access to the asylum procedure throughout the whole country.

               (17)

               Some increase in the reception capacity for asylum seekers in Greece took place but it is not yet sufficient. Greece should ensure that the reception conditions in open and closed reception accommodation, including psychosocial services and access to the necessary health care and treatment, are in compliance with the standards required under the relevant Union legislation, notably the Reception Conditions Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (11), and that they are continuously maintained. Greece should also ensure sustainability of the reception conditions through appropriate funding from the national budget or, to the extent available, through allocated EU funds.

               (18)

               In order to guarantee access to an effective remedy for asylum seekers, Greece established an Appeals Authority, responsible for the operation of Appeal Committees, competent for examining the appeals submitted against the negative first instance decisions of the Asylum Service. At the end of September 2015, the Appeal Committee ceased to operate because their mandate expired, with the result that first instance rejection decisions can be lodged but cannot be dealt with. Consequently, no access to a system of effective remedy is currently available in practice. This situation also undermines the effective implementation of the Relocation procedure, in the cases where an applicant submits an appeal against a relocation or transfer decision.

               (19)

               Many asylum-seekers are currently not provided with the necessary free legal aid to enable them to pursue an appeal against a first instance asylum decision, in accordance with the EU rules. The relevant provisions of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (12) have not yet been transposed into national law or implemented.

               (20)

               There have been improvements in the procedures for identifying vulnerable persons in Greece. The Asylum Service, in cooperation with EASO and UNHCR, has put in place a screening procedure aimed at identifying vulnerable applicants, such as unaccompanied minors with a view to ensuring their support during the procedure. For unaccompanied minors, Greece has reported that an identification and age assessment procedure for unaccompanied minors is being followed within the first reception procedure and the asylum procedure. Additionally, a procedure is being established for the treatment of unaccompanied minors by the Hellenic Police, the First Reception Service and the Asylum Service.

               (21)

               The guardianship system for unaccompanied minors should receive further attention, as Public Prosecutors appointed to represent minors do not have the necessary resources to handle the large number of cases referred to them and there is no institution or body in place that prosecutors can refer to in order to appoint permanent guardians. Concrete steps should also to be taken to ensure that all unaccompanied minors are immediately referred to special accommodation centres and assisted by specialised personnel.

               (22)

               The suspension of transfers under the Dublin Regulation to Greece since 2011 has significantly undermined the effectiveness of the functioning of the Dublin system in the European Union. The inability to carry out such transfers also undermines the effectiveness of the relocation measures adopted for the benefit of Greece in September 2015, in particular by removing one of the main incentives for migrants not to engage in secondary movements to other Member States.

               (23)

               Greece has taken important steps to improve the functioning of its asylum system but shortcomings remain. Greece should therefore as a matter of urgency undertake all the necessary steps to allow a resumption of Dublin transfers, in particular, that persons transferred under the Dublin Regulation would enjoy all of the rights to which they are entitled under the European Union's asylum acquis, including access to an effective remedy against a negative decision on an application for international protection and adequate reception conditions.

               (24)

               This recommendation identifies the main actions that should be taken by Greece on the outstanding shortcomings.

               (25)

               Regular reporting by Greece on the progress being made in implementing these actions, as well as other relevant elements including any forthcoming reports from UNHCR and other relevant organisations, should clarify the assessment of whether the conditions are such as to allow for Member States to resume individual transfers to Greece under the Dublin Regulation, bearing in mind that the volume of transfers and the categories of persons to be transferred should correspond to the specific progress made.

               (26)

               Any resumption of Dublin transfers to Greece should also take into account that Greece still receives a large number of potential asylum seekers on a daily basis, and it should be avoided that an unsustainable burden is placed on Greece.

               (27)

               The responsibility for deciding on such resumption of transfers lies exclusively with Member States' authorities under the control of the courts, which may make preliminary references to the European Court of Justice on the interpretation of the Dublin Regulation,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
   (1)   Greece should ensure that the reception conditions provided to applicants for international protection in Greece meet the standards required by Directive 2013/33/EU.
   (2)   Greece should take the necessary steps to ensure effective access to the asylum procedure throughout the territory of Greece, by the establishment of all 13 Regional Asylum Offices and their maintenance. The Regional Offices of the Asylum Service should in particular be sufficiently staffed to allow for these offices to be fully operational and capable of processing all asylum applications. The necessary human resources required should be calculated by reference to the number of asylum applications made in Greece over the last year. To this end, the necessary recruitment procedures should be finalised as a matter of urgency.
   (3)   Greece should ensure that the Appeal Committees are fully operational and adequately staffed, so as to ensure an effective remedy before them against all newly taken administrative decisions on applications for international protection and that they clear all pending requests for judicial review of administrative decisions on applications for international protection as soon as possible and in any event by the end of 2016.
   (4)   Greece should ensure that all asylum-seekers are provided with the necessary legal aid in procedures for judicial review of administrative decisions on applications for international protection, in accordance with the requirements of EU law and that the legislative framework for the provision of legal aid is adopted and implemented swiftly.
   (5)   Greece should ensure that the current structures for the identification and treatment of vulnerable applicants, including unaccompanied minors, are brought up to the standards required by the EU asylum acquis and specified in particular in Articles 21 to 25 of Directive 2013/33/EU and Article 25 of Directive 2013/32/EU. This means that Greece should ensure that the necessary legal framework is in place and that it is fully implemented so as to guarantee that the needs of vulnerable persons, including unaccompanied minors, are suitably catered for, in particular in terms of accommodation and guardianship.
   (6)   Greece should ensure that all 50 000 reception places which Greece had committed to putting in place by the end of 2015, in cooperation with the UNHCR, are fully operational as soon as possible and that adequate funding is made available so that essential maintenance and services such as catering and sanitation are continuously ensured.
   (7)   Greece should ensure that programming of EU funds and funding from the national budget caters for the implementation of these recommendations.

      Reporting on Actions Taken

               (8)

               Greece is requested to report to the Commission by 4 March 2016 and then on a monthly basis on its progress in implementing the measures identified in this Recommendation.

      Done at Brussels, 10 February 2016.

            For the Commission

         Dimitris AVRAMOPOULOS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31).

      (2)  M.S.S v Belgium and Greece (No 30696/09) and NS v Secretary of State for the Home Department C-411/10 & C-493/10.

      (3)  Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ L 50, 25.2.2003, p. 1), which has been replaced by Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.

      (4)  SWD(2014) 316 final.

      (5)  COM(2015) 240 final.

      (6)  OJ L 239, 15.9.2015, p. 146.

      (7)  OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 80.

      (8)  OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 80 and OJ L 239, 15.9.2015, p. 146.

      (9)  1243rd meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (8-9 December 2015).

      (10)  COM(2015) 678 final, 15 December 2015.

      (11)  Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96) and OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.

      (12)  Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60).


Avis juridique important

|

31981K3792

Commission Recommendation No 3792/81/ECSC of 22 December 1981 extending the Community system of monitoring imports into the Community of certain iron and steel products covered by the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community and originating in third countries

Official Journal L 377 , 31/12/1981 P. 0065

*****COMMISSION  RECOMMENDATION No 3792/81/ECSC  of 22 December 1981  extending the Community system of monitoring imports into the Community of certain iron and steel products covered by the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community and originating in third countries  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Article 74 thereof,  Whereas by recommendation No 587/80/ECSC (1), as prolonged by recommendation No 3384/80/ECSC (2) and modified by recommendation No 1997/81/ECSC (3), the Commission instituted a Community monitoring system in respect of imports into the Community of certain iron and steel products covered by the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community;  Whereas the reasons which originally led the Commission to introduce these measures, namely the need to ensure fuller information on both expected imports and the terms under which they are made, continue to apply;  Whereas it is therefore necessary to prolong the said Community monitoring system,  HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:  Article 1  The period of validity of recommendation No 587/80/ECSC is hereby extended to 31 December 1982 (4).  Article 2  This recommendation is addressed to the Member States.  Done at Brussels, 22 December 1981.  For the Commission  Wilhelm HAFERKAMP  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 65, 11. 3. 1980, p. 5.  (2) OJ No L 355, 30. 12. 1980, p. 42.  (3) OJ No L 194, 17. 7. 1981, p. 20.  (4) The import documents delivered during November and December 1981 may continue to be used in accordance with Article 1 (3) of recommendation No 587/80/ECSC for a period of two months from the date of their delivery even if this period ends in 1982.