title: Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/1111 of 6 July 2016 on the monitoring of nickel in food (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               8.7.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 183/70

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2016/1111
   of 6 July 2016
   on the monitoring of nickel in food
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Nickel is a metal occurring widely in the earth's surface. Nickel is present in food and drinking water due to natural and anthropogenic activity.

               (2)

               The Hellenic Food Authority asked the European Food Safety Authority (‘EFSA’) to evaluate the risk to human health from the presence of nickel in food, particularly in vegetables.

               (3)

               The EFSA Scientific Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM Panel) decided to extend the risk assessment to drinking water and adopted the Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking water (1). This opinion identified reproductive and developmental toxicity as the critical effect for the risk characterization of chronic oral exposure to nickel. Eczematous flare-up reactions and worsening of allergic reactions were identified as the critical effect for acute oral exposure to nickel of nickel-sensitized humans.

               (4)

               Data related to occurrence of nickel in food and drinking water was collected in 15 different European countries. However, as 80 % of the total collected data were collected in one Member State, a geographically more wide spread data set would be needed to verify the occurrence of nickel in food throughout the Union.

               (5)

               For certain food groups considered as main contributors to dietary exposure in the EFSA Scientific Opinion, only limited occurrence data were available. In view of possible future risk management measures, a better view on the nickel content in food commodities belonging to these food groups would be advisable,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

               1.

               Member States should, with the active involvement of food business operators and other interested parties, perform monitoring of the presence of nickel in food during 2016, 2017 and 2018. The monitoring should focus on cereals, cereal-based products, infant formula, follow-on formula, processed cereal-based food for infants and young children, baby food, food for special medical purposes intended specifically for infants and young children, food supplements, legumes, nuts and oil seeds, milk and dairy products, alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages, sugar and confectionery (including cocoa and chocolate), fruits, vegetables and vegetable products (including fungi), dry tea leaves, dry parts of other plants used for herbal infusions and bivalve molluscs.

               2.

               The sampling procedures should be performed in accordance with the provisions laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 333/2007 (2) in order to ensure that the samples are representative for the sampled lot.

               3.

               The samples should be analysed as marketed. The analysis of total nickel should be performed in accordance with Standard EN 13804:2013, ‘Foodstuffs — Determination of elements and their chemical species — General considerations and specific requirements’, preferably by making use of an analytical method based on flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS) or graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS), inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) or mass spectrometry (ICP-MS).

               4.

               Member States, food business operators and other interested parties should provide to EFSA the monitoring data expressed on whole weight basis with the information and in the electronic reporting format as set out by EFSA for compilation into one database by 1 October of 2016, 2017 and 2018. Available occurrence data from preceding years that have not yet been provided should be transmitted according to the same modalities at the earliest occasion.

      Done at Brussels, 6 July 2016.

            For the Commission

         Vytenis ANDRIUKAITIS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  EFSA CONTAM Panel (EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain), 2015. Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of nickel in food and drinking water. EFSA Journal 2015;13(2):4002, 202 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4002

      (2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 333/2007 of 28 March 2007 laying down the methods of sampling and analysis for the control of the levels of trace elements and processing contaminants in foodstuffs (OJ L 88, 29.3.2007, p. 29).


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

text:
               29.7.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 247/42

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 8 July 2014
   on the National Reform Programme 2014 of France and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of France, 2014
   2014/C 247/09
   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 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, 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 (3), which together form the ‘integrated guidelines’. Member States were invited to take the integrated guidelines into account in their national economic and employment policies.

               (3)

               On 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 (4) on France's National Reform Programme for 2013 and delivered its opinion on France's updated Stability Programme for 2012-2017. On 15 November 2013, in line with Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5), the Commission presented its opinion on France'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, adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it identified France 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 5 March 2014, the Commission published the results of its in-depth review for France, under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. The Commission's analysis leads it to conclude that France continues to experience macroeconomic imbalances, which require specific monitoring and decisive policy action. In particular, the deterioration in the trade balance and in competitiveness and the implications of the high level of public sector indebtedness deserve continuous policy attention.

               (8)

               On 5 March 2014, the Commission recommended that France make further efforts to ensure full compliance with the Council recommendation under the Excessive Deficit Procedure.

               (9)

               On 7 May 2014, France 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.

               (10)

               The objective of the budgetary strategy outlined in the 2014 Stability Programme is to correct the excessive deficit by 2015 and reach the medium-term objective in 2017. The Stability Programme confirms the previous medium-term objective of a balanced budget in structural terms, which is more stringent than what the Stability and Growth Pact requires. The Stability Programme plans to bring the deficit to 3 % of GDP in 2015, above the target set in the Council recommendation of 21 June 2013. Thereafter, the planned (recalculated) annual progress towards the medium-term objective is lower than the minimum requirement of 0,5 % of GDP. Overall, the budgetary strategy outlined in the Stability Programme is only partly in line with the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. The Stability Programme projects that the government debt will peak at 95,6 % of GDP in 2014 and 2015 and then drop to 91,9 % in 2017. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning the budgetary projections in the Stability Programme is plausible for 2014 and slightly optimistic for 2015, with GDP projected to grow by 1,0 % and 1,7 % this year and next respectively, against 1,0 % and 1,5 % according to the Commission services 2014 spring forecast. In April 2014, the independent High Council for Public Finances (‘Haut Conseil des finances publiques’) issued an opinion on the macroeconomic scenario of the Stability Programme. The Stability Programme outlines a number of additional measures for 2014, among which the cancellation of ministerial appropriations to be adopted as part of a supplementary budget and the first effects of the EUR 50 billion savings plan announced by the Government.
               On this basis, and also taking into account the fact that the fiscal effort achieved in 2013 was higher than expected at the time of the Commission recommendation, the Stability Programme can be considered to broadly respond to the Commission recommendation. The level of detail of the fiscal consolidation measures is insufficient to credibly ensure the correction of the excessive deficit situation by 2015, as supported by the Commission forecast of a deficit at 3,4 % of GDP next year and an underlying structural adjustment falling well short of the level recommended by the Council. Moreover, risks to the government's targets are tilted to the downside. In particular, part of the additional measures for 2014 announced in the Stability Programme remains to be adopted and the planned amount of savings for 2015 is very ambitious. Based on the Commission forecast, the fiscal effort over 2013-2014 falls short by 0,2 percentage points of GDP in terms of (corrected) change in the structural balance and by at least 0,1 percentage points of GDP in terms of the amount of measures estimated as necessary at the time of the Council recommendation. Based on its assessment of the Stability Programme and the Commission forecast, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the opinion that the measures underpinning the budgetary strategy need to be specified further and that further efforts are needed to comply with the Council recommendation and to ensure an appropriate path towards the medium-term objective thereafter. In particular, additional efforts should be spelled out in the forthcoming amending budget law for 2014.

               (11)

               Given the high and still increasing government debt and the fact that the deadline for correcting the excessive deficit was extended to 2015, it is all the more important that the 2014 budget is strictly implemented and substantial consolidation efforts are firmly pursued in 2015. In particular, public spending should grow at a much slower pace than in previous years, as planned by the Government. Hence, there is a need to further specify the strategy on reducing expenditure by intensifying the ongoing spending review and by redefining, where relevant, the scope of government action. Sizeable short-term savings cannot be achieved without reducing significantly the increase in social security spending, which accounts for nearly half of public sector expenditure.
               This implies curbing healthcare and pension costs, for example through setting more ambitious annual healthcare expenditure targets and temporarily freezing pensions, as well as other social benefits, as currently envisaged by the Government. In addition, the planned new decentralisation law should streamline the various administrative layers in France to eliminate administrative overlap and achieve further synergies, efficiency gains and savings by merging or suppressing administrative layers. In this respect, not only the structural reforms outlined in the Stability Programme will take effect only in the medium term, although the planned timetable has been brought forward since the Stability Programme, but they are also subject to significant implementation risks. The control of local government expenditure should also be strengthened, including by capping the annual increase in local government tax revenue, taking into account existing ceilings on a number of local taxes, while rigorously implementing the planned reduction in grants from the central government. Beyond the need for savings in the short run, the long-term sustainability of public finances is also an issue of concern.
               While public expenditure on health has been kept under control over the last few years, further efforts are needed to improve the cost-effectiveness of the health system. In particular, there is a need to implement further cost-containment policies as the health system is projected to face a significant rise in expenditure over the medium and long term. Areas where efficiency should be enhanced include pharmaceutical and administrative spending as well as hospital care. Lastly, a pension reform was adopted in December 2013 with a view to ensuring the long-term sustainability of the system. However the pension reform will not suffice to eliminate the system's deficit, in particular the deficit arising from schemes for state government officials and employees working in a number of state-controlled companies and All in all, according to projections from the French authorities, the new pension measures will only halve the system's total deficit to some 0,5 % of GDP by 2020. Moreover, the size of the adjustment is subject to significant risks as the macroeconomic scenario underpinning these projections could prove overly optimistic. The newly created pensions monitoring committee (‘Comité de suivi des retraites’) should ensure that the system's deficit is gradually eliminated.

               (12)

               France is among the Member States where the cost of labour is the highest. In particular, the high tax burden on labour reduces firms' profitability and weighs on employment. In order to support cost competitiveness, the Government has taken a number of initiatives to reduce the tax burden on labour. A tax rebate for competitiveness and employment (CICE), equivalent to a decrease in the cost of labour for wages below 2,5 times the minimum wage, was adopted in December 2012. A further EUR 10 billion cut in the cost of labour was announced as part of a ‘responsibility and solidarity pact’ in January 2014. The two measures will account for EUR 30 billion or 1,5 % of GDP, which is commensurate with the overall increase in corporate taxation recorded in 2010-2013 and would only bridge half of the gap between France and the euro area average in terms of employer social security contributions. Moreover, exporting firms, which tend to pay high wages, will benefit less from the CICE than non-exporting firms, thus reducing the impact of the measure on competitiveness. The responsibility and solidarity pact includes a reduction in the cost of labour for low wages and one targeting wages between 1,6 and 3,5 times the minimum wage. The latter measure, expected to enter into force from 2016, would have a more direct impact on exporting firms. Wage-setting in France tends to result in distortions of the wage structure and limit the ability of firms to adjust wages in economic downturns. The High Council for the Financing of Social Protection (‘Haut Conseil du financement de la protection sociale’) has assessed the impact of various scenarios for social security exemptions on employment, but limited emphasis has been put on the impact on wage developments and competitiveness.
               However, although extensive exemptions were granted, for workers paid the minimum wage, the cost of labour at the minimum wage remains high. These exemptions contributed to containing labour costs in 2013, which is a positive development, but the level of the minimum wage in France remains high when compared to other Member States'. The minimum wage should therefore continue to evolve in a manner that is supportive of competitiveness and job creation. France has only few exemptions from the statutory minimum wage and additional efforts could be made to reduce the cost of labour for vulnerable groups.

               (13)

               France's global ranking in a number of international business environment surveys has deteriorated. While efforts have been made as part of a ‘simplification shock’ launched in July 2013 to ease relations between firms and the administration, there is a need for further improving the business environment. In addition, a number of measures considered under the simplification plan still need to be defined and implemented. In particular, specific attention should be paid to regulations from the labour code or to accounting rules linked to specific size thresholds that hamper the growth of French firms. These may play a role in SMEs' difficulties in reaching the size that would allow them to export and to innovate. Policy initiatives to boost R&D spending and innovation by private companies, in particular the tax credit on research and the competitiveness poles, have yielded mixed results so far. The decreasing weight of the industrial sector in the French private sector translates into stagnating R&D spending by private companies despite significant efforts at the firm level. As a consequence, a large proportion of R&D spending remains financed by public money either directly through public research or indirectly through subsidies. The effectiveness of the existing tools should be further improved in order to trigger higher R&D expenditures by private firms and innovation in the private sector. In particular, resources allocated to the competitiveness poles could better foster scale effects and improve the diffusion of innovation. In addition, the effectiveness of the policy could be strengthened by enabling these poles to become real networks of firms with positive spillovers. Lastly, the cost of the tax credit on research is expected to reach EUR 5,8 billion in 2014 (close to 0,3 % of GDP). In spite of the cost of this measure, no ex post assessment of its effectiveness on R&D taking into account latest reforms is available.

               (14)

               Although barriers on legal forms, shareholding requirements or tariffs have been removed for certain professions (e.g. veterinarians, accountants), and new measures for improving competition have been adopted through the recent Consumption Law, some professions still face significant barriers to entry or conduct today (e.g. taxis, the health sector, notaries and legal professions more generally). The principle of numerus clausus for access to many professions (doctors, pharmacists, etc.) is still hampering access to services, and could be reviewed without putting quality and safety at risk. To date no thorough assessment of the need for, and proportionality of, restrictions affecting regulated professions has taken place. In the retail sector, burdensome authorisation requirements for the opening of trade outlets, in particular resulting from urban planning regulations, and the ban on sales at a loss still remain and have an adverse impact on competition and on consumers. To date, no concrete measures have been adopted in France to remove entry barriers in the retail sector. Regarding electricity and gas distribution, regulated prices are being phased out for non-household customers. However, prices continue to be regulated for households and for electricity, they are set below cost levels and the access by alternative suppliers is limited. Regarding energy interconnections, ongoing projects, in particular with Spain, should be completed to reinforce the electricity and gas interconnections with the neighbouring countries. In the railway sector, market entry barriers are still preventing an efficient market functioning. France has not opened up its domestic rail passenger market to competition, except for international services, where there are few new entrants. It has launched a reform of its railway system with a view to making it more financially sustainable. A draft law was presented in October 2013 and is currently being discussed by Parliament. The measures presented include the setting-up of a fully-fledged infrastructure manager within a vertically integrated structure including the incumbent operator. This new structure may hamper access to the network by alternative operators.

               (15)

               France has a high and rising overall tax burden. In 2013, the tax-to-GDP ratio stood at 45,9 %, one of the highest in the Union and up by 3,3 percentage points since fiscal consolidation started in 2010. Against this background, a special committee (‘Assises de la fiscalité’) has provided input to a reform of the tax system. Little progress has been made so far in lowering the statutory rates of personal and corporate income tax and increasing VAT efficiency. Instead, a temporary surcharge on large companies has been extended until 2015 and this will result in the all-in statutory corporate income tax rate peaking at 38,1 % (the statutory rate is already one of the highest in the Union at 33,3 %). The Government has announced the progressive suppression of the corporate social solidarity contribution (‘C3S’) and a gradual reduction in the statutory rate to 28 % by 2020. On the latter, there is no detailed information on the exact timing of the measure. Limited progress has also been made over the last year in reducing and streamlining income tax expenditures. In spite of some progress in the area of environmental taxation (e.g. with the gradual introduction of a carbon tax or ‘contribution climat énergie’), the share of environmental taxation in GDP continues to remain low. In particular, excise duties in France are not indexed with inflation and some important environmentally-harmful subsidies, such as the preferential rate of excise duty for diesel, remain. Lastly, no additional measures were taken in 2013 to address the debt bias in corporate taxation with a view to preventing a further increase in private indebtedness.

               (16)

               Although a number of policy measures were taken in France, the situation on the labour market continued to deteriorate in 2013 and significant challenges remain. Unemployment continued to increase to 10,3 % in 2013 (against 7,5 % in 2008). France's labour market remains segmented with very low levels of transitions from temporary to permanent contracts (the likelihood of moving from a temporary to a permanent job was only 10,6 % in 2010, as against 25,9 % on average in the Union). The inter-professional agreement on securing employment was translated into a law adopted in July 2013. Although this reform is a positive step, its impact remains uneven at this stage. In particular, very few companies have made use of the arrangements for company-level agreements created by the law to increase the flexibility of work conditions in the event of temporary economic difficulties. However, the rate of effective dismissals brought to court has been significantly reduced. While negotiations took place in 2014 between social partners to reform the unemployment benefit system, the new agreement is not expected to substantially reduce the deficit of the system. The cumulated deficit of the unemployment benefit system, which was close to 1 % of GDP in 2013, calls for additional structural measures to ensure its sustainability. In particular, some elements, such as the eligibility conditions, the degressivity of benefits over time or the replacement rates for workers with the highest wages were only marginally modified following the last agreement between social partners in March 2014, and they should be further adapted to ensure that incentives to work are adequate. Thanks to successive pension reforms, the employment rate of workers between 55 and 64 years of age has seen a constant increase in the past three years.
               However, the employment rate among older workers in France (45,6 % in 2013) remains well below the average in the Union ( - 4,5 percentage points below) and only 55 % of older workers in France retire directly after employment (2008-2011). As a result, the unemployment rate for this group has increased strongly over the last few years. Hence, there is a need to strengthen measures to improve their employability while reviewing incentives for them to stay in or return to work.

               (17)

               The 2013 Programme for International Student Assessment survey showed that educational inequality in France is amongst the highest in OECD countries. A sixth of young people in France leave education and training without a qualification. This is particularly worrying as the unemployment rate of young people was 25,5 % at the end of 2013 and as the risk of being unemployed was almost two times higher for the least qualified young people. Schemes to promote apprenticeships should reach in particular the least qualified young people. Some progress in addressing this issue was made through the launch of the reform of compulsory education in July 2013 and the adoption of a law on vocational education and lifelong learning in March 2014. However, it is too early to assess whether these measures will effectively reduce inequalities in the education system and a new plan targeting lower-secondary education schools in disadvantaged areas announced in January 2014, still needs to be implemented. Lastly, the transition from school to work has been facilitated but the number of apprentices decreased in 2012 and the schemes increasingly benefitted students in higher education.

               (18)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of France'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 France 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 (7) below.

               (19)

               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.

               (20)

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

               (21)

               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, France should also ensure the full and timely implementation of those recommendations,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that France take action within the period 2014-2015 to:

               1.

               Reinforce the budgetary strategy, including by further specifying the underlying measures, for the year 2014 and beyond to ensure the correction of the excessive deficit in a sustainable manner by 2015 through achieving the structural adjustment effort specified in the Council recommendation under the Excessive Deficit Procedure. A durable correction of the fiscal imbalances requires a credible implementation of ambitious structural reforms to increase the adjustment capacity and boost growth and employment. After the correction of the excessive deficit, pursue a structural adjustment towards the medium-term objective of at least 0,5 % of GDP each year, and more in good economic conditions or if needed to ensure that the debt rule is met in order to put the high general government debt ratio on a sustained downward path. Step up efforts to achieve efficiency gains across all sub-sectors of general government, including by redefining, where relevant, the scope of government action. In particular, take steps to reduce significantly the increase in social security spending as from 2015 as planned, by setting more ambitious annual healthcare spending targets, containing pension costs, and streamlining family benefits and housing allowances. Set a clear timetable for the ongoing decentralisation process and take first steps by December 2014, with a view to eliminating administrative duplication, facilitating mergers between local governments and clarifying the responsibilities of each layer of local government. Reinforce incentives to streamline local government expenditure, by capping the annual increase in local government tax revenue while reducing grants from the central government as planned. Beyond the need for short-term savings, take steps to tackle the increase in public expenditure on health projected over the medium and long term, including in the area of pharmaceutical spending, and take additional measures when and where needed to bring the pension system into balance by 2020 in a sustainable manner covering all schemes, with a special focus on existing special schemes and complementary schemes.

               2.

               Ensure that the labour cost reduction resulting from the ‘crédit d'impôt compétitivité emploi’ is sustained. Take action to further lower employer social security contributions in line with commitments under the responsibility and solidarity pact, making sure that no other measures offset its effect and that the targeting currently envisaged is maintained. Further evaluate the economic impact of social security contribution exemptions, putting the emphasis on employment, wage developments and competitiveness and take appropriate measures if necessary. Further reduce the cost of labour in a budget neutral way, namely at the lower end of the wage scale in particular through targeted reductions in employer social security contributions taking into account the various wage support schemes.

               3.

               Simplify companies' administrative, fiscal and accounting rules and take concrete measures to implement the Government's ongoing ‘simplification plan’ by December 2014. Eliminate regulatory impediments to companies' growth, in particular by reviewing size‐related criteria in regulations to avoid thresholds effects. Take steps to simplify and improve the efficiency of innovation policy, in particular through evaluations taking into account latest reforms and if necessary an adaptation of the ‘crédit d'impôt recherche’. Ensure that resources are focused on the most effective competitiveness poles and further promote the economic impact of innovation developed in the poles.

               4.

               Remove unjustified restrictions on the access to and exercise of regulated professions and reduce entry costs and promote competition in services. Take further action to reduce the regulatory burden affecting the functioning of the retail sector, in particular by simplifying authorisations for the opening of trade outlets and removing the ban on sales at a loss. While maintaining affordable conditions for vulnerable groups, ensure that regulated gas and electricity tariffs for household customers are set at an appropriate level which does not represent an obstacle to competition. Strengthen electricity and gas interconnection capacity with Spain; in particular, increase the gas interconnections capacity to fully integrate the Iberian gas market with the European market. In the railway sector, ensure the independence of the new unified infrastructure manager from the incumbent operator and take steps to open domestic passenger transport to competition in line with the provisions of, and the calendar that will be decided by, the forthcoming directives.

               5.

               Reduce the tax burden on labour and step up efforts to simplify and increase the efficiency of the tax system. To this end, starting in the 2015 budget, take measures to: remove inefficient personal and corporate income tax expenditures on the basis of recent assessments and the ‘Assises de la fiscalité’ initiative while reducing the statutory rates; take additional measures to remove the debt bias in corporate taxation; broaden the tax base, in particular on consumption; phase out environmentally-harmful subsidies.

               6.

               Take further action to combat labour-market rigidity, in particular take measures to reform the conditions of the ‘accords de maintien de l'emploi’ to increase their take up by companies facing difficulties. Take additional measures to reform the unemployment benefit system in association with social partners, in order to guarantee its sustainability while ensuring that it provides adequate incentives to return to work. Ensure that older workers benefit from adequate counselling and training and re-assess the relevant specific unemployment benefit arrangements with respect to their situation on the labour market.

               7.

               Pursue the modernisation of vocational education and training, implement the reform of compulsory education, and take further actions to reduce educational inequalities in particular by strengthening measures on early school leaving. Ensure that active labour market policies effectively support the most vulnerable groups. Improve the transition from school to work, in particular by stepping up measures to further develop apprenticeship with a specific emphasis on the low-skilled.

      Done at Brussels, 8 July 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. C. PADOAN

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

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

      (3)  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).

      (4)  OJ C 217, 30.7.2013, p. 27.

      (5)  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).

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

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


Avis juridique important

|

31990H0443

90/443/ECSC: Commission Recommendation of 18 July 1990 repealing recommendations on commercial policy measures concerning imports of coal from third countries into the Federal Repubic of Germany

Official Journal L 228 , 22/08/1990 P. 0024 - 0025

*****COMMISSION  RECOMMENDATION  of 18 July 1990  repealing recommendations on commercial policy measures concerning imports of coal from third countries into the Federal Repubic of Germany  (90/443/ECSC)  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:  I  Under recommendation of the High Authority of 28 January 1959 to the Governments of the Member States of the Community on commercial policy measures concerning imports of coal from third countries (1), the High Authority required the Federal Republic of Germany to impose on imports of coal from non-member countries a provisional customs duty of not more than DM 20 per tonne should these imports exceed a zero-duty quota of 5 million tonnes.  It also authorized the Federal Republic of Germany to carry out checks on origin where necessary in implementing the recommendation.  Lastly, it recommended to the Governments of the other Member States that they take, as needed, the measures necessary to ensure the implementation of the measures recommended to the Federal Republic of Germany.  The recommendation was issued in view of the following:  - coal producers in the Community were facing serious difficulties in disposing of coal,  - this situation was particularly evident in the Federal Republic of Germany where coal from third countries was being imported in relatively increased quantities and under such conditions that these imports threatened to cause serious injury to production of coal within the common market with a clear threat to employment,  - existing trade measures in the Federal Republic of Germany at that time were insufficient to deal with the situation.  Under recommendations of 3 November 1959 (2), 3 November 1960 (3), 13 December 1961 (4) and 30 October 1962 (5), the High Authority adopted measures covering the years 1960, 1961, 1962 and 1963.  For subsequent years, the Court of Justice of the European Communities decided (6) that the abovementioned recommendations might continue to serve as a legal basis for national rules providing for the charging of a differential customs duty on coal originating in a non-member country and imported after its release into free circulation in another Member State.  II  Since the adoption of these recommendations, the conditions justifying customs protection in the Federal Republic of Germany have undergone perceptible changes, both with regard to trade and Community measures in favour of the Community coal industry.  As to coal imports into the Federal Republic, while the Federal Republic's imports in 1958 represented 40 % of total Community imports, this share - calculated on the basis of the old Community of Six - had fallen to around 9 % in 1989. In these circumstances, coal is no longer imported in relatively increased quantities in the sense of Article 74 (3) of the Treaty.  As to the Community measures introduced as from 1965 to deal with the problems facing the coal industry, a sequence of Community regimes has been established permitting Member State's intervention in favour of the industry:  - Decision No 3/65 (1), Decision No 27/67 (2), Decision No 3/71/ECSC (3), Decision No 528/76/ECSC (4), Decision No 2064/86/ECSC (5).  The aid regimes put in place by these Decisions have allowed, in particular, the creation of favourable conditions necessary to enable the Community coal industry to adapt to the realities of the energy market. Indeed, the aid envisaged by Member States may be seen as compatible with the proper functioning of the common market, if it contributes to an improvement in the competitiveness of the coal industry, thus helping to ensure better security of supply or to solve the social and regional problems related to changes in the coal industry.  III  In the light of the foregoing, it is clear that the conditions of Article 74 (3) of the Treaty, are no longer met.  Given the exceptional nature of the derogations granted under this provision, and in view of the objectives of Article 3 (f) of the Treaty, the continuation of the arrangements under the abovementioned recommendations is no longer justified.  It is appropriate therefore to repeal the said recommendations as from 1 January 1991, this period being necessary to allow the Federal Republic of Germany to take the required measures,  HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION  Article 1  The recommendations of the High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community of 28 January 1959, 3 November 1959, 3 November 1960, 13 December 1961 and 30 October 1962 are hereby repealed with effect from 1 January 1991.  Article 2  This recommendation is addressed to the Member States.  Done at Brussels, 18 July 1990.  For the Commission  Frans ANDRIESSEN  Vice-President  (1) OJ No 8, 11. 2. 1959, p. 197/59.  (2) OJ No 58, 14. 11. 1959, p. 1150/59.  (3) OJ No 73, 19. 11. 1960, p. 1425/60.  (4) OJ No 82, 19. 12. 1961, p. 1600/61.  (5) OJ No 116, 12. 11. 1962, p. 2683/62.  (6) Judgment of 28 June 1984, case 36/83 - MABANAFT/Hauptzollamt - Emmerich - Reports of cases before the Court of Justice (1984) ECR 2527.  (1) OJ No 31, 25. 2. 1965, p. 480/65.  (2) OJ No 261, 28. 10. 1967, p. 1.  (3) OJ No L 3, 5. 1. 1971, p. 7.  (4) OJ No L 63, 11. 3. 1976, p. 1.  (5) OJ No L 177, 1. 7. 1986, p. 1.


				|

		52011SC0815

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the National Reform Programme 2011 of Slovakiaand delivering a Council opinionon the updated Stability Programme of Slovakia, 2011-2014 /* SEC/2011/0815 final */

			   	Recommendation for a
COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
on the National Reform Programme 2011 of
Slovakia
and delivering a Council opinion
on the updated Stability Programme of Slovakia, 2011-2014
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 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(3)
thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation of the European
Commission[2],
Having regard to the conclusions of the
European Council,
Having regard to the opinion of the
Employment Committee,
After consulting the Economic and Financial
Committee,
Whereas:
(1)
On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to
the European Commission's proposal to launch a new strategy for jobs and
growth, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies, which
will focus on the key areas where action is needed to boost Europe’s potential
for sustainable growth and competitiveness.
(2)
On 13 July 2010, the Council adopted a
recommendation on the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member
States and the Union (2010 to 2014) and on 21 October 2010, adopted a decision
on Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States[3], which together form the
“Integrated guidelines”. Member States were invited to take the integrated
guidelines into account in their national economic and employment policies.
(3)
On 12 January 2011, the Commission adopted the
first Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of a new cycle of economic
governance in the EU and the first European semester of ex-ante and integrated
policy coordination, which is anchored in the Europe 2020 strategy.
(4)
On 25 March 2011, the European Council endorsed
the priorities for fiscal consolidation and structural reform (in line with the
Council’s conclusions of 15 February and 7 March 2011 and further to the
Commission’s Annual Growth Survey). It underscored the need to give priority to
restoring sound budgets and fiscal sustainability, reducing unemployment
through labour market reforms and making new efforts to enhance growth. It
requested Member States to translate these priorities into concrete measures to
be included in their Stability or Convergence Programmes and National Reform
Programmes.
(5)
On 25 March 2011, the European Council also
invited the Member States participating in the Euro Plus Pact to present their
commitments in time to be included in their Stability or Convergence Programmes
and their National Reform Programmes.
(6)
On 28 April 2011, Slovakia submitted its 2011
Stability Programme update covering the period 2011-2014 and on 2 May its 2011
National Reform Programme. In order to take account of the interlinkages, the
two programmes have been assessed at the same time.
(7)
Given its large trade openness and
specialisation in durable manufacturing goods, the Slovak economy was strongly
hit by the collapse in world trade and aggregate demand which followed the
financial crisis. As a result, in 2009, GDP contracted by 4.7% and unemployment
rose to 12%. In 2010, mostly on account of the recovery in external demand, the
economic situation significantly improved in terms of output growth (4.1%
increase in GDP), but it continued to deteriorate in terms of jobs with
unemployment reaching 14.5%, one of the highest levels and largest increases in
the EU. Employment will remain well below the pre-crisis levels in 2011-12. The
crisis induced a significant deterioration of public finances and the general
government deficit increasing from 2% of GDP in 2008 to 8% of GDP in 2009-10.
While still at a relatively low level, the debt-to-GDP ratio also increased by
15 percentage points, reaching 41% of GDP in 2010.
(8)
Based on the assessment of the updated Stability
Programme pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the
opinion that the macroeconomic scenario underlying the programme is plausible
for the initial two years but too favourable towards the end of the programme
period. The programme plans to bring the deficit below the 3% of GDP in 2013,
in line with the deadline set by the Council and further to 2.8% of GDP in
2014. Beyond 2011, the adjustment is broadly expenditure-based. There are
downside risks to budgetary targets mainly due to the implementation of
proposed measures. The programme does not foresee the achievement of the Medium
Term Objective. Meeting the budgetary targets would imply for the period
2011-2013 an average annual fiscal effort of around 1.4% of GDP.
(9)
The deficit is expected to decline substantially
in 2011 thanks to consolidation measures estimated in the Slovak Stability
Programme at some 2.5% of GDP. The adjustment is expected to continue further
in 2011 and 2013 through a reduction in the deficit by around 1 percentage
point of GDP each year. The consolidation effort focuses primarily on the
expenditure side, through savings in expenditure on goods and services and on
the wage bill, which may however be difficult to pursue further on a
sustainable basis. Overall, the challenge for Slovakia is to ensure that
consolidation safeguards and even increases expenditure in growth-enhancing
items, such as education and transport infrastructure. In particular, the low government
gross fixed capital formation, which is expected to decrease further, is a
matter of concern. There is scope to increase revenues from taxes that
are least harmful to growth, such as property and environmental taxes, and to improve
the efficiency of tax collection, especially in view of the large VAT gap.
(10)
Thanks to the reform of 2005, which introduced
multi-annual planning, programme budgeting and several fiscal rules, Slovakia
significantly improved its fiscal framework. However, the current set-up has
not prevented the government from running deficits even in years of high
economic growth. Among the main weaknesses is the fact that the fiscal targets
for the outer years can be easily amended and do not therefore serve the
purpose of anchoring the budgetary process in the years ahead. Expenditure
ceilings as proposed in the Stability Programme update and in the National
Reform Programme could overcome this flaw, provided they embrace the largest
possible share of the general government spending. The current lack of timely published
information in particular for local government and social security funds is an
additional obstacle for the year-on-year monitoring of fiscal developments and
the enforcement of fiscal rules. Finally, Slovakia lacks an independent
institution, which could be directly involved in preparatory works, monitoring,
and assessment mechanisms related to the budget.
(11)
Slovakia is among the Member States that face
significant challenges with regard to the long-term sustainability of public
finances. Ageing-related expenditure is projected to grow faster than the EU
average over the next decades. Pensions would be the main source of this
increase, despite a major reform implemented in 2004-06. The reform did not address
systematically the projected future increases in life expectancy. Additional
future pressures on the pay-as-you-go pillar may come from a strong merit
component for the calculation of pensions and the indexation mechanism. Changes
to the fully-funded pillar in 2008-09, including the requirement for pension
funds to cover incurred losses and the removal of compulsory participation for
new labour market entrants, undermined its viability. The National Reform
Programme and the Stability Programme envisage several adjustments to the pension
system that would address its current shortcomings.
(12)
Tackling sizable increases in unemployment
before it becomes structural is another major challenge. The unemployment rate
currently stands at over 14%. The long-term unemployment rate of 9.2% remains
the highest in the EU and it coexists with strong regional disparities and
skill mismatches. Although the labour market in Slovakia operates under
relatively flexible conditions, the Government plans to increase this
flexibility further through amendments to the Labour code. The unemployment
rate is particularly high amongst low-skilled workers, and their employment
rate is one of the lowest in the EU. This may be due to a relatively high tax
wedge of 34% for the low paid (67% of the average wage), reducing incentives to
hire low-skilled workers. In addition, targeted and well designed active labour
market policies can play a major role in the unemployed back into work. At
present, expenditure and participation in such policies are among the lowest in
the EU and there is little monitoring or evaluation of their effectiveness. A
reform of labour market services and active labour market policies is planned
by the Government by the end of this year.
(13)
Given the importance of an adequately skilled
workforce for improving non-price competitiveness, Slovakia has put forward an
ambitious target to increase higher educational attainment from the current
17.6% to 40% by 2020. With a view to reducing skill mismatches, Slovakia is
reforming school education and vocational education and training, as outlined
in the National Reform Programme. However, tertiary educational attainment
remains well below the EU average, with quality being an issue, as suggested by
a variety of existing indicators. The low education achievements of the
marginalised Roma communities are a major factor contributing to long term
unemployment in Slovakia. Participation of working age people in life long
learning remains very low (2.8%) compared to the EU average, which seems to
have a negative impact on employability and further undermines efforts to
reduce the current high unemployment.
(14)
The need to promote a more growth-enhancing
business environment in Slovakia is recognised in the National Reform
Programme, as are the need to improve the performance of the judiciary, make
public procurement more transparent and fight corruption, although there are
risks related to implementation. However, the problem of weak public
institutions is not sufficiently addressed, and more could be done to
strengthen evidence-based policy-making. Within the public administration, insufficient
capacity and high turnover of staff tend to lower its effectiveness and
transparency, weaken analytical capabilities, and hamper the effective
absorption of EU funds and efficient use of public resources in general. These
factors hamper the growth potential of economy and its competitiveness.
(15)
Slovakia has made a number of commitments under
the Euro Plus Pact[4].
The commitments refer to three areas of the Pact that are relevant for
Slovakia: public finance sustainability, employment, and competitiveness. On
the fiscal side, Slovakia commits to enhancing the long-term sustainability of
public finances and strengthening the national fiscal framework by adopting a
new legal act on fiscal responsibility. Employment measures concern the planed
labour code revision with a view to making the labour market even more
flexible. The competitiveness measures focus on reducing the administrative burden,
tackling corruption, increasing transparency of public procurement and the
judiciary system, and increasing effectiveness of the tax system. The above commitments reflect the reform agenda outlined in the
Stability Programme and the National Reform Programme. They step up ongoing
reform projects related to business environment and enforcement of rights, as
well as open the important issue pensions and long-term sustainability of
public finance. These commitments have been assessed
and taken into account in the recommendations.
(16)
The Commission has assessed the Stability
Programme and National Reform Programme, including the Euro Plus Pact
commitments[5].
It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and
socio-economic policy in Slovakia but also their conformity with EU rules and
guidance, given the overall need to reinforce the overall economic governance
of the European Union by providing EU level input into future national
decisions. In this light, the Commission considers that there are downside
risks to achieving the budgetary targets beyond 2011. The consolidation effort
should safeguard spending on growth-enhancing items and be supported by
measures to strengthen fiscal governance and long-term sustainability of public
finance. Further steps in 2011-12 should focus on strengthening of domestic
sources for growth, addressing the recent surge in unemployment in particular through
a reduction of the tax wedge for low paid workers and a reform of active labour
market policies, addressing skill mismatches, improving the quality of
education and training and the business environment, and strengthening public
institutions and their governance.
(17)
In light of this assessment, also taking into
account the Council Recommendation under Article 126(7) Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union of 2 December 2009, the Council has examined
the 2011 update of the Stability Programme of Slovakia and its opinion[6] is reflected in particular in
its recommendations under (1), (2) and (3) below. Taking into account the
European Council conclusions of 25 March 2011, the Council has examined the
National Reform Programme of Slovakia,
HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Slovakia should
take action within the period 2011-2012 to:
(1)
Implement the 2011 budget as envisaged and
introduce the planned specific measures of a permanent nature in 2012 and 2013
to reduce the deficit below 3% of GDP by 2013. Safeguard growth-enhancing
expenditure and use available room to increase revenue by increasing efficiency
of VAT collection.
(2)
Strengthen fiscal governance by adopting in 2011
and implementing from 2012 binding multi-annual expenditure ceilings, covering
the central government and the social security system. In addition, introduce
an independent Fiscal Council and ensure timely publication of budgetary data
at all levels of the government.
(3)
Enhance the long-term sustainability of public
finances by further adjusting the pay-as-you-go pillar of the pension system,
in particular by linking the pensionable age to life expectancy, and by
creating incentives to ensure the viability of the fully-funded pension pillar
so as to progress towards fiscal sustainability while assuring adequate
pensions.
(4)
Take steps to support labour demand for the
low-skilled unemployed by reducing the tax wedge for low-paid workers. In
addition, introduce measures to increase the administrative capacity of public
employment services with a view to improve targeting, design and evaluation of
active labour market policies, especially for the young and long-term
unemployed.
(5)
Speed up the implementation of planned
education, vocational education and training reforms and take steps to improve
the quality of higher education and its relevance to market needs. Develop a
framework of incentives for both individuals and employers to encourage
participation of the low-skilled in life-long learning.
(6)
Ensure the implementation of planned measures
aimed at a more effective application of public procurement rules, a higher
performance and transparency of the judicial system.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The President
[1]               OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.
[2]               OJ C , p. .
[3]               Maintained for 2011 by
Council Decision 2011/308/EU of 19 May 2011.
[4]               More details on the commitments made under the Euro
Plus Pact can be found in SEC(2011) 733.
[5]               See SEC(2011) 733.
[6]               Foreseen in Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1466/97.


title: Commission Recommendation of 26 April 2010 on the research joint programming initiative Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe

text:
               28.4.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 106/18

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
   of 26 April 2010
   on the research joint programming initiative ‘Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe’
   (2010/238/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 181 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Cultural heritage, in the meaning of the Unesco Conventions concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and the Safeguarding of the intangible Cultural Heritage (1), is a very fragile patrimony and is exposed to multiple risks due to ageing, adverse environmental conditions, and human pressure.

               (2)

               For most European citizens, cultural heritage assets are unique and irreplaceable in their tangible form of historic buildings, collections, sites and movable objects as well as in their intangible value, which includes history, collective memory and identity.

               (3)

               The combined effects of climate change, other environmental changes, human interventions and security risks threaten Europe’s cultural heritage. In particular, climate change may lead to cultural heritage assets being irreversibly damaged or lost because of their fragility and age. In addition, disasters and security risks threaten the physical nature of cultural heritage assets as symbols and icons of European cities and sites.

               (4)

               In order to prevent that those combined risks to Europe’s cultural heritage produce irreversible damage, concerted actions are needed.

               (5)

               At its meeting of 3 December 2009, the Competitiveness Council recognised ‘Cultural Heritage, Climate Change and Security’ (the title was later changed to ‘Cultural Heritage and Global Change: a new challenge for Europe’) as an area where joint programming would provide a major added value to the current, fragmented efforts of Member States in the field of research. It therefore adopted conclusions recognising the need to launch a joint programming initiative on the subject and inviting the Commission to contribute to its preparation. The Council also reaffirmed that joint programming is a process led by Member States, with the Commission acting as a facilitator.

               (6)

               Joint programming of research on cultural heritage and global change would provide for coordination of research in this area, contributing significantly to construction of a fully operational European Research Area on cultural heritage preservation and strengthening Europe’s leadership and competiveness of the research in this field.

               (7)

               In order to achieve the goals set by this Recommendation, Member States should cooperate with the Commission on exploring possible Commission initiatives to assist Member States with developing and implementing the strategic research agenda.

               (8)

               In order for the Commission to be able to report to the European Parliament and to the Council, Member States should report regularly to the Commission on the progress made on this joint programming initiative,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

               1.

               Member States are encouraged to develop a common vision on how cooperation and coordination in the field of research at Union level can help to preserve cultural heritage in all its forms, ensuring its security and sustainable exploitation.

               2.

               Member States are encouraged to develop a common strategic research agenda establishing medium to long-term research needs and objectives in the area of preservation and use of cultural heritage in the context of global change. The strategic research agenda should contain an implementation plan establishing priorities and timelines and specifying the action, instruments and resources required for its implementation.

               3.

               Member States are encouraged to include the following actions, as part of the strategic research agenda and of the implementation plan:

                           (a)

                           identifying and exchanging information on relevant national programmes and research activities;

                           (b)

                           reinforcing joint foresight exercise and technology assessment capacities, especially regarding the impact of global change on cultural heritage assets and the preventive and conservation responses;

                           (c)

                           exchanging information, resources, best practices, methodologies and guidelines;

                           (d)

                           identifying areas or research activities that would benefit from coordination or joint calls for proposals or pooling of resources;

                           (e)

                           defining the modalities for research to be undertaken jointly in the areas referred to in point (d);

                           (f)

                           considering the changing needs of visitors and consumers when defining the objectives for cultural heritage research programmes;

                           (g)

                           sharing, where appropriate, existing research infrastructures or developing new facilities such as coordinated databanks or the development of models for studying deterioration processes;

                           (h)

                           encouraging better collaboration between public and private sectors, as well as open innovation between different research activities and business sectors related to cultural heritage; including tourism, sustainable maintenance and construction or reconstruction of sites, buildings or landscapes and related business services;

                           (i)

                           exporting and diffusing knowledge, innovation and interdisciplinary methodological approaches;

                           (j)

                           creating networks between centres dedicated to cultural heritage research.

               4.

               Member States are encouraged to set up a common management structure in the field of cultural heritage and global change, with a mandate to establish common conditions, rules and procedures for cooperation and coordination and to monitor the implementation of the strategic research agenda.

               5.

               Member States are encouraged to jointly implement the strategic research agenda including via their national research programmes or other national research activities.

               6.

               Member States are encouraged to cooperate with the Commission with a view to exploring possible Commission initiatives to assist Member States in developing and implementing the strategic research agenda, and to coordinating the joint programmes with other Union initiatives in this field.

               7.

               Member States are encouraged to report regularly to the Commission on the progress made on this joint programming initiative.

      Done at Brussels, 26 April 2010.

            For the Commission

         Máire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  For the definition of ‘tangible and intangible cultural heritage’, refer to: Unesco, Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, Paris, 16 November 1972; Unesco, Convention for the Safeguarding of the intangible Cultural Heritage, Paris, 17 October 2003.