title: EFTA Surveillance Authority Recommendation of 2 December 2009 on notifications, time limits and consultations provided for in Article 7 of the Act referred to at point 5cl of Annex XI to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services), as adapted by Protocol 1 thereto

text:
               13.10.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 302/12

         EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION
   of 2 December 2009
   on notifications, time limits and consultations provided for in Article 7 of the Act referred to at point 5cl of Annex XI to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services), as adapted by Protocol 1 thereto
   2011/C 302/05
   THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY (1),
   HAVING REGARD to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (2),
   HAVING REGARD to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, and in particular Article 5(2)(b) thereof,
   HAVING REGARD to the Act referred to at point 5cl of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services) (3) (Framework Directive), as adapted by Protocol 1 thereto, and in particular Article 19(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Under the regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, national regulatory authorities are obliged to contribute to the development of the internal market by cooperating with each other and with the Authority in a transparent manner in order to ensure the development of consistent regulatory practice and the consistent application of the Directives making up the regulatory framework.

               (2)

               To ensure that decisions taken at national level do not have an adverse effect on the single market or on the objectives pursued by the regulatory framework, national regulatory authorities must notify the Authority and other national regulatory authorities of those draft measures stipulated in Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive).

               (3)

               As an additional requirement, national regulatory authorities must obtain the Authority’s authorisation for obligations covered by the second subparagraph of Article 8(3) of the Act referred to at point 5cj of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities) (4) (Access Directive), as adapted by Protocol 1 thereto, which is a separate process.

               (4)

               The Authority will give national regulatory authorities, if they so request, the opportunity to discuss any draft measures before formal notification of such measures under Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) and Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive). Where, pursuant to Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), the Authority has indicated to the national regulatory authority that it considers that the draft measure would create a barrier to the functioning of the EEA Agreement or where it has serious doubts as to its compatibility with the EEA law, the national regulatory authority concerned should be given an early opportunity to express its views regarding the issues raised by the Authority.

               (5)

               Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) lays down certain binding time limits for the consideration of notifications under Article 7.

               (6)

               To ensure the effectiveness of cooperation and the consultation mechanism set out in Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) and to guarantee legal certainty, clear rules dealing with the main procedural aspects of the notifications made under Article 7 were put in place by the EFTA Surveillance Authority Recommendation of 14 July 2004 on notifications, time limits and consultations provided for in Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (5). Recommendation of 14 July 2004 should be replaced by this Recommendation with a view to further simplifying and improving the notification process and ensure a harmonised application of the regulatory framework on electronic communications networks and services across the European Economic Area.

               (7)

               To give further guidance to national regulatory authorities on the content of draft measures and to increase legal certainty on the completeness of a notification, certain minimum information should be provided on what a draft measure should contain in order to be properly assessed.

               (8)

               Account has to be taken of the need to ensure effective assessment, on the one hand, and to simplify administration as far as possible, on the other hand. In this respect, the notification mechanism should not involve any unnecessary administrative burden on the national regulatory authorities. It would also be beneficial to clarify procedural arrangements in the context of the second subparagraph of Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive).

               (9)

               To help simplify the examination of a notified draft measure and to make the process quicker, national regulatory authorities should use standard formats for notifications.

               (10)

               By common accord between the EFTA States, Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement, the English language is to be used as the working language for all communications between the EFTA States and the Authority. This is without prejudice to the rights of private parties and undertakings to submit documents in any of the EEA languages, as provided for by the EEA Agreement.

               (11)

               In order to improve the efficiency of the notification mechanism, to increase legal certainty for national regulatory authorities and market players and to ensure timely implementation of regulatory measures, it is desirable that a notification by a national regulatory authority covering a market analysis also includes the remedies proposed by the national regulatory authority to address the market failures identified. Where the draft measure relates to a market which is found to be competitive and remedies already exist in relation to that market, the notification should also include the proposals for withdrawing those obligations.

               (12)

               In general, a short notification form should be used for certain categories of draft measures in order to reduce the administrative burden on national regulatory authorities and the Authority. However, notification of these categories by way of the standard notification procedure remains possible.

               (13)

               Where a national regulatory authority intends to withdraw regulatory obligations in relation to markets not included in the Authority’s Recommendation of 5 November 2008 on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation (6), notification of such a draft measure under Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) should be made by means of the short notification form.

               (14)

               Where a national regulatory authority carries out a review of a market that has been found to be effectively competitive in a previous review and finds once more that this market is effectively competitive, the notification should be made by means of the short notification form.

               (15)

               National regulatory authorities frequently amend technical details of the remedies imposed to take account of changes in economic indicators (such as equipment, labour, inflation, cost of capital, property rental rates, etc.), or to update forecasts or assumptions. Changes or updates of details which do not change the nature or the general scope of remedies (e.g. extension of reporting obligations, details of required insurance coverage, amounts of penalties, or delivery times) should be notified by means of the short notification form. Only material changes to the nature or scope of the remedies that have an appreciable impact on the market (such as price levels, amendments to the methodologies used to calculate costs or prices, determination of glide paths) should be notified by the standard notification procedure.

               (16)

               With regard to certain markets (in particular, voice call termination markets), national regulatory authorities may come to the same conclusion as in a previous review and wish to impose remedies on further operators (e.g. new entrants) with a similar customer base or total turnover to operators covered by a previous review which do not materially differ from draft measures already notified. The short notification form should be used for these draft measures.

               (17)

               A draft measure notified by means of a short notification form will in principle not give raise to comments by the Authority to the national regulatory authority in accordance with Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive).

               (18)

               In order to increase transparency on a notified draft measure and to facilitate the exchange of information about such measures between national regulatory authorities both the standard and the short notification forms should contain a summarised description of the main elements of the notified draft measure.

               (19)

               The European Regulators Group for Electronic Communications Networks and Services established by Commission Decision 2002/627/EC (7) has recognised the need for these arrangements.

               (20)

               To meet the objectives laid down in Article 8 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), in particular the need to ensure consistent regulatory practices and consistent application of that Directive, full compliance with the notification mechanism laid down in Article 7 is essential.

               (21)

               In order to allow for a consistent application of the regulatory framework across the whole of the EEA and to reap the full benefits of the cooperation between the national regulatory authorities, it is vital that the flow of information between both the EFTA and the EC pillars of the EEA is ensured. A specific adaptation to Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) to this effect contained in the EEA Joint Committee Decision No 11/2004 provides that ‘The exchange of information between the national regulatory authorities of the EFTA States on the one hand and the national regulatory authorities of the EC Member States on the other hand shall pass through the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the Commission.’.

               (22)

               The EFTA Communications Committee has delivered its opinion in accordance with Article 22(2) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive),

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS:

               1.

               Terms defined in Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) and the specific directives have the same meaning when used in this Recommendation. In addition:

                           (a)

                           ‘Recommendation on relevant markets’ means EFTA Surveillance Authority Recommendation of 5 November 2008 on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation (8) and any subsequent Recommendation on relevant markets;

                           (b)

                           ‘notification’ means the notification to the Authority by a national regulatory authority of a draft measure pursuant to Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) or a request pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), accompanied by the standard notification form or the short notification form as provided in this Recommendation (Annex I and Annex II).

               2.

               Notifications should exclusively be made through an electronic notifications system operated by the Authority.
               Documents sent through the electronic notifications system will be presumed to have been received by the addressee on the day on which they were sent.
               Notifications will be registered in the order in which they are received.

               3.

               Notifications will become effective on the date on which the Authority registers them (date of registration). The date of registration will be the date on which a complete notification is received by the Authority.
               Notice will be given on the Authority’s website and by electronic means to all national regulatory authorities of the date of registration of the notification, the subject matter of the notification and any supporting documentation received.

               4.

               Draft national measure, together with the reasoning on which the measure is based, as well as the standard notification form (Annex I) and the short notification form (Annex II), shall be in the English language.

               5.

               Draft measures notified by a national regulatory authority should be accompanied by the documentation needed for the Authority to carry out its tasks. For those draft measures that fall under point 6 below and are notified by means of the short notification form, the Authority does not need in principle any additional documentation to carry out its tasks.
               Draft measures should be duly substantiated.

               6.

               The following draft measures should be made available to the Authority by means of the short notification form contained in Annex II:

                           (a)

                           draft measures concerning markets which have been removed from or have not been previously listed in the Recommendation on relevant markets, either where the market is found to be competitive by the national regulatory authority, or where the national regulatory authority considers that the three cumulative criteria referred to in point 2 of the Recommendation on relevant markets for identifying markets that are susceptible to ex ante regulation are no longer met;

                           (b)

                           draft measures concerning markets which, while included in the Recommendation on relevant markets in force, had been found to be competitive in a previous market review, and remain competitive;

                           (c)

                           draft measures that change the technical details of previously imposed regulatory remedies and do not have an appreciable impact on the market (e.g. annual updates of costs and estimates of accounting models, reporting times, delivery times); and

                           (d)

                           draft measures concerning a relevant market that has already been analysed and notified in relation to other undertakings, where the national regulatory authorities imposes similar remedies on other undertakings, without materially changing the principles applied in the previous notification.

               7.

               The Authority, in close cooperation with the national regulatory authorities, will monitor the practical consequences of the short notification procedure with a view to make any further adjustments as may be necessary or add other categories of draft measures that should be notified using the short notification form.

               8.

               Draft measures not falling under point 6 above should be made available to the Authority by means of the standard notification form set out in Annex I. The draft measures notified should include each of the following where applicable:

                           (a)

                           the relevant product or service market, in particular, a description of the products and services to be included in and excluded from the relevant market on the basis of demand-side and supply-side substitutability;

                           (b)

                           the relevant geographic market, including a reasoned analysis of the competitive conditions on the basis of demand-side and supply-side substitutability;

                           (c)

                           the main undertakings active on the relevant market;

                           (d)

                           the results of the analysis of the relevant market, in particular the findings as to the presence or absence of effective competition, together with the reasons therefore. For these purposes, the draft measure should contain an analysis of the market shares of the different undertakings and a reference to other relevant criteria, as appropriate, such as barriers to entry, economies of scale and scope, vertical integration, control of infrastructure not easily duplicated, technological advantages or superiority, absence of or low countervailing buying power, easy or privileged access to capital markets/financial resources, overall size of the undertaking, product/services diversification, highly developed distribution and sales network, absence of potential competition and barriers to expansion;

                           (e)

                           where appropriate, the undertakings to be designated as having, individually or jointly, significant market power within the meaning of Article 14 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) and the reasoning, evidence and any other relevant factual information in support of such designation;

                           (f)

                           the results of the prior public consultation carried out by the national regulatory authority;

                           (g)

                           the opinion issued by the national competition authority, where provided;

                           (h)

                           evidence that, at the time of notification to the Authority, appropriate steps had been taken to notify the draft measures to the national regulatory authorities in all other EFTA States, to the extent that the electronic system operated by the Authority does not ensure such notification;

                           (i)

                           in the case of notification of draft measures which fall within the scope of Articles 5 or 8 of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive) or Article 16 of the Act referred to at point 5cm of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services) (9) (Universal Service Directive), as adapted by Protocol 1, the specific regulatory obligations proposed to address the lack of effective competition in the relevant market concerned or, in cases where a relevant market is found to be effectively competitive and such obligations have already been imposed in respect of that market, the draft measures proposed to withdraw those obligations.

               9.

               Where, for the purposes of the market analysis, a draft measure defines a relevant market which differs from those in the Recommendation on relevant markets, national regulatory authorities should provide sufficient reasoning of the criteria used for such a market definition.

               10.

               Notifications made in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive) should also contain adequate reasoning as to why obligations other than those listed in Articles 9 to 13 of the Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive) should be imposed on operators with significant market power.

               11.

               Notifications falling within the scope of Article 8(5) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive) should also contain adequate reasoning as to why the intended draft measures are required to comply with international commitments.

               12.

               Notifications made by means of the standard notification procedure that include the applicable information within the meaning of point 8 above will be presumed to be complete. Where the information, including documents, contained in the notification is incomplete in any material respect, the Authority will inform the national regulatory authority concerned within five working days and specify to what extent it considers the notification to be incomplete. The notification will not be registered until the national regulatory authority concerned has provided the requisite information. In such cases, for the purposes of Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), the notification will become effective on the date on which the Authority receives the complete information.

               13.

               Without prejudice to point 8 above, following registration of a notification, the Authority, acting in accordance with Article 5(2) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), may seek further information or clarification from the national regulatory authority concerned. National regulatory authorities should endeavour to provide the information requested within three working days, where this is readily available.

               14.

               The Authority will verify whether or not the draft measure made available by means of a short notification form falls within the categories listed under point 6 above. Where the Authority considers this not to be the case, it will inform the national regulatory authority concerned within five working days and ask the notifying regulatory authority to submit the draft measure by means of the standard notification procedure.

               15.

               Where the Authority makes comments in accordance with Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), it will notify the national regulatory authority concerned by electronic means and publish such comments on its website.

               16.

               Where a national regulatory authority makes comments in accordance with Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), it shall communicate those comments to the Authority and the other national regulatory authorities by electronic means.

               17.

               Where, in application of Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), the Authority considers that a draft measure would create a barrier to the functioning of the EEA Agreement or it has serious doubts as to its compatibility with EEA law and in particular the objectives referred to in Article 8 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive); or it subsequently withdraws its objections, or takes a decision requiring a national regulatory authority to withdraw a draft measure, it will notify the national regulatory authority concerned by electronic means and post a notice on its website.

               18.

               With regard to notifications made pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), the Authority, acting in accordance with Article 14(2) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), will normally take a decision authorising or preventing the national regulatory authority from adopting the proposed draft measure within a period not exceeding three months. The Authority may decide to extend this period for a further two months in view of the difficulties raised.

               19.

               A national regulatory authority may decide at any time to withdraw the notified draft measure, in which case the notified measure will be removed from the register. The Authority will publish a notice to that effect on its website.

               20.

               Where a national regulatory authority adopts the draft measure after receiving comments from the Authority or another national regulatory authority made in accordance with Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive), it shall communicate to the Authority and other national regulatory authorities of the manner in which it took the utmost account of the comments made.

               21.

               When requested by a national regulatory authority, the Authority will informally discuss a draft measure prior to notification.

               22.

               Any period of time referred to in Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) or in this Recommendation will be calculated as follows:

                           (a)

                           where a period expressed in days, weeks or months is to be calculated from the moment at which an event occurs, the day during which that event occurs shall not be counted as falling within the period in question;

                           (b)

                           a period expressed in weeks or in months shall end with the expiry of whichever day in the last week or month is the same day of the week or falls on the same date as the day during which the event from which the period is to be calculated occurred. Where, in a period expressed in months, the day on which it should expire does not occur in the last month, the period shall end with the expiry of the last day of that month;

                           (c)

                           time periods shall include public holidays, Saturdays and Sundays, save where these are expressly excluded or where the periods are expressed in working days. Public holidays means all days designated as such by the EFTA State concerned or by the Authority;

                           (d)

                           working days mean all days other than public holidays, Saturdays and Sundays.

                     Should a time period end on a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday, it shall be extended until the end of the first following working day.
               The Authority publishes a list of public holidays designated by the EFTA States and by the Authority each year in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union. The EFTA States shall transmit a list of public holidays to the Authority upon request.

               23.

               The Authority, together with the national regulatory authorities, will evaluate the necessity of reviewing this Recommendation as appropriate after the date established in the review of the regulatory framework, as incorporated into the EEA law, for the transposition by the EFTA States into national law.

               24.

               This Recommendation is addressed to the EFTA States.

      Done at Brussels, 2 December 2009.

            For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

         Per SANDERUD

            President

         Kurt JÄGER

            College Member

      (1)  Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Authority’.

      (2)  Hereinafter referred to as the ‘EEA Agreement’.

      (3)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33. Directive as amended by Regulation (EC) No 717/2007, OJ L 171, 29.6.2007, p. 32.

      (4)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 7.

      (5)  Adopted by Decision No 193/04/COL (OJ L 113, 27.4.2006, p. 10).

      (6)  EFTA Surveillance Authority Recommendation of 5 November 2008 on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation in accordance with the Act referred to at point 5cl of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services), as adapted by Protocol 1 thereto. Hereinafter referred to as the Recommendation on relevant markets. The Recommendation was adopted by Decision No 688/08/COL of 5 November 2008 adopting a Recommendation on relevant markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation and published in OJ C 156, 9.7.2009, p. 18 and EEA Supplement No 36, 9.7.2009, p. 1.

      (7)  OJ L 200, 30.7.2002, p. 38, as amended.

      (8)  See footnote 5 above.

      (9)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 51.

      ANNEX I

         Standard form relating to notifications of draft measures pursuant to Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)

      (Standard notification form)

         INTRODUCTION

      The standard notification form specifies the summary information to be provided by national regulatory authorities to the Authority when notifying draft measures under the standard notification procedure in accordance with Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive).
      The Authority intends to discuss issues relating to the implementation of Article 7 with national regulatory authorities, especially during pre-notification meetings. Accordingly, national regulatory authorities are encouraged to consult the Authority on any aspect of the standard notification form and in particular on the kind of information they are requested to supply or, conversely, the possibility of dispensing with the obligation to provide certain information in relation to the market analysis carried out pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive).

         CORRECT AND COMPLETE INFORMATION

      All information submitted by national regulatory authorities should be correct and complete and summarised on the standard notification form set out below. The standard notification form is not meant to replace the notified draft measure, but it should enable the Authority and the national regulatory authorities of other EEA States to verify that the notified draft measure does indeed contain, by reference to the information contained in the standard notification form, all the information needed for the Authority to carry out its tasks under Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive) within the time frame set therein.
      The information required should be set out in the sections and paragraphs of the standard notification form, with cross-references to the body of the draft measure where this information is to be found.

         LANGUAGE

      The standard notification form should be completed in the English language.

         Section 1

         Market definition

      Please state where applicable:

                  1.1.

                  The relevant product/service market. Is this market mentioned in the Recommendation on relevant markets?

                  1.2.

                  The relevant geographic market.

                  1.3.

                  A brief summary of the opinion of the national competition authority, where provided.

                  1.4.

                  A brief overview of the results of the public consultation to date on the proposed market definition (e.g. how many comments were received, which respondents agreed with the proposed market definition, which respondents disagreed with it).

                  1.5.

                  Where the relevant market is different from those listed in the Recommendation on relevant markets, a summary of the main reasons justifying the proposed market definition by reference to Section 2 of the Authority’s Guidelines of 14 July 2004 on market analysis and the assessment of significant market power under the regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (1), and the three main criteria mentioned in recitals 6 to 14 of the Recommendation on relevant markets and Section 2.2 of the Explanatory Note accompanying the corresponding Commission’s Recommendation on relevant markets (2).

         Section 2

         Designation of undertakings with significant market power

      Please state where applicable:

                  2.1.

                  The name of the undertakings designated as having, individually or jointly, significant market power.
                  Where applicable, the name of the undertakings considered no longer to have significant market power.

                  2.2.

                  The criteria used to designate an undertaking as having significant market power, individually or jointly, or not.

                  2.3.

                  The name of the main undertakings (competitors) active in the relevant market.

                  2.4.

                  The market shares of the undertakings mentioned above and the basis for calculation of market share (e.g. turnover, number of subscribers).

            Please provide a brief summary of:

                  2.5.

                  The opinion of the national competition authority, where provided.

                  2.6.

                  The results of the public consultation to date on the proposed designation(s) as undertakings having significant market power (e.g. total number of comments received, numbers agreeing/disagreeing).

         Section 3

         Regulatory obligations

      Please state where applicable:

                  3.1.

                  The legal basis for the obligations to be imposed, maintained, amended or withdrawn (Articles 9 to 13 of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive)).

                  3.2.

                  The reasons for which the imposition, maintenance or amendment of obligations on undertakings is considered proportional and justified in the light of the objectives laid down in Article 8 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive). Alternatively, indicate the paragraphs, sections or pages of the draft measure where such information is to be found.

                  3.3.

                  Where the remedies proposed are other than those set out in Articles 9 to 13 of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), please indicate what ‘exceptional circumstances’ within the meaning of Article 8(3) of that Directive justify the imposition of such remedies. Alternatively, indicate the paragraphs, sections or pages of the draft measure where such information is to be found.

         Section 4

         Compliance with international obligations

      In relation to the third intend of the first subparagraph of Article 8(3) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), please state where applicable:

                  4.1.

                  Whether the proposed draft measure intends to impose, amend or withdraw obligations on market players as provided for in Article 8(5) of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive).

                  4.2.

                  The name of the undertakings concerned.

                  4.3.

                  What international commitments entered into by the EFTA State are to be met.

         (1)  EFTA Surveillance Authority Guidelines of 14 July 2004 on market analysis and the assessment of significant market power under the regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services referred to in Annex XI of the Agreement on the European Economic Area. Adopted by Decision No 194/04/COL, OJ C 101, 27.4.2006, p. 1 and the EEA Supplement No 21 of 27.4.2006, p. 1.

         (2)  Explanatory Note accompanying the Commission Recommendation on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation in accordance with Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, SEC(2007) 1483 final.

      ANNEX II

         Short form relating to notifications of draft measures pursuant to Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive)

      (Short notification form)

         INTRODUCTION

      The short notification form specifies the summary information to be provided by national regulatory authorities to the Authority when notifying draft measures under the short notification procedure in accordance with Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework Directive).
      It is not necessary to provide a copy of the draft regulatory measure or to attach any other document to the short notification form. However, it is necessary to indicate the Internet reference through which the draft measure can be accessible in the short notification form.

                              1.

                              One or several markets which has/have been removed from or have not been previously listed in the Recommendation on relevant markets is/are found to be competitive or not to meet the three criteria

                  Please briefly describe the content of the notified draft measure. In particular, please refer to the relevant market concerned and the reasons why you consider that the market is effectively competitive or the three criteria are not met:

                  Please indicate the Article 7 notification reference of the previously notified draft measures:

                  Does the NCA agree with the proposed draft measure as regards the analysis of the relevant market?

                  Yes
                  
                  If no, please outline reasons:

                  No
                  

                  Internet reference to the draft measure:

                  Comments:

                              2.

                              One or several markets which was/were found to be competitive in a previous market review is/are still competitive

                  Please briefly describe the content of the draft measure, indicating the relevant market concerned:

                  Please indicate the Article 7 notification reference of the previously notified draft measures:

                  Are there changes to the market definition, as compared with previously notified draft measures?

                  Yes
                  
                  If yes, please describe briefly:

                  No
                  

                  Does the NCA agree with the proposed draft measure as regards the analysis of the relevant market?

                  Yes
                  
                  If no, please outline reasons:

                  No
                  

                  Internet reference to the draft measure:

                  Comments:

                              3.

                              Changes to technical details of a previously imposed regulatory remedy

                  Please summarise the notified changes to the remedies indicating the relevant market concerned:

                  Please justify your conclusion that the measure consists of a change on a technical detail of a remedy and does not change the nature or the general scope of a remedy:

                  Please indicate the Article 7 notification reference of the previously notified draft measures:

                  Internet reference to the draft measure:

                  Comments:

                              4.

                              Imposition on further operators of remedies already analysed and notified in relation to other undertakings that are similar as regards their customer base or total turnover in telecoms markets, without changing the principles applied by the NRA in the previous notification

                  Please briefly summarise the content of the draft measure, indicating the relevant market concerned:

                  Please indicate the Article 7 notification reference of the previously notified draft measures:

                  Please list the operators on whom this draft measure imposes obligations:

                  Does the NCA agree with the proposed draft measure as regards the analysis of the relevant market?

                  Yes
                  
                  If no, please outline reasons:

                  No
                  

                  Internet reference to the draft measure:

                  Comments:


Avis juridique important

|

31982H0604

82/604/EEC: Council Recommendation of 28 July 1982 concerning the encouragement of investment in the rational use of energy

Official Journal L 247 , 23/08/1982 P. 0009 - 0011 Spanish special edition: Chapter 12 Volume 4 P. 0068  Portuguese special edition Chapter 12 Volume 4 P. 0068

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 28 July 1982 concerning the encouragement of investment in the rational use of energy (82/604/EEC)  THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 235 thereof,  Having regard to the draft from the Commission (1),  Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),  Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),  Having regard to the communication from the Commission on investment in the rational use of energy,  Having regard to the conclusions on energy pricing policy adopted by the Council on 3 December 1981 and 16 March 1982,  Whereas the present situation of relative easing of prices on the oil market ought not to lead to a relaxation of efforts to achieve more rational use of energy;  Whereas, even if the current drop in energy consumption is partly due to changes in the structure of demand, it is also largely due to a decline in economic activity ; whereas a revival of growth would thus very probably entail an increase in energy demand;  Whereas it is necessary not only to progress towards realization of the objectives which the Community has set itself, which are to restructure demand in favour of the more rational use of energy and to develop energy sources other than oil, but also to ensure that the results obtained in the Member States are constantly monitored;  Whereas, according to the Commission's calculations, investment in the rational use of energy represented only something in the order of 0 74 % of the gross domestic product in the Community in 1981 ; whereas it should, therefore, be increased considerably;  Whereas, by helping to improve the competitiveness of undertakings and by enabling new industrial activities to be developed, increased investment could be an important element in an energy and industrial strategy aimed at promoting lasting economic recovery;  Whereas, moreover, it may have a beneficial effect on employment;  Whereas, in view of the importance of this investment for economic activity and its specific nature in some cases, the public authorities should encourage such investment;  Whereas, in addition to special measures to promote certain types of investment, steps should also be taken to improve the general framework (energy, economic and financial policies) in which investment decisions are taken;  Whereas there is uncertainty concerning prices and the trend of the relative prices of the various forms of energy due, in particular, to the pricing and taxation policies currently applied in the Community;  Whereas this uncertainty has an adverse effect on investment decisions;  Whereas economic operators ought to receive better training and information on the importance of the rational use of energy both to their own activities and to the Community at large;  Whereas high, unstable interest rates are having an effect and, more particularly, in certain cases financial channels and financial arrangements need to be better adapted to the specific requirements and situations of investors;  (1) OJ No C 107, 28.4.1982, p. 4. (2) OJ No C 149, 14.6.1982, p. 137. (3) Opinion delivered on 30 June 1982 (not yet published in the Official Journal).   Whereas the partitioning which still exists between national markets is hampering the development of the energy-saving and alternative-energy industries by preventing them from taking full advantage of possible economies of scale;  Whereas over-centralization of decision-making is liable to slow down the promotion and spread of the rational use of energy;  Whereas certain sectors, in particular the major energy-consuming industries, small and mediumsized undertakings and the building sector, face special problems;  Whereas the Member States should make a concerted effort to implement a consistent series of measures designed to overcome these problems and obstacles;  HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT THE MEMBER STATES:         1. Step up their efforts to achieve a more rational use of energy:      - by improving the conditions necessary to enable the economic operators concerned to increase significantly their investment in this area (1),           - by giving greater consideration over the whole range of investment to the requirement of rational use of energy.             The progress achieved in this respect will be subject to regular examination at Community level in the context of the periodic examination of the energy policies of the Member States.  The indicators used to assess this progress will take account of not only energy policy but also macro-economic, financial and sectoral aspects. They will be defined by the Commission in collaboration with the Member States.       2. In order to attain these objectives:      - encourage the energy-saving drive mainly by providing appropriate information,           - apply energy pricing policies which unite the pursuit of energy objectives with efforts to ensure that prices truly correspond to market conditions and costs. Where it is the responsibility of the public authorities, the calculation of the constituent elements of energy prices to the final consumer should also take such objectives into account,           - encourage gas and electricity companies to define and apply a stable tariff structure which corresponds to energy policy objectives,           - improve training and information facilities for economic operators, in particular small and medium-sized undertakings and households, for example by ensuring that they have access to reliable advisory services,           - take steps in so far as is necessary to supply local and regional authorities with more information concerning Community loans and stimulate their interest in such loans,           - take steps in so far as is necessary to supply small and medium-sized undertakings with more information concerning Community loans available and stimulate their interest in such loans, particularly by encouraging them to draw up eligible projects jointly,           - where appropriate, encourage better adaptation of financial channels and financing arrangements to the specific requirements of priority projects involving investment in the rational use of energy,           - make maximum use ot the whole of the Community market by refraining from adopting laws, regulations and administrative measures, or implementing national standards, which hamper the free movement of equipment and services intended for a more rational use of energy,           - where existing administrative and legislative provisions stand in the way, simplify and speed up the procedures surrounding projects involving new installations which would enable local alternative energy resources (for example, blomass, solar energy, geothermal energy and small heads of water) to be exploited efficiently, subject to observance of safety and environmental-protection standards and technical rules,           - encourage a certain degree of decentralization of decision-making, since adaptation to  (1) According to the Commission's estimates, investment in RUE in 1981 represented only 0 74 % of GDP, 1 79 % of GFCF and 25 % of energy investment.  local conditions in particular is an important factor in the success of rational energy-use programmes directed towards the domestic sector and small and medium-sized undertakings,      - examine the possibility of using financial and/or tax incentives to encourage the final consumer to purchase energy-saving installations and equipment,           - provide substantial financial aid towards the renovation of buildings, where this contributes to energy-saving under sufficiently cost-effective conditions,           - ensure adequate continuity in financial and technical assistance programmes, so that prospective investors are better informed and, above all, are able to programme their investment,           - where appropriate, urge fuel and electricity companies to encourage householders to renovate their homes for energy-saving purposes, by supplying adequate services ranging from assistance in obtaining loans to advice on the choice of equipment.                     Done at Brussels, 28 July 1982.  For the Council  The President  O. MØLLER


title: Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 13 November 2006 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Banco de España (ECB/2006/18)

text:
               21.11.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 283/16

      RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

   of 13 November 2006
   to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Banco de España
   (ECB/2006/18)
   (2006/C 283/10)
   THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
   Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Eurosystem are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.

               (2)

               Pursuant to Article 4(2) of the Law of autonomy of the Banco de España and Articles 29(3) and 31 of its Rules of procedure, the accounts of the Banco de España are audited by independent external auditors as provided for in Article 27 of the Statute, and under the terms of Law 19/1988 on the auditing of accounts (1) regarding the eligibility, mandate and rotation of the auditors.

               (3)

               The mandate of the current external auditors of the Banco de España will end after the audit for the financial year 2005. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2006.

               (4)

               The Banco de España has selected Deloitte, S.L. as its external auditors for the financial years 2006 to 2008, with their mandate being renewable thereafter on a yearly basis until the financial year 2012,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
   It is recommended that Deloitte, S.L. should be appointed as the external auditors of the Banco de España for the financial years 2006 to 2008, with their mandate being renewable thereafter on a yearly basis until the financial year 2012.

      Done at Frankfurt am Main, 13 November 2006.

            The President of the ECB

         Jean-Claude TRICHET

      (1)  As amended by Law 44/2002 on financial system reform measures.


				|

		52012DC0312

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on Finland's 2012 national reform programme and delivering a Council opinion on Finland's stability programme for 2012-2015 /* COM/2012/0312 final */

			   	Recommendation for a
COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
on Finland's 2012 national reform
programme
and delivering a Council opinion on Finland's stability programme for 2012-2015
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[3],
Having regard to the resolutions of the
European Parliament,[4]
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)(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)(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[5],
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)(3)   On 12 July 2011, the Council adopted a recommendation on Finland’s
national reform programme for 2011 and delivered its opinion on Finland’s updated
stability programme for 2011-2014.
(4)(4)   On 23 November 2011, the Commission adopted the second Annual
Growth Survey, marking the start of the second European Semester of ex-ante and
integrated policy coordination, which is anchored in the Europe 2020 strategy. On
14 February 2012, the Commission, on the basis of Regulation (EU) 1176/2011,
adopted the Alert Mechanism Report[6],
in which it identified Finland as one of the Member States for which an
in-depth review would be carried out.
(5)(5)   On 2 March 2012, the European Council endorsed the priorities for
ensuring financial stability, fiscal consolidation and action to foster growth.
It underscored the need to 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.
(6)(6)   On 2 March 2012, the European Council
also invited the Member States participating in the Euro Plus Pact to present
their commitments in time for inclusion in their stability or convergence programmes
and their national reform programmes.
(7)(7)   On 19 April 2012, Finland submitted its stability programme
covering the period 2012-2015 and its 2012 national reform programme. In order
to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed
at the same time. The Commission has also assessed, in an in-depth review under
Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011, whether Finland is affected by
macroeconomic imbalances. The Commission concluded in its in-depth review[7] that Finland is experiencing an
imbalance, although not excessive.
(8)(8)   Based on the assessment of the stability programme pursuant to
Article 5(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the
opinion that the macroeconomic scenario underpinning the budgetary projections
in the programme is plausible for the 2012-13 period, GDP growth expected in
the programme is in line with the Commission's 2012 spring forecast.
Projections are also realistic for the years 2014 and 2015 as they foresee GDP
growth to be substantially lower than encountered before the crises and lower
than in the recovery years 2010-11. The main budgetary goal of Finland's 2012
stability programme is to reduce the central government deficit by limiting
expenditures and increasing revenues. As the central government budget is the
main source of the general government deficit, improving its position will
contribute to balancing of the general government budget. The medium-term
budgetary objective (MTO) of a surplus of 0.5% of GDP in structural terms
reflects adequately the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. Based on
the (recalculated) structural budget balance[8],
Finland has met the MTO in 2011 but would marginally deviate from it over
2012-15. The rate of growth of government expenditure, taking into account
discretionary revenue measures, complies with the expenditure benchmark of the
Stability and Growth Pact in all years except 2015. The programme aims at
balancing the general government budget by 2015 and reaching surpluses as from
2016. The debt ratio is well below 60% of GDP and according to the programme,
the debt level will peak in 2014 at close to 52% of GDP and then start
declining. A notable sustainability gap still exists in Finland’s public
finances, mainly stemming from a rapidly deteriorating dependency ratio caused
by population ageing. The sustainability gap in public finances needs to be
continuously monitored and measures adjusted accordingly. Finland’s fiscal framework
is anchored to multi-annual expenditure ceilings, but these do currently not
apply for the municipal sector.
(9)(9)   The productivity of public services has been in decline over
the past decade. Finnish authorities have already implemented several reforms
to address the issue, but their implementation has been slow, especially at the
local government level. In addition, a nation-wide municipal reform and a
central government productivity programme are underway. Further productivity
gains and cost savings could be achieved by encouraging more competition in
shielded private and public service sectors, through further product and labour
market deregulation.
(10)(10)           Over the past year, the Finnish government has introduced
new measures to reduce youth and long-term unemployment. These included a pilot
programme to reduce long-term unemployment and introduction of a social
guarantee for young people. The measures introduced are ambitious and relevant,
but now need to be implemented with a clear focus on improving the skills levels
and labour market position of the target groups. In view of demographic
changes, raising the employment rate of older workers is important to ensure
sustainable public finances and meet the demand for labour in the future. The
increase in life expectancy has been more rapid than envisaged during the 2005
pension reform, and therefore over time the current statutory retirement age
range could turn out to be too low. In its programme, the government committed itself
to increase the effective retirement age to 62.4 years by 2025. In March 2012,
the social partners agreed to several measures to lengthen working careers. The
government has committed itself to carry out a pension reform no later than 1
January 2017. The focus now needs to be on implementing the agreed line of
action in the short term.
(11)(11)           Regulatory barriers in the services sector in Finland
are still restrictive and market concentration is high not only in retail
trade, but also in areas of production. In the grocery retail market, Finland
has the highest degree of market concentration and food prices are among the
highest in Europe. Competition law fines in Finland have traditionally been
low, raising issues regarding their deterrent effect. There have been some
policy developments on competition, such as a new national competition law and
a new law on land use planning and construction. The government is also
committed to launching a new programme on promoting competition. This should be
brought forward without delay with a view to further strengthening the
competition framework in product and service markets.
(12)(12)           Productivity growth in Finland is stagnating and
Finnish exporting firms have lost market shares in foreign markets over recent
years. Unit labour costs have increased, although not in the manufacturing
sector. Some currently dominant industries, especially electronics and paper,
appear to have peaked in their growth and in general the share of manufacturing
in GDP is declining. Finland is exporting intermediate and investment goods
mainly to mature, slowly growing economies and its products have limited
presence in developing economies. The Finnish economy needs to become more
diversified both in terms of companies as in terms of export markets in order
to develop multiple strong exporters in the future. Notwithstanding the past
strong Finnish R&D and innovation performance, without a significant
increase in the number of innovative high-growth firms, Finland’s ranking as an
EU innovation leader risks declining. This requires facilitating innovation,
enabling the transformation from R&D into marketable products, and
encouraging the penetration of fast growing export markets. In the short term,
it will also be crucial to exploit and disseminate the extensive ICT know-how
also in other industries in Finland, including the public sector. Regarding
wage growth, the tripartite wage agreement of 2011 paves the way for modest
wage increases in 2012 and 2013, which should improve Finland’s relative
position vis-à-vis its main trading partners.
(13)(13)            Finland
has made a number of commitments under the Euro Plus Pact. These commitments,
presented in 2011, relate to improving competitiveness, the employment rate and
the sustainability of public finances, strengthening financial stability and ensuring
tax coordination. The Commission has assessed the implementation of the Euro
Plus Pact commitments. The results of this assessment have been taken into
account in the recommendations.
(14)(14)           In the context of the European Semester, the Commission
has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Finland’s economic policy. It has
assessed the stability programme and the national reform programme, and presented
an in-depth review. It has taken into account not only their relevance for
sustainable fiscal and socio-economic policy in Finland but also their compliance
with EU rules and guidance, given the need to reinforce the overall economic
governance of the European Union by providing EU-level input into future
national decisions. Its recommendations under the European Semester are
reflected in recommendations (1) to (5) below.
(15)(15)           In the light of this assessment, the Council has
examined Finland’s stability programme,
and its opinion[9]
is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below.
(16)     In the light of the results
of the Commission’s in-depth review and this assessment, the Council has
examined Finland’s 2012
national reform programme and Finland’s stability programme. Its recommendations under Article 6 of
Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 are reflected in particular in recommendation (5)
below,
HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Finland
should take action within the period 2012-2013 to:
1.1.        Preserve
a sound fiscal position in 2012 and beyond by correcting any departure from the
medium-term budgetary objective (MTO) that ensures the long-term sustainability
of public finances. To this end, reinforce and rigorously implement the
budgetary strategy, supported by sufficiently specified measures, for the year
2013 and beyond including meeting the expenditure benchmark. Continue to carry
out annual assessments of the size of the ageing-related sustainability gap and
adjust public revenue and expenditure in accordance with the long-term
objectives and needs. Integrate the local government sector better in the system
of multi-annual expenditure ceilings.
2.2.        Take further measures to achieve productivity gains and
cost savings in public service provision, including structural changes and
efficiency-enhancing territorial administrative reforms, also in order to
respond to the challenges arising from population ageing.
3.3.        Implement the ongoing measures to improve the labour
market position of young people and the long-term unemployed, with a particular
focus on skills development. Take further steps to encourage the employment
rate of older workers, including by reducing early exit pathways. Take measures
to increase the statutory retirement age in line with the improved life
expectancy.
4.4.        Continue enhancing competition in product and service
markets, especially in the retail sector, by ensuring the effective
implementation of the new Competition Act and the new programme on promoting
healthy competition. Continue to further opening the municipal procurement of
services to competitive bidding and by ensuring competition neutrality between
private and public undertakings. Take further steps to ensure that competition
law fines are sufficiently deterrent.
5.5.        In order to strengthen productivity growth and external
competitiveness, continue efforts to diversify the business structure, in
particular by hastening the introduction of planned measures to broaden the
innovation base while continuing to align wage and productivity developments.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
[1]               OJ L 209, 02.08.1997, p. 1
[2]               OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25
[3]               COM(2012)312 final
[4]               P7_TA(2012)0048 and P7_TA(2012)0047
[5]               Council Decision 2012/238/EU of 26 April 2012
[6]               COM(2012) 68 final
[7]               SWD(2012)154 final
[8]               Cyclically adjusted balance net of one-off and
temporary measures, recalculated by the Commission services on the basis of the information provided in the programme, using
the commonly agreed methodology.
[9]               Under Article 5(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No
1466/97.


title: Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 3 April 2009 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of De Nederlandsche Bank (ECB/2009/8)

text:
               22.4.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 93/1

      RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

   of 3 April 2009
   to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of De Nederlandsche Bank
   (ECB/2009/8)
   2009/C 93/01
   THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
   Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and national central banks are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.

               (2)

               On 12 July 2005, Josephus Andreas Nijhuis, registered accountant and chairman of the board of PricewaterhouseCoopers Accountants N.V. (‘PWC’), acting in his personal capacity, was appointed as the external auditor of De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) from the financial year 2005 for an indefinite period.

               (3)

               Josephus Andreas Nijhuis resigned from PWC with effect from 1 October 2008. It is therefore necessary for DNB to appoint new auditors.

               (4)

               DNB wishes to select PWC as its external auditors for the financial years 2008 to 2011,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
   It is recommended that PricewaterhouseCoopers Accountants N.V. should be appointed as the external auditors of De Nederlandsche Bank for the financial years 2008 to 2011.

      Done at Frankfurt am Main, 3 April 2009.

            The President of the ECB

         Jean-Claude TRICHET


Avis juridique important

|

31993H0163

93/163/EEC: Council recommendation of 15 March 1993 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1979) (Fifth EDF) for the financial year 1991

Official Journal L 069 , 20/03/1993 P. 0039 - 0039

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 15 March 1993  concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the  operations of the European Development Fund (1979) (Fifth EDF) for the financial year 1991 (93/163/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 Second ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 31 October 1979, Having regard to Council Decision 80/1186/EEC of 16 December 1980 on the association of the  overseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community  (1), Having regard to the 1979 Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid   (2), signed on 20 November 1979, and in particular Article 29 (3) thereof, Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 17 March 1981 applicable to the Fifth European  Development Fund  (3), and in particular Articles 66 to 70 thereof, Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the  operations of the European Development Fund (1979) (Fifth EDF) as at 31 December 1991 and the Court  of Auditors' report relating to the financial year 1991 together with the Commission's replies   (4), Whereas, pursuant to Article 29 (3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the management of  the European Development Fund (1979) (Fifth EDF) must be given to the Commission by the European  Parliament on a recommendation from the Council; Whereas the overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the European Development  Fund (1979) (Fifth EDF) during the financial year 1991 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 (1979) (Fifth EDF) for the  financial year 1991. Done at Brussels, 15 March 1993. For the Council The President M. JELVED


title: Council Recommendation of 12 July 2011 on the National Reform Programme 2011 of Belgium and delivering a Council Opinion on the updated Stability Programme of Belgium, 2011-2014

text:
               15.7.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 209/1

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 12 July 2011
   on the National Reform Programme 2011 of Belgium and delivering a Council Opinion on the updated Stability Programme of Belgium, 2011-2014
   2011/C 209/01
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 121(2) and 148(4) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1), and in particular Article 5(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   After consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission's proposal to launch a new strategy for jobs and growth, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies, which 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 (2), which together form the ‘integrated guidelines’. Member States were invited to take the integrated guidelines into account in their national economic and employment policies.

               (3)

               On 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 15 April 2011, Belgium submitted its 2011 Stability Programme update covering the period 2011-2014 and its 2011 National Reform Programme. In order to take account of the interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (7)

               Belgium experienced robust GDP growth averaging 2,3 % per year in the decade before 2008. The country felt the full impact of the global economic recession in 2009, and GDP contracted by 2,8 %. The impact of the recession on employment was relatively contained. A temporary decline in hours worked and a decline in labour productivity per hour provided a buffer. After a decrease of 0,4 % in 2009, employment increased again in 2010. However, unemployment rose from 7 % before the recession to 8,3 % in 2010. Thanks to the upturn in world trade, the recovery in 2010 was stronger than expected, with GDP growing by 2,2 %. Due to the automatic stabilisers and the discretionary measures taken in reaction to the crisis, the general government deficit rose from 1,3 % in 2008 to 5,9 % of GDP in 2009.

               (8)

               Based on the assessment of the updated Stability Programme pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is of the opinion that the macroeconomic scenario underpinning the budgetary projections in the Stability Programme is plausible. Although it is based on slightly less favourable growth assumptions for 2011, it is broadly in line with the latest Commission services’ spring 2011 forecast. After a better-than-expected deficit of 4,1 % in 2010, the objective of the budgetary strategy outlined in the Stability Programme is to further reduce the deficit to 3,6 % in 2011 and below the 3 % reference value by 2012, the deadline set by the Council for correcting the excessive deficit. The reduction in the deficit planned for 2011 seems feasible in view of the rather cautious economic projections. However, the fiscal effort is likely to be below the 0,75 % of GDP average annual effort recommended by the Council, in particular in 2011 and 2012 when it would only amount to 0,4 and 0,3 % of GDP in structural terms respectively. Moreover, the deficit targets for 2012 and subsequent years are not supported by specific adjustment measures. Lastly, the medium-term objective (MTO), which is a structural surplus of 0,5 % of GDP, is not expected to be achieved within the 2011-2014 Stability Programme period.

               (9)

               In view of the better-than-expected outcome recorded in 2010, a more ambitious reduction in the deficit in 2011, and faster-than-projected progress towards the 3 % of GDP threshold, would be appropriate. Moreover, it will not be possible to bring the excessive deficit to an end by 2012 and to continue to make progress towards the MTO without further consolidation measures. Since the tax burden, especially that on labour income, is already very high in Belgium, these consolidation measures should be essentially expenditure-based.

               (10)

               The economic and financial crisis reversed the previous long-term trend of declining government debt. The debt ratio, which had been on a downward trend since 1993 (when it peaked at 134 % of GDP, after which it continued falling until it reached 84 % of GDP in 2007), has increased again since 2008 and reached 96,8 % of GDP at the end of 2010. The high level of public debt remains a major challenge, in particular because the long-term budgetary impact of ageing is higher than the EU average, mainly as a result of a relatively high increase in pension expenditure, which will put further strains on public finances. In the Stability Programme, the authorities outline a three-pronged strategy to curb the projected substantial increase in age-related expenditure (reducing the public debt level, increasing employment and participation rates and providing a strong and solidarity-based social security system). Ensuring sufficient primary surpluses over the medium term and further reforming the Belgian social security system, in particular the pension system, should improve the long-term sustainability of public finances. According to the Commission's latest assessment, the risks with regards to long - term sustainability of public finances appear to be high.

               (11)

               An important challenge for Belgium is to ensure a stable and well-functioning financial sector, capable of meeting the financial intermediation needs of the real economy. During the past two years, the Belgian financial sector has been severely hit by the financial crisis, resulting in reduced balance sheets, substantial state aid and a modification of banking supervision. The financial situation of the banking sector remains fragile. Furthermore, in Belgium the banking sector is highly concentrated and relatively large compared to the size of the economy.

               (12)

               The 1996 Law on ‘Employment Promotion and Precautionary Protection of Competitiveness’ stipulates that the trend in wages in Belgium should be in line with the wage trend in the three neighbouring countries (France, Germany, The Netherlands), thereby keeping labour costs under control. Nevertheless, this law has not been able to prevent a situation where, over the period 2005-2010, wages have increased faster in Belgium than in the three neighbouring countries, while productivity growth has been slower. As a consequence, unit labour costs have risen at a faster rate in Belgium compared to its neighbouring countries and the euroarea average. This is particularly problematic as Belgium is specialised in goods with relatively low technology content, facing fierce competition from lowercost countries. Even though the wage rule helps to frame the wage negotiations, it could be improved by taking into account differences in productivity growth and by providing a more effective system to implement corrections ex post if the targets are not met.

               (13)

               The labour market is characterised by a number of rigidities that create significant disincentives to taking up work, namely: unlimited unemployment benefit duration; high effective marginal tax rates and a high tax wedge (particularly for low paid workers); and the combination of the withdrawal of social assistance benefits and high taxation when taking up work. Moreover, several exit routes for older workers provide incentives to leave the labour market before the statutory retirement age of 65. Further reform of active labour market policies, and extending them to cover the over 50, would help increase the overall employment rate and improve incentives to look for jobs. In addition, further decreases in the level and duration of unemployment benefits over time would provide younger workers with a greater incentive to enter the labour market. Making the access criteria for early retirement more stringent would encourage older workers to stay in the active labour force, and older workers who have been out of work for a period of time to return to the labour market. Lastly, non-EU nationals have an employment rate (40,9 %) which is much lower than the EU average.

               (14)

               The overall tax burden on labour in Belgium is one of the highest in the EU; therefore, its reduction would contribute to making work more attractive. However, given the substantial consolidation effort ahead, this needs to be compensated by equivalent increases in less distorting taxes, for example on consumption or by means of a shift towards environmentallyfriendly taxes. Belgium has much lower implicit tax rates on energy than neighbouring countries. Combined with the high tax wedge on labour, Belgium has the lowest ratio of environmental taxes compared with labour taxes in the whole of the EU. This has contributed to a situation where high unemployment coexists with a relatively high use of energy, making it more difficult to achieve targets on employment and energy efficiency.

               (15)

               Prices for many goods and services are generally higher than in other Member States, reflecting weak competitive pressures — especially in the retail sector and network industries — and a weak supervisory framework. In the retail sector, barriers to entry and operational restrictions are high. In particular, competition-restricting regulations still restrict opening hours, protect incumbents against new entry and inhibit the spread of new business models and technologies. A common competition problem in the network sectors in Belgium is the strong position of the incumbent and the high entry barriers compared to other Member States, meaning that former monopolists in these sectors can still reap higher profits by charging higher prices than a competitive market would allow.

               (16)

               The Belgian authorities have made a number of commitments related to the Euro Plus Pact. The commitments refer to the four areas of the Pact. They focus on measures to bring down the deficit, keep energy prices under control and encourage competition, control real wage increases, implement a supervisory framework to monitor the financial sector and introduce measures to increase the effective retirement age. However, there is no information on the measures to be taken in order to achieve the required objective on the fiscal side; nor is there any information on how real wage growth or energy prices could be controlled. Concerning early retirement schemes, it is not clear whether and when the ‘Generation Pact’ will be reviewed and what the impact of that review would be in terms of concrete measures. These commitments have been assessed and taken into account in the recommendations.

               (17)

               The Commission has assessed the Stability Programme and National Reform Programme, including the Euro Plus Pact. It has taken into account their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socio-economic policy in Belgium, and their compliance with EU rules and guidance, given the need to reinforce the overall economic governance of the EU by providing EU level input into future national decisions. In this light, the Commission considers that a more ambitious reduction of the deficit in 2011 should be possible, and that further consolidation measures should be specified for 2012 and beyond. In order to improve the long-term sustainability of public finances, further reform of the pension system is needed. Further steps should also be taken to strengthen competitiveness, to help people into jobs and to shift the tax burden from labour to consumption and energy, as well as opening up more opportunities for investment and growth in the service sector and network industries.

               (18)

               In the light of this assessment, also taking into account the Council Recommendation of 2 December 2009 under Article 126(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Council has examined the 2011 update of the Stability Programme of Belgium and its opinion (3) is reflected in particular in its recommendations (1) and (2) below,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Belgium take action within the period 2011-2012 to:

               1.

               Take advantage of the ongoing economic recovery to accelerate the correction of the excessive deficit. To this end, take the necessary specified measures — mainly on the expenditure side — by the time of the 2012 budget to achieve an average annual fiscal effort in line with the recommendations under the EDP, thus bringing the high public debt ratio on a declining path. This should bring the government deficit well below the 3 % of the GDP reference value by 2012 at the latest. Ensure progress towards the medium-term objective by at least 0,5 % of GDP annually.

               2.

               Take steps to improve the long-term sustainability of public finances. In line with the framework of the three-pronged EU strategy, the focus should be put on curbing age-related expenditure, notably by preventing early exit from the labour market in order to markedly increase the effective retirement age. Measures such as linking the statutory retirement age to life expectancy could be considered.

               3.

               Address the structural weaknesses in the financial sector, in particular by finalising restructuring of the banks in need of an adequately funded and viable business model.

               4.

               Take steps to reform, in consultation with the social partners and in accordance with national practice, the system of wage bargaining and wage indexation, to ensure that wage growth better reflects developments in labour productivity and competitiveness.

               5.

               Improve participation in the labour market by reducing the high tax and social security burden for the low-paid in a budgetary neutral way and by introducing a system in which the level of unemployment benefits decreases gradually with the duration of unemployment. Take steps to shift the tax burden from labour to consumption and to make the tax system more environmentally friendly. Improve the effectiveness of active labour policies by targeting measures at older workers and vulnerable groups.

               6.

               Introduce measures to boost competition in the retail sector, by lowering barriers to entry and reducing operational restrictions; and introduce measures to strengthen competition in the electricity and gas markets by further improving the effectiveness of the sectoral regulatory and competition authorities.

      Done at Brussels, 12 July 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         J. VINCENT-ROSTOWSKI

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  Maintained for 2011 by Council Decision 2011/308/EU of 19 May 2011 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (OJ L 138, 26.5.2011, p. 56).

      (3)  Foreseen in Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97.


Avis juridique important

|

32003H0734

Commission Recommendation of 29 September 2003 on a common practice for changes to the design of national obverse sides of euro circulation coins (notified under document number C(2003) 3388)

Official Journal L 264 , 15/10/2003 P. 0038 - 0039

Commission Recommendationof 29 September 2003on a common practice for changes to the design of national obverse sides of euro circulation coins(1)(notified under document number C(2003) 3388)(Only the Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish texts are authentic)(2003/734/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 211 thereof,Whereas:(1) According to Article 106(2) of the Treaty, Member States may issue coins subject to approval by the European Central Bank of the volume of the issue.(2) The Council has, in accordance with the second sentence of Article 106(2) of the Treaty, adopted harmonising measures in this field, by way of Council Regulation (EC) No 975/98 of 3 May 1998 on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation(2), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 423/1999.(3)(3) According to Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of 3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro(4), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2596/2000(5), coins denominated in euro and cent and complying with the denominations and technical specifications are to be the only coins which have the status of legal tender in all "participating" Member States as defined in that Regulation. Since being brought into circulation on 1 January 2002, these coins have circulated throughout the whole euro area.(4) The informal Economic and Finance Ministers Council of Verona agreed in April 1996 that euro coins should have a common European reverse side and a distinctive national obverse side. The common designs for the different denominations were chosen by the Heads of State or Government of the Member States at the European Council in Amsterdam in December 1997, following a competition organised by the Commission. The designs on the national sides of the euro coins were decided by each Member State.(5) The Council agreed on 23 November 1998 that "there should be a moratorium on issues of commemorative coins intended for circulation in the early years of the new notes and coins." Commemorative euro coins are specific circulation coins and comply with the technical specifications laid down in Regulation (EC) No 975/98, but the standard national obverse design is replaced by a different national design in order to commemorate a specific event or personality.(6) An agreed common practice for changes to the design of national obverse sides of euro circulation coins would help, in particular, to ensure that parties handling coins on a professional basis and the public at large are informed sufficiently far in advance of future changes of that nature.(7) The Member States have been consulted on the common practice set out in this Recommendation, in order to take account of their different national traditions and preferences in this particular area. The common practice should provide sufficient leeway for Member States to maintain their traditions in this field.(8) Issues of commemorative euro circulation coins should only commemorate events or personalities of the highest relevance, since such coins will circulate throughout the euro area. Less important themes should rather be celebrated by way of collector coins, coins which are not intended for circulation and which must be easily distinguishable from circulation coins.(9) Limiting commemorative circulation coin issues to a single denomination corresponds to existing practice in a number of Member States and creates an appropriate framework for such issues. The 2-euro coin constitutes the most suitable denomination for this purpose, principally on account of the large diameter of the coin and its technical characteristics offering adequate protection against counterfeiting.(10) Certain volume limits for commemorative circulation coins are necessary, in order to ensure that such coins remain a small percentage of the total number of 2-euro coins in circulation. At the same time, the ceilings should allow for the issuance of sufficient coins to ensure that commemorative coins can circulate effectively, at least for a certain period.(11) The Community has concluded monetary agreements with the Principality of Monaco, the Republic of San Marino and the Vatican City State, allowing them to issue certain quantities of euro circulation coins. The common practice should also be applicable to the circulation coins issued by those States,HEREBY RECOMMENDS:Article 1Changes to the national sides of the normal euro circulation coinsWithout prejudice to Article 2 of this Recommendation, the designs used for the national obverse sides of the circulation coins denominated in euro or in cent should not be modified until the end of 2008, except in those cases where a Head of State depicted on a coin changes. Before the end of this period, the Commission should prepare a review examining whether this moratorium should be extended or whether a different practice should be introduced.Article 2Issuance of commemorative euro circulation coinsAs from 2004, the issuance of commemorative euro circulation coins showing a different national obverse design from that of the normal euro circulation coins should comply with the following rules:(a) the number of issues should be limited to one per issuing State per year, without prejudice to point (c)(i). This limit would not apply to possible commemorative euro circulation coins collectively issued by all euro-area countries;(b) the 2-euro coin should be the sole denomination used for such issues;(c) the total number of coins put into circulation for each individual issue should not exceed the higher of the following two ceilings:(i) 0,1 % of the total number of 2-euro coins brought into circulation by all issuing States up to the beginning of the year preceding the year of issuance of the commemorative coin, this ceiling being raised to 2,0 % of the total circulation of 2-euro coins of all issuing States if a truly global and highly symbolic event is commemorated, in which case the issuer should refrain from launching another similar commemorative circulation coin issue during the subsequent four years and should, moreover, set out the reasons for choosing the raised ceiling in the context of the prior-information rules provided for in Article 3(b);(ii) 5,0 % of the total number of 2-euro coins brought into circulation by the issuing State concerned up to the beginning of the year preceding the year of issuance of the commemorative coin.Article 3Design of the national sides and publication of future changesThe following rules should apply to all circulation coins denominated in euro or in cent:(a) in accordance with established practice, the national side should bear 12 stars surrounding the design and the year mark;(b) the Commission should be informed about intended changes to the national obverse designs of euro coins at least six months before the coins are issued; it will refer to the Economic and Financial Committee for approval of all commemorative circulation coin issues having an envisaged issuing volume exceeding the 0,1 % ceiling referred to in Article 2(c)(i);(c) all relevant information on new national coin designs will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.Article 4AddresseesThis Recommendation is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Portuguese Republic and the Republic of Finland.Done at Brussels, 29 September 2003.For the CommissionPedro Solbes MiraMember of the Commission(1) See also a communication by the Commission concerning this Recommendation (OJ C 247, 15.10.2003).(2) OJ L 139, 11.5.1998, p. 6.(3) OJ L 52, 27.2.1999, p. 2.(4) OJ L 139, 11.5.1998, p. 1.(5) OJ L 300, 29.11.2000, p. 2.