Avis juridique important

|

31985H0308

85/308/EEC: Council Recommendation of 13 June 1985 on social protection for volunteer development workers

Official Journal L 163 , 22/06/1985 P. 0048 - 0051 Spanish special edition: Chapter 05 Volume 4 P. 0150  Portuguese special edition Chapter 05 Volume 4 P. 0150

*****COUNCIL  RECOMMENDATION  of 13 June 1985  on social protection for volunteer development workers  (85/308/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 recommendation submitted by 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),  Whereas the European Council which met on 25 and 26 June 1984 called on the Member States to take steps to encourage young people to participate in projects organized by the Community beyond its frontiers, and in particular to support the creation of national committees of European volunteers for development, bringing together young Europeans who wish to work on projects in developing countries;  Whereas measures to encourage voluteers to work on such projects will contribute to the practical implementation of cooperation policies determined jointly by the Community, the Member States and Third World countries, the aim of which is to promote the economic, social and cultural development of the developing countries;  Whereas such work can provide valuable experience and further training for persons who are motivated and qualified in areas relevant to development work, in line with the objectives set out in Article 128 of the Treaty;  Whereas steps should therefore be taken to remove obstacles to taking up employment as a volunteer development worker;  Whereas a disincentive to this form of employment is the absence of adequate cover for such persons and for members of their families under the social security systems of certain Member States during or in respect of the period spent as a volunteer development worker or the period spent in preparation for such work;  Whereas, however, the powers necessary for achieving this Community objective are not provided for elsewhere in the Treaty; whereas recourse should therefore be had to Article 235 thereof,  HEREBY RECOMMENDS THE MEMBER STATES:  A. - to recognize as one of the objectives of their social policy the introduction of social protection for volunteer development workers or the removal of shortcomings in this area,  - to regards as 'volunteer development workers' those persons who are sent, where appropriate pursuant to national law, to developing countries through the intermediary of approved non-governmental organizations, whether State-aided or not, under conditions of remuneration similar to local conditions, for the purpose of making a positive contribution to the physical, economic and social development of such countries; to regard as 'members of their families' those persons so defined under national laws and practices,  - to take, to this end, the measures necessary for the achievement of social protection for volunteer development workers and for members of their families on the basis of the following principles:  1. Volunteer development workers and members of their families should benefit from a level of social protection similar to that which exists in the sending country for persons carrying out a comparable activity in that country.  That cover shall extend to the period of preparation spent under contract by the person concerned in the sending country.  The cover should relate to benefits during service in a developing country and the acquisition and maintenance of social entitlements during such service with a view to guaranteeing social protection on return.  2. Cover should relate to the following:  (a) sickness;  (b) maternity;  (c) invalidity;  (d) old age;  (e) death;  (f) accidents at work and occupational diseases recognized as such by the Member State concerned;  (g) unemployment on return;  (h) family benefits paid within the territory of the Community.  In the case of exporting of benefits, national laws may limit benefits or adjust the amounts thereof.  3. Cover for volunteer development workers and members of their families should be organized as fully as possible under the national systems.  This implies that volunteer development workers should not be excluded from social protection for their development activities, even if their remuneration in the developing countries is lower than the minimum amount used for determining eligibility for social protection.  4. The cost of such cover should be borne in an appropriate way pursuant to national laws and practices.  5. Member States should guarantee equal treatment between volunteer development workers and the members of their families referred to above who are nationals of other Member States and national volunteer development workers and the members of their families referred to above, in so far as Community rules on migrant workers apply to them. 6. Member States should, where appropriate, base their measures on the following procedures:  (1) Cover should be organized using one or more of the following methods:  (a) treatment of periods of service in a developing country as periods of insurance, occupational activity or residence under the legislation or practice of the sending State, for the purpose of determining entitlement to benefits due (and, if necessary, for calculating the amount of such benefits) in circumstances which might arise after return to the sending country;  (b) retention of entitlement for a period prescribed by the legislation of the sending State for persons who would otherwise no longer be subject to that legislation in respect of short-term occurences which might take place during the period of preparatory training or the period of service;  (c) use of secondment, as laid down by social security agreements concluded between the sending State and the developing countries concerned or, failing such agreements, by the legislation of the sending State;  (d) use of voluntary insurance for expatriates provided for under the legislation of the sending State, or in the absence of such a scheme, the setting up of a special voluntary insurance scheme for volunteer development workers and members of their families;  (e) continuation of payment of remuneration in periods of temporary incapacity due to sickness, maternity or accident for the duration of the stay of volunteer development workers and members of their families in a developing country.  (2) Member States are to ensure that the fact that volunteer development workers' remuneration during development service is lower than the minimum used for determining eligibility for social protection does not result in their being excluded from entitlement to such protection or to affiliation to voluntary insurance under that legislation.  (3) (a) The medical costs incurred by volunteer development workers or the members of their families in a developing country should be refunded pursuant to the legislation of the sending State;  (b) However, where the refunding of health care is not provided for, voluntary workers and members of their families could, in cases of sickness, maternity and accident during the period of a stay in a developing country, be covered by private insurance;  (c) Entitlement to health care extended to volunteer development workers on secondment or covered by voluntary insurance and to members of their families should be maintained so as to cover a prescribed period following return to the sending State, unless those concerned are covered during that period as residents or unemployed persons.  (4) During their preparatory period spent under contract in the sending country, volunteer development workers should, if necessary, be treated as employees for application of the legislation or practice of the sending country, for the purposes of determining entitlement to health care in cases of sickness and accident, unless they are in any event covered as residents. Members of their families should also be covered during and in respect of such periods. (5) In order to be eligible for cover against unemployment on their return, volunteer development workers and members of their families who have also worked as volunteer development workers and who, if necessary, have made contributions for the period referred to in point 4 above should be able to claim the periods spent in carrying out that activity as periods of insurance or employment.  B. Within a period of two years of the adoption of this recommendation, Member States will provide the Commission with the necessary information to enable it to draw up a report for the Council on progress achieved and obstacles encountered in the provision of social protection for volunteer development workers and, if appropriate, to propose any other measures required to achieve common objectives.  Done at Luxembourg, 13 June 1985.  For the Council  The President  G. DE MICHELIS  (1) OJ No C 16, 17. 1. 1985, p. 11.  (2) OJ No C 122, 20. 5. 1985, p. 80.  (3) Opinion delivered on 27 March 1985 (not yet published in the Official Journal).


Avis juridique important

|

31999H0829

1999/829/Euratom: Commission Recommendation of 6 December 1999 on the application of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty (notified under document number C(1999) 3932)

Official Journal L 324 , 16/12/1999 P. 0023 - 0043

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONof 6 December 1999on the application of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty(notified under document number C(1999) 3932)(1999/829/Euratom)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Articles 37 and 124 thereof,Having consulted the group of persons appointed in accordance with Article 31 of the Treaty by the Scientific and Technical Committee,(1) Whereas Article 37 requires that each Member State is to provide the Commission with such general data relating to any plan for the disposal of radioactive waste in whatever form as will make it possible to determine whether the implementation of such plan is liable to result in the radioactive contamination of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State. The Commission is to deliver its opinion within six months, after consulting the group of experts referred to in Article 31;(2) Considering the experience acquired in the application of the Commission Recommendations of 16 November 1960(1), 82/181/Euratom(2) and 91/4/Euratom(3) concerning the application of Article 37 of the Treaty;(3) Whereas the Court of Justice of the European Communities in its judgement of 22 September 1988 in Case 187/87(4) ruled as follows: "Article 37 of the Treaty of 25 March 1957 establishing the European Atomic Energy Community must be interpreted as meaning that the Commission of the European Communities must be provided with general data relating to any plan for the disposal of radioactive waste before such disposal is authorised by the competent authorities of the Member State concernend";(4) Whereas in the same judgement the Court stated that, "Consequently, it must be acknowledged that, where a Member State makes the disposal of radioactive waste subject to authorisation, the Commission's opinion must, in order to be rendered fully effective, be brought to the notice of that State before the issue of any such authorisation";(5) Whereas Article 37 has as its objective to forestall any possibility of radioactive contamination of another Member State; whereas the Commission, having consulted the abovementioned group of experts, has deemed disposal of radioactive waste associated with certain operations to be not liable to result in the radioactive contamination of another Member State;(6) Whereas in exceptional cases due to information received, the Commission may call for general data to be submitted for a plan for the disposal of radioactive waste, otherwise deemed not to be liable to result in the radioactive contamination of another Member State on the basis of the present Recommendation; whereas the Commission's opinion may then pertain to an authorisation which has been granted at an earlier stage;(7) Whereas the basic safety standards for the health protection of the general public and workers against the dangers of ionising radiation have been revised by Directive 96/29/Euratom(5) and the application of Article 37 should reflect these revisions where appropriate;(8) Whereas to appraise disposal plans in a consistent manner, it is necessary to specify which types of operation may result in the disposal of radioactive waste within the meaning of Article 37 of the treaty, and to specify for the different types of operation which information is to be supplied as the general data;(9) Whereas all Member States have now declared that they will desist from sea dumping,HEREBY RECOMMENDS:1. That the "disposal of radioactive waste" within the meaning of Article 37 of the Treaty should cover any planned disposal or accidental release of radioactive substance associated with the operations listed below, in gaseous, liquid or solid form in or to the environment.1. The operation of nuclear reactors.2. The reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel.3. The mining, milling and conversion of uranium and thorium.4. U-235 enrichment of uranium.5. The fabrication of nuclear fuel.6. The storage of irradiated nuclear fuel in dedicated facilities(6).7. The handling and processing of radioactive substances on an industrial scale(7).8. The processing or storage of radioactive waste(8) arising from operations (1) to (7) and (9).9. The dismantling of nuclear reactors and reprocessing plants.10. The emplacement above or under the ground of radioactive wastes without the intention of retrieval.11. The sea dumping of radioactive waste(9).12. The sub-seabed burial of radioactive wastes(10).13. Work activities involving natural raiation sources and identified under the terms of Title VII of the Basic Safety Standards by the Member States involved as being of concern with regard to the resulting disposal of radioactive wastes and as requiring to be subject to prior authorisation.14. All other operations.2. That "general data" within the meaning of Article 37 of the Treaty be understood to mean:- for operations (1) to (8) the information set out in Annex 1- for operations listed under (9) the information set out in Annex 2- for operations listed under (10) the information set out in Annex 3- for operations listed under (11) and (12) such information as will be required by the Commission on a case-by-case basis- for operations listed under (13) the relevant parts of the information set out in Annex 1, as required for the specific work activity (Chapters 6 and 7 are normally not applicable).3. That operations falling within the scope of point 1 (14) are deemed not to be liable to result in the radioactive contamination of another Member State, significant from the point of view of health, unless the point of view of health, unless in any specific case the Commission calls for such general data to be provided.4. That, if a Member State envisages modifying a plan for the disposal of radioactive waste, the submission of general data be governed by the following conditions:4.1.(a) If a Member State envisages modifying a plan for the disposal of radioactive waste, on which an opinion has already been given under the terms of Article 37, a submission of general data containing at least the information set out in a standard form in Annex 4 is necessary if the authorised waste are less restrictive than in the existing plan or if the potential consequences of the reference accident(s) evaluated in the licensing procedure are increased.4.1.(b) Unless the Commission calls for general data to be communicated, no submission of general data is necessary if no new authorisation or licence is required.or if:- the modification of the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste envisages unchanged or more restrictive authorised limits and associated requirements than in the existing plan and- the potential consequences of the reference accident(s) are unchangend or decreased.4.2. In the case of a plan for the disposal of radioactive waste on which no opinion has already been given under the terms of Article 37, a submission of the general data is necessary unless the Member State provides the Commission with a statement demonstrating that the conditions outlined in point 4.1.(b) are met.5. That, the "general data" be submitted to the Commission:5.1. whenever possible one year but not less than six months- before any authorisation for the disposal of radioactive waste is granted by competent authorities, or- before start-up of those operations for which no disposal authorisation is foreseen, or- for operations (9), if the proposed authorised limits and associated requirements for the disposal of radioactive waste are less restrictive than those in the plan for the existing installation, or if the potential conseuqences of reference accident(s) are increased, before any corresponding new authorisation for the disposal of radioactive waste is granted by the competent authorities, and,5.2. in cases where the Commission has called for general data in accordance with point 3, no later than six months after the request, without prejudice to any authorisation duly granted by the competent authorities pending receipt of the Commission's request. Any authorisation granted before the Commission called for general data shall be reviewed in the light of the Commission's subsequent opinion.6. That, since submission of a plan for the disposal of radioactive waste is the responsibility of the relevant Member State, that State accepts responsibility for all information submitted to the Commission in respect of such a plan.7. That the Member State concerned informs the Commission of the actions it envisages in response to any recommendation given in an opinion of the Commission on a disposal plan.8. That Member States communicate to the Commission for information:(a) the authorisation(s) for disposal of radioactive waste for comparison with the information in the general data on which its opinion was based;(b) preferably annually and at least every two years, a statement on the radioactive liquid and atmospheric waste discharges to the environment from nuclear power reactors and reprocessing plants and, where appropriate, revisions of the authorisation(s) for disposal of radioactive waste that occurred during the period covered. This statement should be provided within nine months of that period.This recommendation is addressed to the Member States.It replaces Recommendation 91/4/Euratom.Done at Brussels, 6 December 1999.For the CommissionMargot WALLSTRÖMMember of the Commission(1) OJ 81, 21.12.1960, p. 1893/60.(2) OJ L 83, 29.3.1982, p. 15.(3) OJ L 6, 9.1.1991, p. 16.(4) [1988] ECR, p. 5013.(5) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1, to be implemented by May 2000.(6) Provided that the operation is not incorporated in a plan submitted under another heading.(7) Excluding industrial work activities (involving the presence of natural radiation sources) covered by Title VII of the Basic Safety Standards (Directive 26/29/Euratom).(8) Provided that the operation is not incorporated in a plan submitted under another heading.(9) At this moment no Member State intends to carry out this operation.(10) At this moment no Member State intends to carry out this operation.ANNEX 1"GENERAL DATA"applicable to Operations (1) to (8)INTRODUCTION- general presentation of the plan- present stage of licensing procedure, envisaged commissioning steps.1. The site and its surroundings1.1. Geographical, topographical and geological features of the site and the region with- a map of the region showing the location and geographical coordinates (degrees, minutes) of the site- the relevant features of the region- the location of the installation in relation to such other installations, the discharges from which need to be considered in conjunction with those from the installation in question- the location of the site with regard to other Member States giving the distances from frontiers and closest conurbations, together with their populations.1.2. Seismology- the degree of seismic activity in the region; probable maximum seismic activity and designed seismic resistance of the installation.1.3. HydrologyFor an installation situated near to a water body providing a potential contamination pathway to another Member State, a brief description of appropriate hydrological features, extending to the other Member State(s), for example:- brief description of the path(s), tributaries, estuary, water abstraction, flood plains, etc.- average, maximum and minimum water flows and their frequency of occurrence- underground water table, levels and flows- brief description of the littoral areas- direction and force of currents, tides, circulation patterns, both local and regional- flood risk and protection of the installation.1.4. MeteorologyLocal climatology with frequency distributions of:- wind directions and speeds- precipitation intensity and duration- for each wind sector, atmospheric dispersion conditions, duration of temperature inversions.1.5. Natural resources and foodstuffsBrief description of:- soil characteristics and ecological features of the region- water utilisation in the region and as appropriate in neighbouring Member States- principal food resources in the region and as appropriate in other Member States: crops, stock breeding, fishing, hunting and, for discharges into sea, data on fishing in territorial and extraterritorial waters- foodstuff distribution system and particularly the export to other Member States from the regions concerned, in so far as they are related to the risk of exposure from discharges through the significant exposure pathways.1.6. Other activities in the vicinity of the site- where appropriate, any industrial or military activities, surface and aerial traffic and any other factors which may have an influence on the safety of the installation- protection measures.2. The installation2.1. Main features of the installation- brief description of the installation- type, purpose and main features of the processes- site layout plan- safety provisions.2.2. Ventilation systems and the treatment of gaseous and airborne wastesDescription of ventilation, decay, filtration and discharge systems, in normal conditions and in the case of an accident, including flow diagrams2.3. Liquid waste treatmentDescription of liquid waste treatment facilities, storage capacities and discharge systems, including flow diagrams2.4. Solid waste treatmentDescription of solid waste treatment facilities and storage capacities2.5. ContainmentDescription including leaktightness specification and testing2.6. Decommissioning and dismantling- envisaged period of operation of the installation- consideration given to decommissioning and dismantling- outline of regulatory and administrative provisions for decommissioning and dismantling.3. Release from the installation of airborne radioactive effluents in normal conditions3.1. Authorisation procedure in force- outline of the procedure in force- discharge limits and associated requirements envisaged by the authorities, including the assumed radionuclide composition.3.2. Technical aspects- annual discharges foreseen- origins of the radioactive effluents, their composition and physico-chemical forms- management of these effluents, methods and paths of release.3.3. Monitoring of discharges- sampling, measurement and analysis of discharges, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities- principal features of the monitoring equipment- alarm levels, intervention actions (manual and automatic).3.4. Evaluation of transfer to man3.4.1. Models and parameter values used to calculate the consequences of the releases:- atmospheric dispersion of the effluents- ground deposition and resuspension- food chains, inhalation, external exposure etc.- living habits (diet, exposure time, etc.)- other parameter values used in the calculations.3.4.2. Evaluation of concentration and exposure levels associated with the discharge limits cited in 3.1:- annual average concentrations of activity in the atmosphere near the ground and surface contamination levels, for the most exposed areas in the vicinity of the installation and in other Member States- for the reference group(s) in other Member States, corresponding annual exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants, taking account of all significant exposure pathways.3.5. Radioactive discharges to atmosphere from other installationsProcedures for coordination with radioactive discharges from other installations referred to in 1.1, third indent.4. Release from the installation of liquid radioactive effluents in normal conditions4.1. Authorisation procedure in force- outline of the general procedure involved- discharge limits and associated requirements envisaged by the authorities, including the assumed radionuclide composition.4.2. Technical aspects- annual discharges foreseen- origins of the radioactive effluents, their composition and physico-chemical forms- management of the effluents, methods and paths of release.4.3. Monitoring of discharges- sampling, measurement and analysis of discharges, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities- principal features of monitoring equipment- alarm levels, intervention actions (manual and automatic).4.4. Evaluation of transfer to man4.4.1. Models and parameter values used to calculate the consequences of the releases:- aquatic dispersion of the effluents- their transfer by sedimentation and ion exchange- food chains, inhalation of sea spray, external exposure, etc.- living habits (diet, exposure time, etc.)- other parameter values used in the calculations.4.4.2. Evaluation of concentration and exposure levels associated with the discharge limits cited in 4.1:- annual average concentrations of activity in surface waters, at the points where such concentrations are highest, in the vicinity of the installation and in other Member States- for the reference group(s) in other Member States: effective dose to adults, children and infants, taking account of all significant exposure pathways.4.5. Radioactive discharges into the same receiving waters from other installationsProcedures for coordination with discharges from other installations referred to in 1.1, third indent.5. Disposal from the installation of solid radioactive waste5.1. Categories of solid radioactive waste including, where appropriate, spent fuel, and estimated amounts5.2. Processing and packaging5.3. Storage arrangements5.4. Radiological risks to the environment, precautions taken5.5. Arrangements for the movement and destinations of the different waste categories transferred off site5.6. Criteria for contaminated materials to be released from the requirements of the Basic Safety Standards- clearance levels established by competent authorities.6. Unplanned releases of radioactive effluents6.1. Review of accidents of internal and external origin which could result in unplanned releases of radioactive substancesList of the accidents studied in the safety report.6.2. Reference accident(s) taken into consideration by the competent national authorities for evaluating possible radiological consequences in the case of unplanned releasesOutline of the accident(s) considered and reasons for its (their) choice.6.3. Evaluation of the radiological consequences of the reference accident(s)6.3.1. Entailing releases to atmosphere- assumptions used to calculate the releases to atmosphere- release paths; time patterns of the releases- amounts and physico-chemical forms of those radionuclides released which are significant from the point of view of health- models and parameter values used to calculate for the releases their atmospheric dispersion, ground deposition, resuspension and transfer via food chains and to evaluate the maximum exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- maximum time-integrated concentrations of radioactivity in the atmosphere near the ground and maximum surface contamination levels (in dry and wet weather) for the most exposed areas in the vicinity of the plant and for relevant areas in other Member States- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants living in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways.6.3.2. Entailing releases into an aquatic environment- assumptions used to calculate the liquid release- release paths, time pattern of releases- amounts and physico-chemical forms of those radionuclides released which are significant from the point of view of health- models and parameters used to calculate for the releases their aquatic dispersion, their transfer by sedimentation and ion exchange, their transfer via food chains and to evaluate the maximum exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants living in the vicinity of the plant and in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways.7. Emergency plans, agreements with other Member StatesIn relation to possible radiological emergencies which may affect other Member States in order to facilitate the organisation of radiological protection in these States,Brief description of:- intervention levels established for different types of countermeasures- emergency planning arrangements, including the emergency planning zones adopted for the installation- arrangements in place for the early exchange of information with other Member States, bilateral or multilateral agreements on transfrontier information, coordination of emergency plans and their implementation and mutual assistance- emergency plan testing arrangements with particular reference to the involvement of other Member States.8. Environmental monitoring- external radiation monitoring- monitoring of radioactivity in air, water, soil and the food chains, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities.With reference to 3.1 and 4.1, monitoring programmes as approved by the competent national authorities, organisation, sample forms and frequency, type of monitoring instruments used in normal and accident circumstances; where appropriate, any collaboration arrangements in this respect with neighbouring Member States.ANNEX 2"GENERAL DATA"applicable to Operation (9)INTRODUCTION- general presentation of the plan- description of the different dismantling phases envisaged- dismantling licensing procedures.1. The site and its surroundings1.1. Geographical, topographical and geological features of the site and the region with- a map of the region showing the location and geographical coordinates (degrees, minutes) of the site- the relevant features of the region- the location of the installation in relation to such installations, the discharges from which need to be considered in conjunction with those from the installation in question- the location of the site with regard to other Member States giving the distances from frontiers and closest conurbations, together with their populations.1.2. HydrologyFor an installation situated near to a water body providing a potential contamination pathway to another Member State, a brief description of appropriate hydrological features, extending to the other Member State(s), for example:- brief description of the path(s), tributaries, estuary, water abstraction, flood plains, etc.- average, maximum and minimum water flows and their frequency of occurrence- underground water table, levels and flows- brief description of the littoral areas- direction and force of currents, tides, circulation patterns, both local and regional- flood risk and protection of the installation.1.3. MeteorologyLocal climatology with frequency distributions of:- wind directions and speeds- precipitation intensity and duration- for each wind sector, atmospheric dispersion conditions, duration of temperature inversions.1.4. Natural resources and foodstuffsBrief description of:- soil characteristics and ecological features of the region- water utilisation in the region and as appropriate in neighbouring Member States- principal food resources in the region and as appropriate in other Member States: crops, stock breeding, fishing, hunting and, for discharges into sea, data on fishing in territorial and extraterritorial waters- foodstuff distribution system and particularly the export to other Member States from the regions concerned, in so far as they are related to the risk of exposure from discharges through the significant exposure pathways.2. The installation2.1. Brief description and history of the installation to be dismantled2.2. Ventilation systems and the treatment of gaseous and airborne wastesDescription of ventilation, decay, filtration and discharge systems, in normal conditions and in the case of an accident, including flow diagrams2.3. Liquid waste treatmentDescription of liquid waste treatment facilities, storage capacities and discharge systems, including flow diagrams2.4. Solid waste treatmentDescription of solid waste treatment facilities and storage capacities2.5. ContainmentDescription including leaktightness specification and testing3. Release from the installation of airborne radioactive effluents in normal conditions3.1. Authorisation procedure in force- outline of the procedure in force- discharge limits and associated requirements envisaged by the authorities, including the assumed radionuclide composition.3.2. Technical aspects- annual discharges foreseen- origins of the radioactive effluents, their composition and physico-chemical forms- management of these effluents, methods and paths of release.3.3. Monitoring of discharges- sampling, measurement and analysis of discharges, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities- principal features of the monitoring equipment- alarm levels, intervention actions (manual and automatic).3.4. Evaluation of transfer to man3.4.1. Models and parameter values used to calculate the consequences of the releases:- atmospheric dispersion of the effluents- ground deposition and resuspension- food chains, inhalation, external exposure, etc.- living habits (diet, exposure time, etc.)- other parameter values used in the calculations.3.4.2. Evaluation of concentration and exposure levels associated with the discharge limits cited in 3.1:- annual average concentrations of activity in the atmosphere near the ground and surface contamination levels, for the most exposed areas in the vicinity of the installation and in other Member States- for the reference group(s) in other Member States, corresponding annual exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants in other Member States, taking account of all significant exposure pathways.4. Release from the installation of liquid radioactive effluents in normal conditions4.1. Authorisation procedure in force- outline of the general procedure involved- discharge limits and associated requirements envisaged by the authorities, including the assumed radionuclide composition4.2. Technical aspects- annual discharges foreseen- origins of the radioactive effluents, their composition and physico-chemical forms- management of the effluents, methods and paths of release.4.3. Monitoring of discharges- sampling, measurement and analysis of discharges, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities- principal features of monitoring equipment- alarm levels, intervention actions (manual and automatic).4.4. Evaluation of transfer to man4.4.1. Models and parameter values used to calculate the consequences of the releases:- aquatic dispersion of the effluents- their transfer by sedimentation and ion exchange- food chains, inhalation of sea spray, external exposure, etc.- living habits (diet, exposure time, etc.)- other parameter values used in the calculations.4.4.2. Evaluation of the concentration and exposure levels associated with the discharges cited in 4.1:- annual average concentrations of activity in surface waters, at the points where such concentrations are highest, in the vicinity of the installation and in other Member States- for the reference group(s) in other Member States: effective dose to adults, children and infants, taking account of all significant exposure pathways.5. Disposal from the installation of solid radioactive waste5.1. Categories of solid radioactive wastes and estimated amounts5.2. Processing and packaging5.3. Storage arrangements5.4. Radiological risks to the environment, precautions taken5.5. Arrangements for the movement and destinations of classified waste transferred off-site5.6. Criteria for contaminated materials to be released from the requirements of the Basic Safety Standards, for disposal, recycling or reuse- clearance levels established by competent authorities.5.7. Envisaged types and amounts of released materials.6. Unplanned releases of radioactive effluents6.1. Review of accidents of internal and external origin which could result in unplanned releases of radioactive substancesList of the accidents studied in the safety report.6.2. Reference accident(s) taken into consideration by the competent national authorities for evaluating possible radiological consequences in the case of unplanned releasesOutline of the accident(s) considered and reasons for its (their) choice.6.3. Evaluation of the radiological consequences of the reference accident(s)6.3.1. Entailing releases to atmosphere- assumptions used to calculate the releases to atmosphere- release paths; time patterns of the releases- amounts and physico-chemical forms of those radionuclides released which are significant from the point of view of health- models and parameter values used to calculate for the releases their atmospheric dispersion, ground deposition, resuspension and transfer via food chains and to evaluate the maximum exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- maximum time-integrated concentrations of radioactivity in the atmosphere near the ground and maximum surface contamination levels (in dry and wet weather) for the most exposed areas in the vicinity of the plant and for relevant areas in other Member States- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants living in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways.6.3.2. Entailing releases into an aquatic environment- assumptions used to calculate the liquid release- release paths, time pattern of releases- amounts and physico-chemical forms of those radionuclides released which are significant from the point of view of health- models and parameters used to calculate for the releases their aquatic dispersion, their transfer by sedimentation and ion exchange, their transfer via food chains and to evaluate the maximum exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants living in the vicinity of the plant and in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways.7. Emergency plans; agreements with other Member StatesIn relation to possible radiological emergencies which may affect other Member States in order to facilitate the organisation of radiological protection in these States, Brief description of:- intervention levels established for different types of countermeasures- emergency planning arrangements, including the emergency planning zones adopted for the installation- arrangements in place for the early exchange of information with other Member States, bilateral or multilateral agreements on transfrontier information, coordination of emergency plans and their implementation and mutual assistance- emergency plan testing arrangements with particular reference to the involvement of other Member States.8. Environmental monitoring- external radiation monitoring- monitoring of radioactivity in air, water, soil and the food chains, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authoritiesWith reference to 3.1 and 4.1 monitoring programmes as approved by the competent national authorities, organisation, sample forms and frequency, type of monitoring instruments used in normal and accident circumstances; where appropriate, any collaboration arrangements in this respect with neighbouring Member States.ANNEX 3"GENERAL DATA"applicable to Operation (10)INTRODUCTION- general presentation of the plan- present stage of project and licensing procedure, envisaged future steps- time scale, envisaged starting date, operational period and closure date.1. The site and its surroundings1.1. Geographical, topographical and geological features of the site and the region with- a map of the region showing the location and geographical co-ordinates (degrees, minutes) of the site- the relevant features of the region- the location of the repository in relation to such other installations, the discharges from which need to be considered in conjunction with those from the installation in question- the location of the site with regard to other Member States giving the distances from frontiers and closest conurbations, together with their populations.1.2. Seismology- the degree of seismic activity in the region; probable maximum seismic activity and designed seismic resistance of the installation.1.3. HydrologyFor an installation situated near to a water body providing a potential contamination pathway to another Member State, a brief description of appropriate hydrological features, extending to the other Member State(s), for example:- brief description of the path(s), tributaries, estuary, water abstraction, flood plains, etc.- average, maximum and minimum water flows and their frequency of occurrence- underground water table, levels and flows- brief description of the littoral areas- direction and force of currents, tides, circulation patterns, both local and regional- for geological disposal, relevant details of the hydrogeological regime, including seasonal variations- flood risk and protection of the installation.1.4. MeteorologyLocal climatology with frequency distributions of:- wind directions and speeds- precipitation intensity and duration- for each wind sector, atmospheric dispersion conditions, duration of temperature inversions.1.5. Natural resources and foodstuffsBrief description of:- soil characteristics and ecological features of the region- water utilisation in the region and as appropriate in neighbouring Member States- principal food resources in the region and as appropriate in other Member States : crops, stock breeding, fishing, hunting and, for discharges into sea, data on fishing in territorial and extraterritorial waters- foodstuff distribution system and particularly the export to other Member States from the regions concerned, insofar as they are related to the risk of exposure from discharges through the significant exposure pathways.1.6. Other activities in the vicinity of the site- where appropriate, any industrial or military activities, surface and aerial traffic and any other factors which may have an influence on the safety of the installation- protection measures.1.7. Evolution of the siteAnticipated evolution of the site over the time period considered for assessment of long term impact:- the natural environment; anticipated changes in geography, topography, geology, hydrology, hydrogeology, meteorology and ecology, glacial effects, and (for coastal sites) sea level changes and coastal erosion- the human environment; assumptions made on future population patterns, habits and food sources- sources of information and uncertainties in data.2. The repository2.1. Conceptual approach and design- main features of the repository- location, depth and design in relation to geological strata- emplacement methods, backfill and sealing methods, timing of backfill and sealing- contingency plans for dealing with difficulties arising during the constructional/operational phases- approach to retrievability of waste- plans for closure (timing and stages)- plans for management in post-closure period- outline of regulatory and administrative provisions for closure and postclosure periods.2.2. Wastes to be disposed in repository- waste inventory; radionuclide concentrations and quantities and restrictions on e.g. substances, concentrations, specific radioisotopes or half lives- types of waste packaging- type and capacity of buffer stores to be used for incoming wastes, storage methods and conditions- waste monitoring to ensure compliance with regulations and operators local rules.2.3. Ventilation systems and the treatment of gaseous and airborne wastesDescription of ventilation, filtration and discharge systems, in normal conditions and in the case of an accident, including flow diagrams.2.4. Liquid waste treatment facilitiesDescription of liquid waste treatment facilities, storage capacities and discharge systems, including flow diagrams3. Release from the installation of airborne radioactive effluents in normal conditions3.1. Authorisation procedure in force- outline of the procedure in force- discharge limits and associated requirements envisaged by the authorities, including the assumed radionuclide composition.3.2. Technical aspects- annual discharges foreseen- origins of the radioactive effluents, their composition and physicochemical forms- management of these effluents, methods and paths of release.3.3. Monitoring of discharges- sampling, measurement and analysis of discharges, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities- principal features of the monitoring equipment- alarm levels, intervention actions (manual and automatic).3.4. Evaluation of transfer to man3.4.1. Models and parameter values used to calculate the consequences of the releases:- atmospheric dispersion of the effluents- ground deposition and resuspension- food chains, inhalation, external exposure, etc.- living habits (diet, exposure time, etc.)- other parameter values used in the calculations.3.4.2. Evaluation of concentration and exposure levels associated with the discharge limits cited in 3.1:- annual average concentrations of activity in the atmosphere near the ground and surface contamination levels, for the most exposed areas in the vicinity of the installation and in other Member States- for the reference group(s) in other Member States, corresponding annual exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants, taking account of all significant exposure pathways.3.5. Radioactive discharges to atmosphere from other installationsWhere appropriate, procedures for coordination with radioactive discharges from other installations, where there may be an additive effect for the exposure levels.4. Release from the installation of liquid radioactive effluents in normal conditions4.1. Authorisation procedure in force- outline of the general procedure involved- discharge limits and associated requirements envisaged by the authorities, including the assumed radionuclide composition.4.2. Technical aspects- annual discharges foreseen- origins of these radioactive effluents, their composition and physicochemical forms- management of these effluents, methods and paths of release.4.3. Monitoring of discharges- sampling, measurement and analysis of discharges, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities- principal features of monitoring equipment- alarm levels, intervention actions (manual and automatic).4.4. Evaluation of transfer to man4.4.1. Models and parameter values used to calculate the consequences of the releases:- aquatic dispersion of the effluents- their transfer by sedimentation and ion exchange- food chains, inhalation of sea spray, external exposure, etc.- living habits (diet, exposure time, etc.)- exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- other parameter values used in the calculations.4.4.2. Evaluation of the concentration and exposure levels associated with the discharge limits cited in 4.1:- annual average concentrations of activity in surface waters, at the points where such concentrations are highest, in the vicinity of the installation and in other Member States- for the reference group(s) in other Member States : effective dose to adults, children and infants, taking account of all significant exposure pathways.4.5. Radioactive discharges into the same receiving waters from other installationsWhere appropriate, procedures for coordination with discharges from other installations, where there may be an additive effect for the exposure levels.5. Disposal from the installation of solid radioactive waste5.1. Categories of solid radioactive wastes and estimated amounts5.2. Processing and packaging5.3. Storage arrangements5.4. Radiological risks to the environment, precautions taken5.5. Arrangements for the movement and destinations of the different waste categories transferred off-site5.6. Criteria for contaminated materials to be released from the requirements of the Basic Safety Standards- clearance levels established by competent authorities.6. Unplanned releases of radioactive effluents6.1. Review of accidents of internal and external origin which could result in unplanned releases of radioactive substancesList of the accidents studied in the safety report.6.2. Reference accident(s) taken into consideration by the competent national authorities for evaluating possible radiological consequences in the case of unplanned releasesOutline of the accident(s) considered and reasons for its (their) choice.6.3. Evaluation of the radiological consequences of the reference accidents6.3.1. Entailing releases to atmosphere- assumptions used to calculate the releases to atmosphere- release paths; time patterns of the releases- amounts and physico-chemical forms of those radionuclides released which are significant from the point of view of health- models and parameter values used to calculate for the releases their atmospheric dispersion, ground deposition, resuspension and transfer via food chains and to evaluate the maximum exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- maximum time-integrated concentrations of radioactivity in the atmosphere near the ground and maximum surface contamination- levels (in dry and wet weather) for the most exposed areas in the vicinity of the plant and for relevant areas in other Member States- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants living in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways.6.3.2. Entailing releases into an aquatic enviromnent- assumptions used to calculate the liquid release- release paths, time pattern of releases- amounts and physico-chemical forms of those radionuclides released which are significant from the point of view of health- models and parameters used to calculate for the releases their aquatic dispersion, their transfer by sedimentation and ion exchange, their transfer via food chains and to evaluate the maximum exposure levels via the significant exposure pathways- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective dose to adults, children and infants living in the vicinity of the plant and in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways.7. Emergency plans; agreements with other Member StatesIn relation to possible radiological emergencies which may affect other Member States in order to facilitate the organisation of radiological protection in these States, brief description of:- intervention levels established for different types of countermeasures- emergency planning arrangements, including the emergency planning zones adopted for the installation- arrangements in place for the early exchange of information with other Member States, bilateral or multilateral agreements on transfrontier information, coordination of emergency plans and their implementation and mutual assistance- emergency plan testing arrangements with particular reference to the involvement of other Member States.8. Environmental monitoring- external radiation monitoring- monitoring of radioactivity in air, water, soil and the food chains, whether undertaken by the operator or by competent authorities.With reference to 3.1 and 4.1 monitoring programmes as approved by the competent national authorities, organisation, sample forms and frequency, type of monitoring instruments used in normal and accident circumstances; where appropriate, any collaboration arrangements in this respect with neighbouring Member States.9. Radiological impact during post-closure phase9.1. Philosophy for assuring long term safety- dependence placed on respective barriers, redundancy of barriers, in respect of containment of part/all of the radionuclide inventory.9.2. Acceptance criteria applied to repository- use of quantitative and qualitative indicators of safety- use of reference groups- time periods considered for application of indicators.9.3. Techniques used to evaluate long term impact of repository- approach to survey scenarios- description of scenario(s) assumed; features, events and processes taken into account, and features, events and processes deliberately omitted- methods used for assessment of impact- sources of uncertainties and approaches to managing them- plans for review of impact or update of safety case during the operational period up to closure.9.4. Results of assessment of long term impact of repository- main exposure pathways in vicinity of repository and other Member States resulting from normal evolution (see 1.7)- estimated amounts, of forms of those nuclides released, estimated rate and timing of release, gas and ground water return times after closure- corresponding maximum exposure levels: effective doses and/or estimated risks to adults, children and infants living in relevant areas of other Member States taking account of all significant exposure pathways- evaluation of the uncertainties in assessments.9.5. Authorisation procedure- outline of procedure to be put into place- limitations to be incorporated into authorisation.9.6. Proposals for management of site post-closure- monitoring proposals for site post-closure- form and management of records.ANNEX 4>PIC FILE= "L_1999324EN.004202.EPS">>PIC FILE= "L_1999324EN.004301.EPS">NOTICE TO READERSSubject: Monthly IndexesThe April 1999 editions of the OJ "L" and "C" monthly alphabetical index and the methodological table are now available.EUR-OP aims to produce all subsequent editions rapidly, at two-week intervals, and to be up to date early in the year 2000.We regret the long delays which were caused by internal changes in production methods, and are confident that these problems will not re-appear with the year 2000 subscriptions.We apologise for any inconvenience caused.


				|

		52012DC0311

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on Estonia’s 2012 national reform programme and delivering a Council Opinion on Estonia’s stability programme for 2012-2015 /* COM/2012/0311 final */

			   	Recommendation for a
COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
on Estonia’s 2012 national reform
programme
and delivering a Council Opinion on Estonia’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 the recommendation of the
European Commission[2],
Having regard to the conclusions of the
European Council,
Having regard to the resolutions of the
European Parliament,[3]
Having regard to the opinion of the
Employment Committee,
After consulting the Economic and Financial
Committee,
Whereas:
(1)       On 26 March 2010, the
European Council agreed to the European Commission’s proposal to launch a new
strategy for jobs and growth, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of
economic policies, which will focus on the key areas where action is needed to
boost Europe’s potential for sustainable growth and competitiveness.
(2)       On 13 July 2010, the
Council adopted a recommendation on the broad guidelines for the economic
policies of the Member States and the Union (2010 to 2014) and, on 21 October
2010, adopted a decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the
Member States[4],
which together form the ‘integrated guidelines’. Member States were invited to
take the integrated guidelines into account in their national economic and
employment policies.
(3)       On 12 July 2011, the
Council adopted a recommendation on Estonia’s national reform programme for 2011
and delivered its opinion on Estonia’s updated stability programme for
2011-2014.
(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[5], in which it did not identify
Estonia as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be
carried out.
(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. It invited Member States to implement the Council’s country-specific
recommendations for 2011 and to translate these priorities into concrete
measures to be included in their stability or convergence programmes and national
reform programmes.
(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)       On 26 April 2012, Estonia
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.
(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 in 2012-13,
when GDP growth is expected to average around 2.4%. The Commission's 2012 spring
forecast foresees GDP growth of 3.8% in 2013. The objective of the budgetary
strategy outlined in the programme is to ensure sustainable fiscal policy that
supports balanced growth, by achieving a structural surplus while ensuring
sufficient fiscal buffers and reducing the tax burden on labour. The strategy
also aims at fulfilling the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. The
programme aims at overachieving the medium-term budgetary objective (MTO) of a
structural surplus as of 2012. The MTO adequately reflects the requirements of
the Stability and Growth Pact. Based on the (recalculated) structural budget
balance,[6],
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 2013 (when the MTO is planned to be reached)
and 2014. In parallel, the programme aims at reaching headline surpluses as of
2014. The debt ratio is well below 60% of GDP and, according to the programme,
is likely to decrease after 2013 to about 10% in 2015.
(9)       Estonia achieved a
sizeable budget surplus in 2011. The projected rate of economic growth for 2012
in the Commission's 2012 spring forecast looks much weaker than for 2011,
dropping from 7.6% to 1.6 %, and therefore further control over efficiency of
spending is necessary. Estonia plans to introduce a structural budget rule in
2012 to help keep control over expenditure. The rule should be complemented by
strengthening the binding nature of the multi-annual expenditure targets as
soon as the budget rule is in place. Thus, Estonia has partially implemented the
2011 recommendation in this area.
(10)     As regards the labour
market, a number of steps have been made in the area of labour taxation.
However, the incentives to work can be improved by addressing the rising trend
in take up of disability and incapacity-for-work benefits and by making work
pay for low and high-income earners receiving unemployment and parental
benefits. While promising efforts are made to reduce the high unemployment, long-term
and youth unemployment is still high. As a result, the poverty risk of children
in jobless households is increasing and needs to be addressed by effective
social services, including family services. The family support itself could be
made more efficient in a budget-neutral way by better targeting the allocation
of parental and family benefits and by removing inefficient income tax
exemptions related to children.
(11)     The measures in the
National Energy Efficiency Action Plan are still insufficient given the current
trend of modal shift away from public transport. The fleet of new cars in
Estonia is the most energy intensive in EU. Fuel excise duties are insufficient
in shifting consumer patterns. The transposition of several energy-related EU
Directives has not yet been fully completed. Estonia still needs to diversify its
energy supply. The electricity infrastructure could be upgraded to integrate
increasing amounts of wind energy.
(12)     The quality and
availability of vocational education has considerably improved and more
modernisation measures are planned for 2012-13. However, the transition from
general education to vocational education (VET) needs to be improved, and a
generalisation of more work-based schemes could be considered. Lifelong
learning participation is improving, but there is an insufficient focus on
low-skilled workers. There are continuing problems with matching education
outcomes with labour market needs. There is also a need to urgently reform
upper-secondary education and for further improvement in the provision of
education services by local authorities. Also, cooperation between the business
sector and higher education institutions continues to be weak, while the
knowledge-intensive part of the private sector should be further developed.
(13)     To reflect the declining
demographic trend and ensure a balanced and competitive regional development there
is a longer-term need to ensure financial sustainability of local governments as
well as to ensure a better provision of public services at local level and
optimise the use of relatively dispersed resources. Being limited in size, the
majority of local governments have difficulties to universally deliver the
necessary social, health, labour market, transport and educational services.
(14)     Estonia has made a number
of commitments under the Euro Plus Pact. These commitments, and the
implementation of the commitments presented in 2011, relate to fostering
employment, improving competitiveness and enhancing sustainability of public
finances. 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.
(15)     In the context of the
European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Estonia’s
economic policy. It has assessed the stability programme and national reform
programme. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable
fiscal and socio-economic policy in Estonia 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.
(16)     In the light of this
assessment, the Council has examined Estonia’s stability programme, and its
opinion[7]
is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below,
HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Estonia should
take action within the period 2012-2013 to:
1.           Preserve a sound fiscal position by implementing budgetary
plans as envisaged, ensuring achievement of the medium-term budgetary objective
(MTO) by 2013 at the latest, and compliance with the expenditure benchmark.
Complement the planned budget rule with more binding multi-annual expenditure
rules within the medium-term budgetary framework, continue enhancing the
efficiency of public spending and step up the fight against the shadow economy.
2.           Improve incentives to work
by streamlining the social benefits system and increasing flexibility in the
allocation of disability, unemployment and parental benefits, while ensuring
adequate social protection. Improve delivery of social services, while better targeting
family and parental benefits and removing distortionary income tax exemptions
related to children. Increase the participation of the young and the long-term
unemployed in the labour market.
3.           Link training and
education more effectively to the needs of the labour market, and enhance
cooperation between businesses and academia. Increase opportunities for low
skilled workers to improve their access to life-long learning. Foster
prioritisation and internationalisation of the research and innovation systems.
4.           Improve energy efficiency,
in particular in buildings and transport, and strengthen environmental incentives
concerning vehicles and waste, including by considering
incentives such as the taxation of vehicles. Foster
renewable energy use, including through upgraded infrastructure and legislation.
Continue the development of cross-border connections to end relative market
isolation.
5.           Enhance fiscal
sustainability of municipalities while improving efficiency of local governments
and ensure effective service provision, notably through stronger incentives for
merger or increased cooperation of municipalities. Relevant reform proposals
should be put in place within a reasonable timeframe.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
[1]               OJ L 209, 02.08.1997, p. 1
[2]               COM(2012)311 final
[3]               P7_TA(2012)0048 and P7_TA(2012)0047
[4]               Council Decision 2012/238/EU of 26 April 2012
[5]               COM(2012) 68 final
[6]               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.
[7]               Under Article 5(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No
1466/97


Avis juridique important

|

31995H0113

95/113/EC: Council Recommendation of 20 March 1995 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 1993

Official Journal L 080 , 08/04/1995 P. 0045 - 0045

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 20 March  1995 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the  operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 1993  (95/113/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 206  thereof, Having regard to the Fourth ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 15 December 1989, Having regard to Council Decision 91/482/EEC of 25 July 1991 on the association of the overseas  countries and territories with the European Economic Community  (1), Having regard to the Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid  (2),  signed in Brussels on 16 July 1990, and in particular Article 33 (3) thereof, Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 29 July 1991 applicable to the Seventh European  Development Fund  (3), and in particular Articles 69 to 77 thereof, Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the  operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) as at 31 December 1993 and the  Court of Auditors' report relating to the financial year 1993 together with the Commission's  replies  (4), Whereas, pursuant to Article 33 (3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the management of  the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh 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 (1989) (Seventh EDF) during the financial year 1993 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 (1989) (Seventh EDF) for the  financial year 1993. Done at Brussels, 20 March 1995. For the Council The President E. ALPHANDÉRY


title: Recommendation for a Council opinion in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the updated convergence programme of Malta, 2006-2009

text:
Important legal notice

|

52007SC0140

Recommendation for a Council opinion in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 On the updated convergence programme of Malta, 2006-2009  /* SEC/2007/0140 final */

	[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 7.2.2007SEC(2007) 140 finalRecommendation for aCOUNCIL OPINIONin accordance with the third paragraph of Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 On the updated convergence programme of Malta, 2006-2009(presented by the Commission)EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM1. GENERAL BACKGROUNDThe Stability and Growth Pact, which entered into force on 1 July 1998, is based on the objective of sound government finances as a means of strengthening the conditions for price stability and for strong sustainable growth conducive to employment creation. The 2005 reform of the Pact acknowledged its usefulness in anchoring fiscal discipline but sought to strengthen its effectiveness and economic underpinnings as well as to safeguard the sustainability of the public finances in the long run.Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies[1], which is part of the Stability and Growth Pact, stipulates that Member States have to submit, to the Council and the Commission, stability or convergence programmes and annual updates thereof (Member States that have already adopted the single currency submit (updated) stability programmes and Member States that have not yet adopted it submit (updated) convergence programmes). The first convergence programme of Malta was submitted in May 2004. In accordance with the Regulation, the Council delivered an opinion on it on 5 July 2004 on the basis of a recommendation from the Commission and after having consulted the Economic and Financial Committee. In accordance with the same procedure, updated stability and convergence programmes are assessed by the Commission and examined by the Committee mentioned above, while the Council may examine them.2. BACKGROUND FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE UPDATED PROGRAMMEThe Commission has examined the most recent update of the convergence programme of Malta, submitted on 7 December 2006, and has adopted a recommendation for a Council opinion on it (see box for the main points covered by the assessment).In order to set the scene against which the budgetary strategy in the updated convergence programme is assessed, the following paragraphs summarise:1.  the economic and budgetary performance over the last ten years2.  the country’s position under the corrective arm of the Stability and Growth Pact (excessive deficit procedure)3.  the most recent assessment of the country’s position under the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact (summary of the Council opinion on the previous update of the convergence programme)4.  the Commission’s assessment of the October 2006 national reform programme.2.1. Recent economic and budgetary performanceFollowing a period of strong economic growth in the second half of the nineties, the performance of the Maltese economy slowed down appreciably between 2001 and 2005[2]. Although unfavourable cyclical developments contributed to this outcome, domestic structural weaknesses - magnified by sectoral concentration in manufacturing - have progressively led to a loss in Malta’s external competitiveness. This resulted in a fall in exports and a worsening external deficit which in 2005 stood at around 11% of GDP. While estimates for TFP growth may capture 'quality' aspect of factor inputs, the low total factor productivity in recent years appears to be another reason behind Malta's weak economic growth. In the past years, Malta recorded a general government deficit. Although various attempts have led to a decline in the deficit-to-GDP ratio since 1998, the adjustment was not always durable. For most years the adjustment was achieved through higher revenue, however recently adjustment is being attained through expenditure control which should contribute to a more lasting consolidation. However, despite the success in restraining overall spending in recent years, certain expenditure items - such as those related to healthcare and social protection - have followed an upward trend between 1998 and 2004.2.2. The excessive deficit procedure for MaltaOn 5 July 2004 the Council adopted a decision stating that Malta had an excessive deficit in accordance with Article 104(6). At the same time, the Council addressed a recommendation under Article 104(7) specifying that the excessive deficit had to be corrected by 2006. In particular, Malta was recommended to implement with vigour measures, particularly those of a structural nature, aimed at rationalising and reducing expenditure. The Council also recommended Malta to end the rise in the debt ratio in 2005 and reduce it thereafter.2.3. The assessment in the Council opinion on the previous programmeOn 14 March 2006, the Council adopted its opinion on the previous update of the convergence programme, covering the period 2005-2008. The Council was of the opinion that “overall the programme is consistent with the correction of the excessive deficit by 2006”. The Council invited Malta to “implement with rigour the 2006 budget measures and ensure the correction of the excessive deficit this year and in line with the updated convergence programme, and ensure that budgetary consolidation towards the programme’s medium-term objective is sustained after the excessive deficit has been corrected”, to “ensure that the debt ratio is declining towards the 60% of GDP Treaty reference value at a satisfactory pace from 2006 onwards” and to “improve the long-term sustainability of the public finances by making further progress in the design and implementation of the pension reform”.2.4. The Commission assessment of the October 2006 national reform programmeThe implementation report of the national reform programme of Malta, provided in the context of the renewed Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, was submitted on 15 October 2006. Malta's national reform programme identifies as key challenges/priorities: sustainability of public finances, competitiveness, the environment, employment and education and training. The Commission’s assessment of this programme (adopted as part of its December 2006 Annual Progress Report[3]) showed that Malta is making good progress in the implementation of its National Reform Programme. Implementation is advancing strongly in the area of fiscal sustainability, considered by the authorities to be a crucial element for achieving more growth and jobs and adopting the euro. The implementation efforts in the micro-economic and employment area are more moderate.Against the background of strengths and weaknesses identified, Malta was recommended to take action in the areas of: strengthening competition and reduce and redirect state aid; attracting more people into the labour market, tackle undeclared work and implement changes to the tax and benefit system.Box: Main points covered by the assessment As required by Article 5(1) (for stability programmes) and Article 9(1) (for convergence programmes) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the assessment covers the following points: whether the economic assumptions on which the programme is based are plausible; the medium-term budgetary objective (MTO) presented by the Member State and whether the adjustment path towards it is appropriate; whether measures being taken and/or proposed to respect that adjustment path are sufficient to achieve the MTO over the cycle; when assessing the adjustment path towards the MTO, whether a higher adjustment effort is made in economic good times, whereas the effort may be more limited in economic bad times, and, for euro-area and ERM II Member States, whether the Member State pursues an annual improvement of the cyclically-adjusted balance, net of one-off and other temporary measures, of 0.5% of GDP as a benchmark to meet its MTO; when defining the adjustment path to the MTO (for Member States that have not yet reached it) or allowing a temporary deviation from the MTO (for Member States that have), the implementation of major structural reforms which have direct long-term cost-saving effects (including by raising potential growth) and therefore a verifiable impact on the long-term sustainability of public finances (subject to the condition that an appropriate safety margin with respect to the 3% of GDP reference value is preserved and that the budgetary position is expected to return to the MTO within the programme period), with special attention for pension reforms introducing a multi-pillar system that includes a mandatory, fully-funded pillar; whether the economic policies of the Member State are consistent with the broad economic policy guidelines. The plausibility of the programme’s macroeconomic assumptions is assessed by reference to the Commission services’ autumn 2006 forecast, using also the commonly agreed methodology for the estimation of potential output and cyclically-adjusted balances. The assessment of consistency with the broad economic policy guidelines is made against the broad economic policy guidelines in the area of public finances as included in the integrated guidelines for the period 2005-2008. The assessment also examines: the evolution of the debt ratio and the outlook for the long-term sustainability of the public finances, which should be given “sufficient attention in the surveillance of budgetary positions” according to the Council report of 20 March 2005 on “Improving the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact”. A Commission Communication of 12 October 2006 sets out the approach to the assessment of long-term sustainability[4]; the degree of integration with the national reform programme, submitted by Member States in the context of the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs. In its cover note of 7 June 2005 to the European Council on the broad economic policy guidelines for the period 2005-2008, the ECOFIN Council stated that the national reform programmes should be consistent with the stability and convergence programmes; compliance with the code of conduct[5], which inter alia prescribes a common structure and set of data tables for the stability and convergence programmes. |-  Recommendation for aCOUNCIL OPINIONin accordance with the third paragraph of Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 On the updated convergence programme of Malta, 2006-2009THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,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[6], and in particular Article 9(3) thereof,Having regard to the recommendation of the Commission,After consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,HAS DELIVERED THIS OPINION:5.  On [27 February 2007] the Council examined the updated convergence programme of Malta, which covers the period 2006 to 2009.6.  The macroeconomic scenario underlying the programme envisages that real GDP growth will hover around 3% over the programme period. Assessed against currently available information, this scenario appears to be based on favourable growth assumptions for 2007 and markedly favourable ones thereafter, especially due to the optimistic medium-term evolution of the external sector. Less favourable net exports in the medium term than foreseen in the programme could heighten the external imbalance recorded in recent years.7.  For 2006, the general government deficit is estimated at 2.9% of GDP in the Commission services’ autumn 2006 forecast, against a target of 2.7% of GDP set in the previous update of the convergence programme. The estimated outturn for 2006 in the new update (2.6% of GDP) is below that projected in the Commission services’ autumn 2006 forecast and seems plausible in the light of recent information on GDP growth and government finance cash data.8.  The budgetary strategy outlined in the update aims at reducing the deficit below the 3% of GDP reference value in 2006 and at pursuing fiscal consolidation thereafter. The update foresees a gradual reduction in the general government deficit leading to a broadly balanced budget by 2009. With a projected decline in the interest burden, the primary surplus is expected to reach 3¼ % of GDP by 2009. The adjustment is to be achieved through a cut in the primary expenditure ratio by almost 5¾ percentage points of GDP, which more than offsets a decline in the revenue ratio by almost 3¾ percentage points of GDP. Despite the success in restraining overall spending, healthcare expenditure followed an upward trend in the past years. Lower recourse will be made to deficit-reducing one-off measures than in the recent past. The programme broadly confirms the planned nominal budgetary adjustment in the previous update against a much more favourable macroeconomic scenario.9.  The structural deficit (i.e. the cyclically-adjusted deficit net of one-off and other temporary measures) calculated according to the commonly agreed methodology is planned to improve from around 3% of GDP in 2006 to ½% of GDP at the end of the programme period. As in the previous update of the convergence programme, the medium-term objective (MTO) for the budgetary position presented in the programme is a balanced position in structural terms but the new programme does not aim to achieve the MTO within the programme period. As the MTO is more demanding than the minimum benchmark (estimated at a deficit of around 1¾% of GDP), achieving it should fulfil the aim of providing a safety margin against the occurrence of an excessive deficit. The MTO lies within the range indicated for euro-area and ERM II Member States in the Stability and Growth Pact and the code of conduct and adequately reflects the debt ratio and average potential output growth in the long term.10.  The risks to the budgetary projections in the programme appear broadly balanced for 2007 but the budgetary outcomes could be worse than projected in the programme thereafter. This is due to a favourable GDP growth projected for 2007 and a markedly favourable macroeconomic scenario in 2008-2009 underlying the update's projections (although tax projections for these years seem cautious). In addition, after 2007 no details are given on the adjustment strategy increasing the risks attached to the planned fiscal consolidation.11.  In view of this risk assessment, the budgetary stance in the programme seems consistent with a correction of the excessive deficit by 2006 as recommended by the Council. In addition, it seems to provide a sufficient safety margin against breaching the 3% of GDP deficit threshold with normal macroeconomic fluctuations from 2008 onwards. In the years following the correction of the excessive deficit, the pace of the adjustment towards the MTO implied by the programme is broadly in line with the Stability and Growth Pact, which specifies that, for euro-area and ERM II Member States, the annual improvement in the structural balance should be 0.5% of GDP as a benchmark and that the adjustment should be higher in good economic times and could be lower in bad economic times.12.  Government gross debt is estimated to have reached 68¼% of GDP in 2006, above the 60% of GDP Treaty reference value. The programme projects the debt ratio to decline by 8¾ percentage points of GDP over the programme period. The evolution of the debt ratio is likely to be less favourable than projected in the programme given the risks to the budgetary targets mentioned above. In view of this risk assessment, the debt ratio seems to be sufficiently diminishing towards the reference value over the programme period.13.  Malta has recently enacted a pension reform aimed at both increasing the effective retirement age and raising the level of pensions. As a result estimates in the programme suggest that pension expenditures will be higher, leading to a higher increase in age-related expenditure, close to the EU average. Although at a somewhat slower pace than historical trends, projections for healthcare spending show an increase of around 1¾ percentage points of GDP in the long term, if current trends persist. The current budgetary position would not ensure a steady reduction of debt to below the Treaty reference value. Therefore, improving the budgetary position, as projected in the programme, would contribute to reducing the risks to the sustainability of public finances. Overall, Malta appears to be at medium risk with regard to the sustainability of public finances.14.  The convergence programme does not contain a qualitative assessment of the overall impact of the October 2006 implementation report of the national reform programme within the medium-term fiscal strategy. However, it provides systematic information on the direct budgetary costs or savings of the main reforms envisaged in the national reform programme and its budgetary projections explicitly take into account the public finance implications of the actions outlined in the national reform programme. The measures in the area of public finances envisaged in the convergence programme seem consistent with those foreseen in the national reform programme. In particular, both programmes envisage the implementation of the pension reform while the convergence programme provides details of the tax reform announced in the national reform programme.15.  The budgetary strategy in the programme is broadly consistent with the broad economic policy guidelines included in the integrated guidelines for the period 2005-2008.16.  As regards the data requirements specified in the code of conduct for stability and convergence programmes, the programme has some gaps in the required and optional data[7].The overall conclusion is that the programme is consistent with a correction of the excessive deficit by 2006 and, in a context of strong growth prospects, envisages adequate progress towards the MTO thereafter. The debt ratio as envisaged by the programme seems to be diminishing at a satisfactory pace towards the 60% of GDP reference value. However, there are risks to the achievement of the budgetary targets after 2007. Maintaining a budgetary position that is robust to possible reversals of the projected strong growth pattern is important especially in light of the recent build-up of external imbalances. In view of the above assessment, Malta is invited to:(i) pursue adequate progress towards the MTO and ensure that the debt-to-GDP ratio is reduced accordingly, while spelling out the budgetary strategy, especially on the expenditure side, with a longer time perspective;(ii) in view of the level of debt and the projected increase in age-related expenditure, improve the long-term sustainability of public finances by achieving the MTO and making further progress in the design and implementation of the healthcare reform.Comparison of key macroeconomic and budgetary projections2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |Real GDP (% change) | CP Dec 2006 | 2.2 | 2.9 | 3.0 | 3.1 | 3.1 |COM Nov 2006 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.1 | 2.2 | n.a. |CP Jan 2006 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 2.0 | n.a. |HICP inflation (%) | CP Dec 2006 | 2.5 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 2.0 |COM Nov 2006 | 2.5 | 3.0 | 2.6 | 2.4 | n.a. |CP Jan 20066 | 2.8 | 3.1 | 2.5 | 1.9 | n.a. |Output gap (% of potential GDP) | CP Dec 20061 | -2.8 | -2.1 | -1.3 | -0.3 | 0.9 |COM Nov 20065 | -2.1 | -1.4 | -1.1 | -0.5 | n.a. |CP Jan 20061 | -2.9 | -3.7 | -4.2 | -4.4 | n.a. |General government balance (% of GDP) | CP Dec 2006 | -3.2 | -2.6 | -2.3 | -0.9 | 0.1 |COM Nov 2006 | -3.2 | -2.9 | -2.7 | -2.9 | n.a. |CP Jan 2006 | -3.9 | -2.7 | -2.3 | -1.2 | n.a. |Primary balance (% of GDP) | CP Dec 2006 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 2.5 | 3.2 |COM Nov 2006 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 | n.a. |CP Jan 2006 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 2.4 | n.a. |Cyclically-adjusted balance (% of GDP) | CP Dec 20061 | -2.2 | -1.8 | -1.8 | -0.8 | -0.2 |COM Nov 2006 | -2.4 | -2.3 | -2.3 | -2.7 | n.a. |CP Jan 20061 | -2.8 | -1.3 | -0.7 | 0.4 | n.a. |Structural balance2 (% of GDP) | CP Dec 20063 | -3.8 | -2.9 | -2.0 | -1.0 | -0.4 |COM Nov 20064 | -4.0 | -3.5 | -2.5 | -2.7 | n.a. |CP Jan 2006 | -3.8 | -2.3 | -1.4 | 0.3 | n.a. |Government gross debt (% of GDP) | CP Dec 2006 | 74.2 | 68.3 | 66.7 | 63.2 | 59.4 |COM Nov 2006 | 74.2 | 69.6 | 69.0 | 68.6 | n.a. |CP Jan 2006 | 76.7 | 70.8 | 68.9 | 67.3 | n.a. |Notes: 1 Commission services calculations on the basis of the information in the programme. 2 Cyclically-adjusted balance (as in the previous rows) excluding one-off and other temporary measures. 3 One-off and other temporary measures taken from the programme (1.6% of GDP in 2005, 1.1% of GDP in 2006, 0.2% of GDP in 2007, 0.2% of GDP in 2008 and 0.2% of GDP in 2009; all deficit-reducing). 4 One-off and other temporary measures taken from the Commission services’ autumn 2006 forecast (1.6% of GDP in 2005, 1.1% of GDP in 2006, 0.2%of GDP in 2007, 0% of GDP in 2008; all deficit-reducing). 5 Based on estimated potential growth of 2.2%, 1.7%, 1.7% and 1.6% respectively in the period 2005-2008. 6 The January 2006 CP figures correspond to the Retail Price Index. Source: Convergence programme (CP); Commission services’ autumn 2006 economic forecasts (COM); Commission services’ calculations |[1] OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1055/2005 (OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 1). All the documents referred to in this text can be found at the following website:http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/about/activities/sgp/main_en.htm[2] On 7 December 2006, the Maltese authorities transmitted to Eurostat new GDP data since 1995, showing - with respect to figures published in September 2006 - downward revisions in nominal GDP levels up to around 1% between 1996 and 2003. For 2004 and 2005, nominal GDP has been revised upwards by 0.4% and 0.9%, respectively, and for the first half of 2006 the revision corresponds to 1.1%. These revisions were carried out within the regular assessment process of compliance with Eurostat's statistical practices. The latest figures have been used by the Commission in its assessment of the updated programme.[3] Communication from the Commission to the Spring European Council, “Implementing the renewed Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs - A year of delivery” - COM(2006) 816, 12.12.2006.[4] Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, “The long-term sustainability of public finances in the EU” - COM(2006) 574, 12.10.2006 - and European Commission, Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (2006), “The long-term sustainability of public finances in the European Union”, European Economy No 4/2006.[5] “Specifications on the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact and guidelines on the format and content of stability and convergence programmes”, endorsed by the ECOFIN Council of 11 October 2005.[6] OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1055/2005 (OJ L 174, 7.7.2005, p. 1). The documents referred to in this text can be found at the following website:http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/about/activities/sgp/main_en.htm[7] In particular, the data on sectoral balances in particular forecasts for net lending/borrowing vis-à-vis the rest of the world for 2006-2009 and employment and labour productivity in hours worked are not provided.