Summary of Opinions - January 2017 Plenary Session

European Economic and Social Committee

Brussels, 17 February 2017

EESC-2016-06957-00-01-TCD-TRA (FR) 1/14

Contents:

1.INTERNAL MARKET

2.SOCIAL AFFAIRS/MIGRATION

3.INNOVATION AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION

4.EXTERNAL RELATIONS

The plenary session of 25-26 January 2017 was attended by Marianne Thyssen, European Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs, Skills and Labour Mobility, Maria João Rodrigues, MEP, European Parliament rapporteur for the Pillar of Social Rights, Ian Borg, Maltese Parliamentary Secretary for EU Funds and the 2017 presidency, and Pierre Moscovici, European Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs.

The following opinions were adopted:

1.INTERNAL MARKET

• Threats and obstacles to the Single Market (own-initiative opinion)

Rapporteur:Oliver Röpke (Workers – AT)

Reference:EESC-2016-01244-00-00-AC-TRA

The single market is a major achievement and a key element of the European integration process. It should represent the cornerstone of prosperity in Europe. However, both are coming under growing pressure, partly due to short-sighted national interests, with a significant part of the population increasingly calling them into question, partly because of real concerns of the European citizens.

The EESC is concerned that the EU's single market has barely grown since the financial crisis. Active steps are therefore needed to steer Europe back towards the policy objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy.

The EESC:

• stresses the importance of cross-border mobility for businesses and workers and the need to fight against unfair and illegal practices associated with the cross-border provision of services and to ensure fair competition in the interests of business too;
• calls for a better balance between market freedoms and basic social rights in primary law;
• welcomes efforts to check EU law for efficiency; harmonised legislation should thus be checked for necessity, specifically in the interests of SMEs;
• underlines its view that the digital single market should be a policy priority given its huge growth potential. Existing legal uncertainties in the areas of employment, the economy and consumer affairs need to be examined and removed without delay;
• calls for a clear legal framework for new forms of economy and new business models in the single market, including various forms of the sharing economy, with a view to closing regulatory gaps;
• reiterates its view that regulatory gaps in taxation policy lead to unfair competition in the single market;
• considers that services of general interest play a key role in the social market economy and are essential for the general public. They have a place among the EU's shared values, playing a part in fostering social and territorial cohesion. This role should be taken into account as part of the "principles and conditions" which the EU can establish for these services;
• calls for measures to tackle unfair practices in public procurement, which push tenders below a fair standard, sometimes fail to comply with minimum-wage requirements in force in the respective national legal provisions and practices and, in many cases, result in high cost overruns. The aim must be to apply the best tender principle, not that of the lowest bid.

Contact:Jean-Pierre Faure

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 9615 – email: )

• Copyright package

Rapporteur:Juan MENDOZA CASTRO (Travailleurs – ES)

Reference:COM(2016) 593 final – 2016/0280 (COD)

COM(2016) 594 final – 2016/0284 (COD)

COM(2016) 596 final – 2016/0278 (COD)

EESC-2016-05382-00-00-AC-TRA

The EESC:

• welcomes the package to adapt copyright to the requirements of the digital economy;
• stresses that regulating copyright must serve to strike a balance between the rights of all these parties, avoiding bureaucracy and unnecessary requirements;
• stresses that swift ratification by the EU of the Marrakesh Treaty on copyright in relation to the blind is important and necessary;
• suggests a number of amendments e.g. on text and data mining or copies of works for the preservation of cultural heritage to adjust copyright more closely to current requirements;
• refers to the ECJ judgement stating that, under certain conditions, the lending of a digital copy of a book has similar characteristics to the lending of printed works;
• urges that "freedom of panorama" exception should be harmonised by European rules;
• supports the exclusive related right of publishers to authorise or prohibit the digital use of their press publications for a period of twenty years;
• welcomes that authors are entitled to fair remuneration for their creative endeavours, to be associated with the commercial success of their works and to benefit from a high level of protection and funding of works.

Contact:Claudia Drewes-Wran

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 8067 – email: )

• Aviation security/screening equipment

Rapporteur:Stefan Back (Employers – SE)

Reference:COM(2016) 491 final – 2016/0236 (COD)

EESC-2016-05432-00-01-AC-TRA

The EESC:

• welcomes the Commission's proposal as a first step in implementing the action plan;
• regrets that:
• the proposal does not introduce a single EU approval authority with an integrated technical service, as this would have made for optimal efficiency and cost reduction;
• the possibility of prescribing more stringent requirements at national level than the basic level provided for under that regulation is not reflected in the Proposal;
• the TFEU does not allow dedicated national action to protect essential national interests against terrorist acts, in line with Article 346 TFEU or to public procurement under Article 15 of Directive 2014/24 on public procurement;
• no consideration seems to have been given to the possibility of including a system for exchange of information and coordination between the different national approval authorities;
• welcomes in principle the proposal that the EU should seek to become a full member of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC);
• has doubts about the added value of the proposal as it now stands and would therefore ask the Commission to reconsider its content with a view to taking on board the observations made in this opinion.

Contact:Claudia Drewes-Wran

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 8067 – email: )

2.SOCIAL AFFAIRS/MIGRATION

• European Pillar of Social Rights

Rapporteur:Jacek Krawczyk (Employers – PL)

Gabriele Bischoff (Workers – DE)

Luca Jahier (Various Interests – IT)

Reference:EESC-2016-01902-00-01-AS-TRA

Key points:

The EESC:

• welcomes the Commission's initiative of launching a public consultation on a European Pillar of Social Rights while emphasising full respect of the division of competences and the principle of subsidiarity;
• calls for greater clarity regarding the scope and content of the Pillar and stresses that civil society and the social partners should be properly involved in the discussions concerning the Pillar;
• finds that social rights should apply to all Member States, while recognising that specific instruments/mechanisms may be necessary for the euro area;
• stresses the interdependence between economic and social policies and acknowledges that the European economic and social model is based on the shared understanding of the importance of increasing employment, social progress and productivity;
• considers that the Pillar should promote the existing EU social acquis and its full and proper enforcement, and finds that the European Semester and the National Reform Programs - which also concern non-euro area countries - should become the principle vehicles for its the implementation and monitoring. The Committee also refers to developing/designing benchmarks;

• is convinced that the future of work should be a key priority within the debates about the social pillar;

• emphasises the role of social dialogue and collective bargaining, as well as that of civil dialogue;
• reiterates the view that sustainable, effective and efficient social welfare systems are of the utmost importance for all societies in the EU;
• believes that a serious debate on a well-founded architecture of the EMU, implying a consensus on economic and social objectives, as well as agreed governance, is unavoidable.

Contact:Johannes Kind

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 9111 – email: )

• Establishing a Union Resettlement Framework

Rapporteur:Christian Moos (Various Interests – DE)

Reference:EESC-2016-05234-00-00-AC-TRA

Key points:

The EESC:

• The EESC calls for a genuine common asylum policy that respects European values. It welcomes the creation of a Union Resettlement Framework;
• calls on the Union to take more responsibility for people in need of international protection;
• emphasises its call to construct robust integration systems in the Member States;
• calls for the common criteria for resettlement to focus on people's need for protection, not on the third country's effective cooperation on asylum. They must also be non-discriminatory.
• considers the "first country of asylum" and "safe third country" concepts to be open to question due to the current unsafe and unstable situation in the third countries and regions concerned. The EESC is of the opinion that the EU-Turkey Statement is of utmost importance in the current situation. It is in the interest of both the EU and Turkey that the human rights situation is monitored in its implementation;
• calls for the resettlement programme to be uncoupled from partnership agreements that aim to encourage third countries to prevent refugees from fleeing, as this carries the risk of infringing international law and fundamental rights; emphasises that return agreements or other similar cooperation agreements with third countries must not place conditions on measures undertaken neither in partnership with third countries, nor on development aid more generally;
• calls for UNHCR to play a key role in identifying third-country nationals or stateless persons to be resettled and questions special rights enabling third countries to make a selection;
• questions, according to the Geneva Convention, the blanket exclusion of people who have irregularly stayed in, entered, or attempted to enter the territory of the Member States during the five years prior to resettlement, as well as of people who have been rejected by Member States during the five years prior to resettlement, despite the fact that they otherwise fulfil the eligibility criteria;
• underlines that resettlement must not impinge upon the right to asylum;
• is in favour of ambitious goals when it comes to deciding on the annual number of people to be resettled, and recommends treating the figure to be determined by the high-level committee as a minimum number;
• expects to be involved in the High-Level Resettlement Committee that is to be set up;
• calls for UNHCR to be permanently involved in the High-Level Resettlement Committee; Broadly speaking, the Commission proposal is not clear as to how, and by means of what procedures, people in need of international protection are to be identified (by UNHCR or by the Member States), nor what role the EU Agency for Asylum will play in these procedures.
• calls for complementary, alternative reception and funding programmes to be examined, along the lines of Canada's Private Sponsorship of Refugees Program[1]. Institutionalising a tripartite approach – one that involves the Member States, UNHCR and private/civil society actors – would be broadly beneficial to an EU Resettlement Framework.

Contact:Raluca Radescu

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 9083 – email: )

• Matrimonial matters/Matters of parental responsibility/International child abduction – Brussels IIa Regulation

Rapporteur:Christian Bäumler (Workers – DE)

Reference:EESC-2016-05280-00-00-AC-TRA

Key points:

The EESC:

welcomes the fact that the Commission is proposing several significant changes with the aim of making the procedure of returning an abducted child more efficient; in the EESC’s view, this could include the adoption of common minimum standards, including a uniform enforcement procedure. Better cooperation between central authorities is essential in cross-border proceedings and is in the best interest of the child;

welcomes that Member States should be obliged to concentrate jurisdiction in a limited number of courts and that the proposal introduces time limits, and allows only one appeal in return proceedings; supports the idea that the court of origin could declare a decision provisionally enforceable even if this possibility does not exist in its national law and suggests that any child who is capable of forming his or her own views has the right to be heard. Minimum standards could help to avoid refusal of recognition, enforcement or "exequatur" of a decision handed down in another EU country;

supports the abolition of exequatur for all decisions and for authentic instruments and agreements on parental responsibility; however, safeguards should be maintained; the EESC supports that the court of the Member State of refuge can order urgent protective measures if required and proposes that the draft be amended to specify that placement in a foster family should, wherever possible, take precedence over institutional care, which should avoided;

advocates the establishment of free counselling arrangements for parents who come from a country other than the child's current country of residence; considers that there is a need for regulation in cases where one parent does not come from the European Union.

The EESC considers that the scope of application of the Brussels IIa Regulation needs to be clarified. Even if marriage is defined according to "national" criteria, Member States are required to comply with Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. The EESC proposes that compliance with Article 21 be mentioned in one of the recitals of the Regulation.

Contact:June Bedaton

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 8134 – email:

3.INNOVATION AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION

• Horizon 2020 (evaluation)

Rapporteur:Gonçalo Lobo Xavier (Employers – PT)

Reference:Information report

EESC-2016-5513-00-01-RI-TRA

Following a request from the Commission, the information report seeks to provide an input to the Commission's interim evaluation of Horizon 2020 and, in addition, of its Science with and for Society (SwafS) sub-programme.

The EESC's recommendations are based on the views of civil society, gathered by its members via an online questionnaire and a number of fact-finding missions.

Contact:Luís Lobo

(Tel.: 00322546979717 – email: )

• European Gigabit Society

Rapporteur:Ulrich Samm (Employers – BE)

Reference:COM(2016) 587 final

EESC-2016-05303-00-00-AC-TRA

Key points:

In its opinion, the EESC welcomes the Commission communication and the related initiatives, i.e. the adoption of the European Electronic Communications Code, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC), the 5G action plan and the support scheme for public authorities wanting to offer free wifi access (WiFi4EU). At the same time, the EESC has some comments to make aimed at improving the original Commission proposal.

First of all, the EESC notes that the fragmentation of network providers involves modernising and providing support to the single market.

In addition, the EESC notes that the Strategic Objectives for 2025 are dependent on national funding (private and public) and welcomes the proposal to establish an EU network of broadband competence offices as well as a credit system designed to lower administrative burdens and costs, especially for small communities and SMEs.

While welcoming the fact that the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) are providing considerable funding for high-speed broadband networks, the EESC recommends that the role of the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) be strengthened by introducing sectoral earmarking for high-speed broadband networks.

Furthermore, the EESC believes that the economic and social benefits resulting from the transformation to a Gigabit economy depend on the roll-out of high-capacity networks, both in urban and rural areas and across the whole of society. In this connection, there will be a need for investments to cover all remote areas and guarantee access for the most vulnerable.

Finally, the EESC is pleased to note the free "WIFI4EU" initiative for all Europeans in public places. However, the EESC recommends following the Regulation on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market (eIDAS), which offers guarantees for data protection and public security.

Contact:Cédric Cabanne

(Tel.: 00 32 2 546 9355 - email: )

• European Electronic Communications Code

Rapporteur:Jorge Pegado Liz (Various interests – PT)

Reference:COM(2016) 590 final

EESC-2016-05296-00-00-AC-TRA

The EESC endorses the general thinking underlying the Commission's proposal on the European Electronic Communications code, as well as the timing, the way it has approached the subject and the manner in which it has tackled the codification and horizontal recasting of the four existing directives (framework directive, authorisation directive, access directive and universal service directive), bringing them in a single directive in line with the aim of regulatory fitness (REFIT).

The EESC agrees with the main objectives of the proposal, aimed at securing better internet connective for everyone and all business.

Nevertheless, the EESC regrets the decision to leave the directive on privacy out of the framework of the proposal.

The EESC also deplores the fact that the European Commission has opted for the legal form of a Directive rather than the legal form of a regulation. A Regulation would have be directly applicable and legislate for a higher level of consumer protection, thus contributing to greater integration in the single market.

The EESC supports the proposal, highlighting the following aspects:

• concern about the accessibility for "users with disabilities", as well as the need to "lay down the (…) end-users rights" better;
• relevance of the wording of new concepts and definitions, important for clarifying and interpreting the legal framework;
• the change to the procedures for analysing the market and codifying best practice;
• facilitating the sharing of the 5G spectrum and promoting access for end users to basic WI-FI connectivity, shared used of the spectrum;
• greater independence for national regulatory and other authorities responsible for this area.

On the other hand, the EESC has serious misgivings and strong doubts about the following points: