Christian Friis Bach (UNECE), Luca JAHIER (EESC)

European Economic and Social Committee

The voice ofVarious Interests’ GroupJuly 2017Europe III

>>

On 22-23 May, the Various Interests’ Group of the EESC organized a high-level conference on the Agenda 2030 and how to move from declarations to concrete action.

To make the UN 2030 Agenda a reality, we must have the courage to imagine a new world. We must have the ambition to put opportunities and goals before problems. We must have the creativity and determination to transform a vision into a positive European narrative for a flourishing sustainable development Union. We must have the foresight and discipline to protect what is beautiful and fragile in our world and prepare for the future.

It is very easy to relegate discussions on sustainable development to experts and academics. But this would be a major mistake. For the debates surrounding sustainable development are profoundly political and they must take centre-stage in our political reflections on the future of the EU, on the future of Member States and of our global relations. To my great regret, the EU has not demonstrated that it has assimilated and embraced the opportunities for a paradigm shift provided by the 2030 Agenda. Unfortunately, the Agenda is quite absent from the five scenarios in the EC White Paper on the Future of Europe. Even the Rome Declaration and last years’ Communication on a ‘Sustainable European Future’ provides only partial and half-hearted commitments. In my opinion, this could be an immense missed opportunity. It also contradicts the EU’s commitments to the UN Climate Change Paris Agreement.

It is now time for the EU to take the political decision to make the 2030 Agenda a central pillar to the future direction and identity of the EU. It is crucial that we make sustainable development a horizontal European priority

and that we strengthen the governance of the SDGs. We must take the global leadership and align the Agenda with the EU’s longer-term 2050 sustainable development strategy. For to be credible, the EU has to deliver the 2030 Agenda and lead by example. This will involve building an overarching European Strategy for sustainable development. This strategy should abandon silos and embrace a holistic, coordinated and systematic

approach. It should mainstream sustainable development across all EU programmes, policies and financial instruments. As a first step, we need an inter-institutional agreement on sustainable development between the Commission, the Council and European Parliament. Indeed, I would call on the EC to present a new scenario on the Future of Europe, which would put centre stage a sustainable democratic Union.

For thirty years after the definition of the concept of sustainable development our common future is very much under threat. At precisely the time when others turn away from their commitments, it is imperative that the EU maintains the momentum, accelerating, investing in and embracing change. Now

is the time for long-time engagement, to make the transition to an inclusive, equitable, resilient, low-carbon, circular and collaborative economy. Now is the time for political leadership, to rethink our growth models and improve well-being. To balance economic prosperity with innovation, social inclusion, democratic participation and environmental sustainability, all within our planetary boundaries. We must have the conviction and boldness to defend the universal, indivisible and mutually reinforcing dimensions of the 2030 Agenda.

The EU must becomethe world leader in meeting SDGs!EDEditorial

Luca JAHIER (IT)President of theVarious Interests’ Group

Hence, it is crucial for us to build on our European values and safeguard the exercise of human, economic, social and cultural rights. However, we can only design and deliver this new world, by working transparently in partnership with a maximum number of social and economic actors from a wide spectrum of civil society organisations (CSOs). It is civil society which will drive change, with bottom-up initiatives which respect the opinions and rights of local people. Moreover, we can only embark on this new world by making sustainable development financially accessible to all citizens, by transforming perceptions, attitudes, developing a new attractive narrative and ultimately, by creating a sustainable culture among Europeans.

This will be the basis for re-installing hope and trust in our democratic systems. The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development will become our European Social Contract of the 21st Century.

Brice Lalonde, Advisor to the French Chapter of the UN Global Compact,Chair of the Business and Climate Summit and the French Water Academy

Video connection with Professor Enrico Giovannini, full professor of Economic Statistics,University of Rome “Tor Vergata”; former Minister of Labour and Social Policies;

former member of the “Stiglitz Commission”; former director of statistics at the OECD

OUR GROUP’S STRENGTHThe next meeting of the Farmers’ Category is sched-uled for 26 September 2017.

The latest meeting of the Social Economy Category took place on 8 June. The principal topic for the meet-ing was the official presentation of the EESC commis-sioned study “Recent Evolutions of the Social Economy in the European Union” by the authors of the study,

Professors Monzόn Campos and Chaves-Avila of CIRIEC asbl. (pictured)

The Members of the Catego-ry also had the opportunity to listen to a presentation of the report ‘Non-profit is a European Issue for the So-cial Economy’, by Mr Guer-ry, Director of public affairs at the General Mutual for National Education and Ms Driguez, Lecturer in private law at the University Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne.

The latest Consumers and Environment Category meeting took place on 21 June 2017. During the morn-ing session, Mr. Peter Bischoff-Everding from DG JUST made a focus on the Consumers Agenda, Mr. Mario Catizzone, Referent Europa Soil Group made a pres-

entation on “Save the landscape Forum” and Mr. Maciulevicius made a review of the work of the permanent study group on “Sustainable Food Systems”. The after-noon was dedicated to the theme “No more double standard in foodstuff – Same brand, same product, same quality” with a pres-entation by Mrs. Daciana Octavia SÂRBU, Vice-Chair of the ENVI Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, member of the European Parliament. S.O.S. Poprad, Slovak Consumes organi-zation representative Mrs. Petra Vargova Cakovska also attended the meeting.

 

Bernardo Hernández Bataller andCillian Lohan, Spokespersons

Krzysztof Balon andAlain Coheur, spokespersons

Daciana Octavia Sârbu, Vice-Chair of the ENVI Committee on the Environment, Public Health and

Food Safety, member of the European Parliament

Europe III

>>

Full recommendations: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.events-and-

activities-agenda-2030-recommendations

http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.categories

Michael SMYTH (EESC), Mairead MCGUINNESS (EP), Luca JAHIER (EESC)

Jonathan Peel (EESC), Conor Patterson (Newry & Mourne Cooprtaive Agency), Michael Smyth (EESC), Aidan Gough (InterTradeIreland)

Jane MORRICE (EESC)

Luca JAHIER (EESC), Mairead MCGUINNESS (EP)

Luca JAHIER (EESC)

NEWS from Group III Group III Extraordinary Meeting in Dundalk, Ireland

On 23rd June 2017, the Bureau of the Various Interests’ Group of the EESC heldan extraordinary meeting at the Ballymascanlon Hotel in Dundalk, Ireland. This location is of significant importance as it is the place where, in 2011, the “New Cross Border Agreement” was signed between the Louth local authorities and the Newry and Mourne District Council, with both parties taking a major step forward in promoting cross-border partnership. At the time, the agreement was seen as an example of best practice and an important new instrument for building cooperation between the relevant local authorities. Now, in the wake of the Brexit referendum, the tendency is rather the reverse, with borders clos-ing instead of opening up.

‘Brexit’ and its border implications?

The Bureau of the Various Interests’ Group’s aimwas to engage with, listen to and learn from Irish civil society and openly discuss the direct repercussions of ‘Brexit’ on the island of Ireland, its borders, trade and communities. The con-ference was opened by Luca Jahier, followed by an intervention by the first Vice President of the European Parliament Mairaed McGuinness.

In his intervention, Presi-dent Jahier reminded the audience that half of Irish agricultural products are shipped to the UK and one quarter of Ireland’s imports come from Britain.Crucially, the ‘weight’ of Ireland’s exports to Britainis estimated at 25% of all Irish jobs. Furthermore, in the regions between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, border businesses rely on more than 3 billion Euros of cross-border trade (agri-food, building materials and chemicals). These are sectors which would be subject to high tariffs and non-tariff barriers, if the UK were to leave the Eu-ropean Single Market and Customs Union.

Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that the prospect of reinstating con-trols at the borders has become a rare unifying factor for the border people. Indeed, there have been protests against such a move on both sides of the border. Clearly, border is a key issue, for its impact on the Peace Process as well as on

mobility of workers and access to healthcare, amongst other. What will be the impact on sectar-ianism if a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic is reintroduced? Particularly now that the Northern Ireland Assembly has been dis-solved and there are real fears of a return to direct rule from London.

Will we see Northern Ireland as a member of the Europe-an Economic Area (EEA), as some are advocating? Or willNorthern Ireland be granteda special EU status as severalNorthern Irish parties have requested? It remains to be seen.

One thing is certain: most ofthe consequences of Brexit will be felt by smaller ac-tors such as SMEs, families, individuals considering that every day some 35,000 people commute across the border for work, school, re-tail, cultural or sporting ac-tivities. Put people first was one of the recommendations emerging from the meeting. Now is the time and respon-sibility of civil society, local government and citizens to become more involved in the Brexit debate. It is they who will drive change, with bottom-up initiatives which respect the opinions and rights of local people.

“Brexit is about peace, tolerance and people leaving together” concluded Mairead McGuin-ness in her opening speech.

Discussion Panel BBC ‘BBC Inside Business’PODCAST: http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/inbusiness

International cultural relations have an enormous and untapped potential within the current international context, in which freedom of expression, human rights and mutual cooperation are under threat.

At a time when extremism is increasing, when our citizens are questioning their common identity more than ever – now is the time to firmly place culture and cultural policies at the heart of the European political agenda.

I truly welcome the decision to make 2018 the year of European Cultural Her-itage. Using the positive dynamics creat-ed by this initiative, the EU should seize the momentum and create a concrete strategy and action plan for internation-al cultural relations, including culture as a tool of soft power and promoting it as a pillar of sustainable development.

At the last plenary, the EESC unanimous-ly adopted an opinion, for which I was rapporteur, advising on how such plan should be developed. We have worked in close collaboration with the European Parliament on a common vision.

For centuries, European Union citizens have forged a sense of common be-longing on the basis of shared values of peace, prosperity and social rights. The ‘European identity’ was the product of a Europe wrecked by war and with an ur-gent imperative to rebuild its economic power and social cohesion.

Drawing from its own experience, the European Union has the power to use culture as a peace-building and soft power tool in societies marked by con-flict. The positive outcome of the bot-tom-up PEACE project in Northern Ire-land demonstrates this potential.

If used correctly, culture can become the best tool to fight propaganda and authoritarianism! Based on the extraordinary richness of diversity, culture will inevitably combat populist tendencies and state-led cultural propa-ganda, build bridges between people and open up opportunities for closer cooperation and exchange.

Now is the time to place culture at the heart of the EU political agenda

Experimental global initiatives such as “White Dove” should be developed for the EU to take its place as a global leader in the promotion and protec-tion of peace worldwide.

But culture is also crucial for economic growth and sustainable develop-ment, and should be recognised as such. More EU programmes should be developed supporting the creative industries, freedom of artistic ex-

pression in Europe and worldwide, and promoting employment, skills develop-ment and support to SME’s within this field.

Moreover, the European “capitals of cul-ture” have proved to be a successful ini-tiative over the course of more than 30 years. However, there is still a room to further promote this project, and launch it on an international scale with the co-operation of the Council of Europe and UNESCO.

We, civil society representatives, have an important role to play in the devel-opment of people-to-people cultural exchanges and knowledge sharing! I personally call on the EU to promote networks of cultural players and put in place annual cultural civil society forums of actors in this field.

Tibor Navracsics, EU Commissioner for Education, Culture, Youth and Sport

Europe III

Luca JAHIER (IT)President of theVarious Interests’ Group

The Communication of the Commission and the EEAS on making culture a vehicle for international relations is a first step in the right direction for the recognition of its enormous potential for peace, development and economic growth. But it is high time to move a step further and adopt an Action Plan with concrete deliverables making full use of 2018 as the European Year of Cultural Heritage.

Group III Members in the Spotlight playing a key rolePanagiotis GKOFAS (EL) Hellenic Confederation of Professionals, Craftsmen and Merchants (GSEVEE) Member of the Various Interests’ Group

Panagiotis Gkofas has recently been elected President of the Avignon SME Academy

Migration, refugee policy response and their implications on SMEs and entrepreneurship, jobs and growth

Brussels, June 13th 2017

The European SMEs Academy Avignon in partnership with the Eco-nomic and Social Committee, promoted a Workshop/Round Table with representative of European and National SMEs organizations from Italy, Germany, Austria, Spain, Greece, Civil Society Organizations and EU Social Partners, Foundations and National and Regional Authorities.

The meeting was opened by the President of the European Economic and Social Committee, Mr. Georges Dassis followed by an opening speech of the President of SMEs Academy Avignon Mr. Panagiotis Gkofas and CNA V. President Mr. Giuseppe Oliviero (Italian National Confederation SMEs and Craft).

The objective of the workshop - round Table with EU and International In-stitutions, was to increase and raise awareness on how to strengthen col-laborations among Social Partners, Civil Society, Academic and research networks. Through the interactive dialogue among the participants, several issues and practices were discussed: partnerships/platforms and SMEs practices, pilot programs, sector specific studies and reports in view of more comprehensive EU observatory reporting on entrepreneurship, migration and interconnected refugee policy responses.

SME Academy Avignon was established by UEAPME and some of its mem-ber organisations (CNA, GSEVEE) to act as a think tank and scientific body to help Craft and SME associations in their policy work as well as create a network of researchers, Foundations and public/private actors work-ing on strategic challenges(trade & standards, consumption models and global value chains, digitization and innovation, demographic changes, sustainability, smart regulation and social dumping and others) relevant for SMEs bridging with EU Civil Society Organizations and Social Partners.

Jean-Marc ROIRANT (FR) Education League / President Civil Society Europe Member of the Various Interests’ Group

We stand in solidarity with you!

On Tuesday 13 June, the Hungarian Parliament voted the draft bill on the transparency of organisations receiving foreign funding. Such a legislation stigmatises all Hungarian NGOs and not for profit organ-isations that receive funding for their own activities from abroad including EU funding.

Civil Society Europe , chaired by Group III Member Jean-Marc Roirant, together with 519 association across Europe signed a “Statement to Hungarian peo-ple and civil society organisations – we stand in solidarity with you!”: We, representatives of European civil society, hereby express our

solidarity with the Hungarian NGOs who were most recently tar-geted by the bill on the “transparency of organisations receiving

foreign funds”. At the same time we wish to express our deepest support for the people who have taken the streets of Budapest to protest against this renewed attack on basic freedoms in Hungary.

The legislative proposal that was tabled in the Hungarian parliament on 7 April would force NGOs receiving more than € 24,000 per year from outside Hungary to register as “civic organisations receiving foreign funds”. This includes funding from EU sources not managed by a Hungarian institution. This would effectively stigmatise any organisation that receives such funding.

The current bill is not an isolated occurrence. It is part of a wider govern-mental effort aimed at undermining the credibility of civil society in Hunga-ry. Here, we specifically refer to the recently launched national consultation ‘Let’s stop Brussels’. The questionnaire accuses international NGOs operat-ing in Hungary of interfering “in internal affairs […] in a non-transparent way” and of inciting “illegal immigrants […] to commit illegal acts”.

The current legislation regulating civil society organisations already pro-vides sufficient mechanisms for guaranteeing that these organisations con-duct their work in a transparent, lawful and accountable manner. If accepted in its current form, the new bill tabled by the government would be unprec-edented in a European Union member state. It would also severely constrain the space of action of independent civil society organisations at a time when other checks and balances have been significantly weakened in Hungary.

Civil Society Organisations should have the same right to operate freely and independently in fundraising and projects as prescribed in Interna-tional Human rights law and also in line with article 11 of the EU Treaties. Based on these concerns, we call on the Hungarian government to with-draw the bill. Rather than stigmatising NGOs with an unnecessary and harmful piece of legislation, we urge Hungary’s leaders to support NGOs which work for the well-being of society.

Group III Members in the Spotlight playing a key role

We stand in solidarity with you – civil society actors and human rights de-fenders in Hungary and elsewhere. The further shrinking of civic space in Europe can no longer be tolerated.

Together, we will work to create a Europe that truly respects human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities in a society in which plural-ism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.

Dilyana SLAVOVA (BG) National Association “Mountain Milk” Member of the Various Interests’ Group President of REX section

It is high time for mountains to move up the EU Agenda

“Mountains are the cathedrals where I practise my religion”Anatoli Boukreev

Mountain areas are represented in the Economic and Social Committee by Group III. Whenever there are events on the issue, Group III members actively participate and present their views.

On 7 June more than 100 stakeholders from mountain areas all over Europe met in Brussels to take part in a high-level conference on “Cohesion Policy in Mountain Areas: How to increase the contribution from mountains and benefits for mountain territories”.

Why are mountain areas so important for the EU?

Mountains cover 35% of the land area of Europe (including Turkey) and 30% of the EU. People living in mountain areas number 112 million (17%) in Eu-rope and 64 million (13%) in the EU (EEA 2010). For the EU, these numbers and proportions changed considerably with the accession of new Member States in central and eastern Europe in 2004, 2007, and 2013. Many of them have significant mountain areas and populations, in particular Slovenia (76% of its land area and 51% of its population), Slovakia (60% and 39%, respectively), Bulgaria (49% and 36%), Croatia (40% and 13%), and Ro-mania (38% and 12%).

Although mountains account for a significant proportion of both the area and the population of the EU, relatively little specific attention has been paid to them in EU policies or even on a wider European scale. Article 174 of the 2007 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union includes mountains among the regions with “severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps” (this category also in-cludes sparsely populated areas, islands, and border areas, many of which are also mountainous). Article 174 refers to the goal of economic, social, and territorial cohesion, which aims to reduce disparities in levels of devel-opment across the EU; this is generally known as “cohesion policy”. Apart from this important mention, mountains are given specific attention in EU policy only with regard to agriculture and rural development; they have been identified as “less favoured areas” since 1975, and since 2013 as “areas with natural or other specific constraints”.

How can we put mountain areas at the heart of the EU agenda?

Firstly, we as representatives of organised civil society should support the idea of having “an agenda for mountainous regions” that could be “at the heart of an EU strategy on the development of mountainous regions”.

Secondly, we need active, ambitious and targeted policies for mountain areas that help them to overcome constraints in order to make the most of their enormous potential.

Moving forward, we should show our support for a dedicated approach to mountain areas that is reflected in an integrated approach to EU funds.

In concrete terms, EU policy should target an EU mountain strategy by: • prioritising actions in mountain areas in R&D programmes • tailoring specific measures for mountain areas • giving priority to mountain areas when selecting projects • integrating CSF funds•

The European Rural Parliament hosted by the EESC proclaimed that “All Europe shall live”. Mountain areas are part of Europe and the EU should take proper care of them.

Europe III

Group III Members in the Spotlight playing a key roleRoman HAKEN (CZ) Ředitel Centra pro komunitní práci (CpKP)Member of the Various Interests’ Group

Participation approaches and a danube strategy

One of the possible future directions for EU cohesion policy could involve regional strategies. As the Czech Republic is part of the EU Danube Strategy (EUSDR), a National Participation Day – a meeting of regional stakeholders involved in the strategy – was held in Prague on 30 May 2017. The event was co-organised by Group III member Roman Haken, member of the Czech government’s Council for Non-Governmental Non-Profit Organisations and chairman of its committee on regions and partnership.

The Danube Strategy has emerged as the second of the four current EU macro-strategies and defines the concept of regional cooperation, which brings together not just the regions, but above all the whole Danube ba-sin, including the Czech Republic. The EU Danube Strategy was launched in June 2011 and involves a total of nine EU Member States and five non-EU countries. It focuses on the four main pillars of regional development: better connectivity, environmental protection, building prosperity and strengthening the region.

Thierry LIBEART (FR) Fondation Nicolas Hulot pour la Nature et l’Homme Member of the Various Interests’ Group

Is advertising compatible with the ecological transition?

There is no sense in talking about sustainability whilst ignoring ad-vertising. The latter is, together with private monetary creation & banks and loans creation, the mere engine of consumerism and pro-ductivity. In this frame, Group III Member Thierry Libaert contributes to the debate through this study, which analyses whether advertise-ment is compatible with the ecological transition.

For too long the ecological tran-sition has focused on a strictly economic approach: the func-tional economy, the sharing economy, degrowth, new devel-opment indicators, the circular economy etc.

The dominant impression was that a successful transition is a matter for economists in which the public has no part to play. It was based on the belief that history is determined by graphs, figures and curves, although change is also driven by our ideas and our imagination.

Is advertising, whose main pur-pose is to constantly sell us new products and services, responsible for the environmental crisis?

According to the author of the study, advertising is part of an economic growth model with major environmental consequences in which our ideal of happiness depends on our capacity to consume more and more.

Oddly enough, apart from the degrowth movements and the criticism of abuses in connection with advertising poster campaigns and “greenwash-ing”, the responsibility of the advertising industry in the context of the nec-essary ecological transition has rarely been analysed.

The report does not aim either to pillory the world of advertising or to ab-solve it of blame, but it does not flinch from taking sides. It does not neces-sarily reflect the position of the Fondation Nicolas Hulot, but the Founda-tion felt that a debate needed to be launched.

In any event, the author makes a case for the industry’s responsibility; the opposite case - advertising that contributes to a different vision of socie-ty - still remains to be made. Meanwhile we have a summary of possible solutions.

The Study can be found here:http://www.fondation-nicolas-hulot.org/sites/default/files/pub_et_transition.pdf

The report can be found here:http://www.fondation-nicolas-hulot.org/files/pubettransitionpdf

Giuseppe GUERINI (IT)CECOP-CICOPA Member of the Various Interests’ Group

ECO/428- VAT – derogation

The EESC supports the measures that the European Union has put in place to tackle all forms of tax fraud and takes the view that the reverse charge mech-anism for collecting value added tax (VAT) may be a useful tool in countering carousel fraud and VAT evasion.

However, the use of the reverse charge mechanism, which is a derogation from the established principles on VAT, must not be allowed to harm the internal market and it must be temporary and properly assessed by the Commission.

The Committee recommends focusing particular attention on the proportion-ality principle, as the cost of compliance for small and medium-sized enterpris-es (SMEs) related to introducing a reverse charge mechanism could be con-siderable. Furthermore, the Committee emphasises that solutions adopted to combat VAT fraud should not impose excessive and disproportionate burdens on tax compliant businesses, particularly SMEs.

Finally, to ensure that this legislative proposal functions correctly and to re-duce any future need to use additional derogations relating to the established principles and rules on the VAT system in the EU, Member States requesting the application of the reverse charge mechanism should impose specific and tangible electronic invoicing requirements to ensure that payments are fully traceable.

Jorge PEGADO-LIZ (PT) Associação para a Defesa dos Consumidores Member of the Various Interests’ Group

TEN/629 - Processing of personal data

With this proposal, the Commission provides a concrete response to the need to adapt the current rules on the protection of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies in line with the new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The EESC is of the view that the EU institutions should serve as a model for Member State procedures, and therefore believes that special care is called for in drafting the proposal.

Even if the proposal generally is correct and adequate, the Committee fears, in view of the speed of technological progress in this domain, that its late adoption and entry into force may compound the risks of unauthorised appropriation of data and irregulari-ties in data processing and marketing, and that it may become obsolete be-fore it is even implemented.

At its plenary session on 31 May – 1 June 2017 the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) adopted the following opinions for which Group III members were Rapporteurs or Co-Rapporteurs.

Luca JAHIER (IT) President of the Various Interests’ Group

REX/480 - Towards an EU strategy for international cultural relations

It is the opinion of the EESC that culture has an important role to play in the current global political environment, in which the respect of human rights, tolerance, cooperation and mutual solidarity are once more under threat. Therefore the EESC welcomes the joint communication, which reveals a clear understanding of the impact of culture, constitutes an impressive compendi-um of existing programmes at EU and national level, and highlights potential areas of action in the field of international cultural exchange.

Culture in external rela-tions cannot be seen as neutral and independ-ent of the political con-text of the countries in-volved. Both historic and present-day examples demonstrate the possible misuse and manipulation of culture to nourish an authoritarian, populist or other political agenda. Therefore, while culture in EU exchanges certainly serves an agenda, it is important to underline that, contrary to propaganda, EU exchanges allow for the views of multiple stakeholders and pluralistic ap-proaches.

The EESC now calls for a step forward, from a text “towards an EU strategy” to the adoption and subsequent implementation of a clear strategy and action plan. The action plan should respond to four structural necessities: providing clarity of governance at EU level; seeking to coordinate and offer subsidiary support at Member State level; clarifying financial aspects; and promoting networks of interrelated cultural players, representing a thriving cultural civil society.

So as to enable the full recognition of the importance of culture to sustaina-bility, the EESC calls for culture to be recognised as a pillar of sustainable development, on an equal footing with the economic, social and envi-ronmental pillars.

The EESC welcomes the fact that culture is acknowledged as a crucial founda-tion for peace and stability. Culture is therefore of key importance in furthering the main aim of the European Union: to “promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples” (Article 3 TEU). The EESC therefore calls on the EU, based on Europe’s own experience, to take its place as a global leader in the practice, protection and promotion of peace worldwide.

The EESC underlines the importance of civil society as protagonists in a sus-tainable society and in the development of all initiatives in the field of culture. The EU should therefore invest in supporting the development of a structured civil society in the cultural field.

Europe III

Overview of our Members’ Work in the EESC

The EESC also considers that some issues should have been addressed ex-plicitly, such as: aligning the wording of the proposal with that of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, procedures for dealing with harassment, cyberbullying and whistleblowing in the EU institutions, its ap-plication to the Internet of Things, Big Data and the use of search engines for the purpose of accessing, creating or using personal data, and the placing of personal information published on the websites of the institutions on social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, etc.).

Pasi MOISIO (FI)Federation of Finnish Enterprises FFE Member of the Various Interests’ GroupTEN/633 - Initial qualification and periodic training of drivers of certain road vehicles for the carriage of goods and passengers

The EESC recognises that the Directive on the initial qualification and periodic training of drivers of heavy goods vehicles has had generally positive effects for the European road transport sector. Creating a harmonised training system has helped to improve professional drivers’ ability to perform their job, devel-oped a common level of service in the road transport sector, and enhanced the attractiveness of the sector to new entrants.

The EESC considers that the proposal has the potential to further consolidate the EU principle of freedom of movement and to be a further step towards a healthier and more open EU transport market. It also provides an opportunity to improve road safety in Europe, as well as professional drivers’ health and safety at work.

The EESC likewise welcomes the directive’s objective of harmonising and streamlining administrative procedures in the different Member States, so that driver training sessions and programmes run in any Member State under the directive are recognised as such and are mutually approved without latitude for interpretation or separate additional requirements.

The Committee also recommends that the oversight of authorised training establishments operating in different countries should be enhanced in the fu-ture so that the scope and quality of training provided can be verified in each and every case.

Finally, the revision of the directive is intended to align it more closely with the latest broad trends that are highly relevant to transport, such as digitisa-tion and decarbonisation. The EESC endorses this approach and notes that although transport is rapidly automating and robotisation is becoming preva-lent in the sector, the central role of the human factor must also still be borne in mind.

Ariane RODERT (SE) Forum – idéburna organisationer med social inriktning Member of the Various Interests’ Group

INT/812 - The Start-up and Scale-up Initiative

While the EESC welcomes the Commission’s initiative and the actions pro-posed which aim to remove key barriers, it notes that not all high-growth enterprises are high-tech enterprises and that action is needed across sec-tors. The Committee therefore recommends:

• an updated re-launch of the Small Business Act gathering all initiatives into a single agenda;

• a coordinated policy approach for start-ups and scale-ups taking into account the diversity of enterprise models;

• the Commission fully implement and enforce initiatives to address the key barrier of administrative burden and red tape;

• the structural involvement of social partners and the enforcement of EU rules on working conditions, labour laws and collective agreements;

• the simplification of the rules and conditions given the limited resources of SMEs and micro-companies.

As strengthening partnerships and building communities of resources are a key success factor, the EC should promote networking, including the creation of intermediaries, fa-cilitators, accelerators and in-cubators. Moreover, the EESC notes that unleashing both start-ups and scale-up growth potential requires the development of tailored financing and because skills development is crucial, focus must be placed on educational entrepreneur-ship. Action is also needed to reduce the current high level of risk aversion in the EU.

Finally, the EESC calls on the EC to bring together all the current and new in-itiatives to support social economy enterprises by issuing a communication with an Action Plan for the Social Economy.

Christian MOOS (DE)German Civil Servants’ Association Member of the Various Interests’ Group

CCMI/149 - European DefenceAction Plan

The EESC is in favour of creating a European Defence Union (EDU) and supports the European Defence Action Plan, including the establish-ment of a common European Defence Fund.

The EESC also:

• calls for significant qualitative progress in European defence cooperation, as the EU’s defence market and industry is overly fragmented and causes inefficient allocation of resources, overlapping remits, lack of interopera-bility and technological gaps;

• supports the objective of strategic autonomy in identified critical capabil-ity and technology areas;

• states that a sine qua non for the development of common defence capa-bilities is to strengthen the European defence industrial and technological base including a highly skilled workforce;

• strongly supports giving special attention to SMEs including in the area of research and development for defence purposes;

• rejects the opening up of existing funds that serve economic or social ob-jectives for defence purposes;

• rejects a special provision for national budgetary resources allocated for defence under the Stability and Growth Pact. Defence expenditure should not destabilise public finances;

• supports the creation of a Defence Fund with separate windows for re-search and capabilities. However, the EU budget has to be increased, as the research window for defence must not be financed at the expense of research in other sectors. The EESC is in favour of the capability window being financed solely by national contributions. The procurement of de-fence products by Member States cannot be financed from the EU budget.

Arno METZLER (DE)German Association of Consulting Engineers Member of the Various Interests’ Group

INT/815 - Services Package

The EESC

• appreciates and supports the efforts of the European Commission to un-leash the full potential of the Single Market in regard to the services sector;

• stresses that any kind of EU “interventions” relating to the strict remit of Member States’ competencies can lead to political controversies;

• recommends following a positive approach enforcing best practices and consultation instead of enforcement measures wherever possible;

• recommends to broaden a dialogue between the EU and the MS and not to focus on compliance with the Services Directive only but also with pri-mary EU law, and in particular with the Charter of Fundamental Rights so as to guarantee a fair balance between work-ers’ rights and consumers’ protection on one side and economic freedoms on the other side.

• stresses that for cases without a positive compli-ance evaluation the Com-mission’s decision should not be binding and the already available post-adoption procedures should be applied;

• recommends introducing the proportionality test only as services offer for national regulators;

• stresses that it is necessary to ensure that the country of origin principle is not introduced in any form;

• recommends stating more clearly that the Professional Qualifications Directive has preference over any aspects of professional recognition in regard to the new e-card;

• recommends reconsidering the once-only principle and introducing time limits on the validity of a services e-card;

• believes that the IMI system needs to be evaluated with a view to guaran-teeing the best possible performance, compatibility and complementa-rity with existing national and/or social partner data exchange schemes including sectoral initiatives such as Social ID cards.

At its plenary session on 31 May – 1 June 2017 the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) adopted the following opinions for which Group III members were Rapporteurs or Co-Rapporteurs.

Indre VAREIKYTÉ (LT)Lithuanian Youth Council Member of the Various Interests’ Group

SOC/552 - Erasmus+mid-term evaluation

In response to the European Commission’s request, the EESC organised a large consultation of social partners and other civil society organisations, according to which:

• The increased overall budget allowed Erasmus+ to improve participation compared with predecessor programmes. However, its effectiveness could be further enhanced by improving administrative procedures and by further increasing the budget and the quality of the activities.

• The brand unification has triggered positive reactions overall, yet there is still a need to distinguish at least the main actions and activities.

• The administrative burden should be further reduced, not only for the executive agencies but also for applicants and beneficiary organisations, especially for smaller and/or volunteer-based organisations.

• The guidelines for national agencies could be reviewed and compliance more strictly supervised in order to build more coherence and to eliminate partiality.

• The lump sum system could be reviewed, also travel rates, as they disadvantage travel to areas with limited flight access and underestimate the cost of accommodation in major cities.

• The Erasmus+ programme guide should be shortened and simplified.• All European instruments that aim to support the transparency and

recognition of knowledge, skills, and competences should be more used.• The participation of social partners and youth and non-formal education

organisations at the programme management level could be improved.• The rules and conditions associated with key action 2 (“Strategic

Partnerships”) could be reviewed to avoid that large organisations submit applications in sectors where they have no expertise.

• More emphasis could be placed on the lifelong learning dimension of Erasmus+.

• The programme should not only concentrate on the number of beneficiaries but also on the quality of the experiences that the beneficiaries have.

• The programme should be made more accessible to disadvantaged groups and to the organisations working with them.

Europe III

Overview of our Members’ Work in the EESC

The complete texts of all EESC opinions are available in various language versions on the Committee’s website: http://dm.eesc.europa.eu/EESCDocumentSearch/Pages/opinionssearch.aspx

Jorge PEGADO-LIZ (PT) Associação para a Defesa dos Consumidores Member of the Various Interests’ Group

INT/813 - Adapting RPS acts to Articles 290 and 291 TFEU

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) regrets that the Com-mission has not followed up points made in previous EESC opinions and has had to resume negotiations with a view to adapting a number of legal acts providing for the use of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS) to Ar-ticles 290 and 291 TFEU.

It points out that its previous opinions set out the approach which it deemed best able to safeguard the fundamental values at stake in this exercise in terms of legal certainty, respect for fundamental rights, and effective, bal-anced and democratic use of the institutions’ powers.

The Committee believes that these principles should guide the new proce-dure to align legal acts that are still subject to the RPS with the new regime of delegated and implementing acts set out in Articles 290 and 291 TFEU.

Without prejudice to a more specific analysis when reviewing each measure submitted to it for an opinion, the EESC here summarises the observations it considers should be made with regard to each of the legislative proposals announced in the proposal.

Alfred GAJDOSIK (AT)Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft VIDA Member of the Various Interests’ Group

TEN/625 - Electricity Market Design

The EESC welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a new market design, a risk preparedness regulation and the new organisation of the energy regu-lators’ cooperation. The Committee highlights that well-functioning electric-ity markets are a precondition for fulfilling the goals of the Energy Union. For the markets to function well, significant changes in the market design are necessary, particularly due to the increasing use of variable renewable electricity. The EESC appreciates the general approach of the market design package, especially the goals of putting consumers at the heart of the ener-gy market, increasing electricity supply and strengthening regional coop-eration. This notwithstanding, on some points there is still room for further improvement. In particular, more specific rules are needed. This applies, for instance, to the consumers’ rights to generate, store and trade energy them-selves but also to opportunities to set up and use decentralised and flexible trading structures. The EESC also recalls that the problem of energy poverty needs to be taken into account for the future policy towards a low-carbon society. Presumption can be one approach to tackle this problem as long as vulnerable consumers are enabled to get access to the necessary capital through public loans or with the help of municipalities, regions or other en-tities such as NGOs.

John BRYAN (IE)Irish Farmers’ Association – SpokespersonsEESC Farmers’ Category Member of the Various Interests’ GroupNAT/703 -A possible reshaping of the CAP

The EESC believes that the CAP is an essential EU policy, which must provide European citizens and the agriculture sector with a truly common policy and which has delivered on its key objectives set out in the Treaty of Rome.While the request for an exploratory opinion speaks of reshaping the CAP, the EESC places emphasis on upgrading the CAP in the interests of stakeholders, adopt-ing a cautious and organic approach. Upgrading the CAP must be approached in a positive way and the CAP budget must be adequate to address existing and new demands.

A re-shaped CAP must meet the needs of the new challenges facing Europe, including the EU commitments under the United Nations Sustainable Devel-opment Goals (SDGs) and climate change commitments under the 21st Con-ference of Parties (COP21), bilateral trade deals and market volatility.

The CAP must strongly support the European Model of Agriculture and family farming, as well as redressing the major income inequality both between rural and urban areas and within agriculture.

In providing a sustainable supply of high-quality safe food for over 500 million EU citizens, and exports worth EUR 131 bn, representing 7.5% of the EU’s total exports, the CAP budget, which amounts to 38% of the total EU budget, must strike a balance, providing value for money. Future funding must be sufficient to address the additional financial demands resulting from Brexit, pressure on farm incomes and the increased demand for public goods.

The EESC supports the retention of the two-pillar model of the CAP. Direct pay-ments in Pillar 1 must support farm incomes, market management measures and increased delivery of public goods. Rural Development payments in Pillar 2 should focus on economic, environmental and social programmes based on the objectives set down in Cork 2.0 to support vulnerable regions and sectors, and should ensure a targeted approach to the delivery of public goods.

The valuable contribution that agriculture makes to the environment is underestimated. The carbon sinks in grassland, forestry, peatlands and hedgerows need to be accounted for, protected and enhanced under both the CAP Pillar 1and Pillar 2 payments.

Strong targeted programmes which focus on young farmers and retirement must be implemented to address the important issue of generational renewal. In addition, programmes aimed at enhancing the role of women in agriculture should be adopted.

Simplification should be a key part of a re-shaped CAP with the use of modern technology to simplify and reduce the ever increasing bureaucratic burden facing farmers.

A re-shaped CAP should incorporate the principle of community preference and food sovereignty with EU food for EU citizens. Agriculture cannot be sacri-ficed in any bilateral or multilateral trade deals to obtain benefits in other are-as. All EU food imports must meet full EU standards on sanitary, phytosanitary (SPS), labour and environmental conditions.

The farmer’s position in the food chain must be strengthened.

The level of direct aid paid to farmers in the individual EU Member States needs to be further harmonised, in order to create a level playing field for farmers in all Member States and to ensure the balanced development of rural areas throughout the EU.

@GroupIIIEESCfollow us on twitter

EESC VariousInterests Group

like us on facebook

PrintQE-AG-17-006-EN-CISSN 2467-4451WebQE-AG-17-006-EN-NISSN 2467-446X

EESC-2017-58-EN

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE APRIL & MAY PLENARY SESSIONGroup III members co-ordinating the work on new opinions

The full listing of membership of the above study groups for the new work may be consulted here:http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.group-3-new-study-groups

Editors of this edition: Chloé Lahousse, Susanna Baizou, Fausta Palombelli, Enrica Nardello, Irina Jancova, Brigitte Carmosin Editor in Chief: Marc Beffort

Secretariat of the Various Interests’ Group,European Economic and Social Committee,99 Rue Belliard, 1040 Brussels Tel. +32 (0)2 546 8893

THE EESC IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF EXTERNAL WEBSITES

e-mail: gr3@eesc.europa.eu • www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.group-3

For any use or reproduction of the ”photos” and “illustrations”, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holder(s).

Europe III

APRIL Mihai IVASCU (RO) is the Co-Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Accessibility of certain works protected by copyright” – INT/824

Bernardo HERNÁNDEZ BATALLER (ES) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Compliance package” – INT/825

Carlos TRÍAS PINTÓ (ES) is the President of the study group for the opinion on: “Euro area economic policy” – ECO/435

Krzysztof BALON (PL) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “European Pillar of Social Rights” – SOC/564

Christian MOOS (DE) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Cooperation with civil society to prevent the radicalisation of young people” – SOC/565

Cillian LOHAN (IE) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Access to justice at national level related to measures implement-ing EU environmental law” – NAT/716

Lutz RIBBE (DE) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Action Plan for nature, people and the economy” – NAT/717

MAYJorge PEGADO LIZ (PT) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Goods package” – INT/826

Baiba MILTOVICA (LV) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Monitoring and reporting of Co2 emissions from and fuel con-sumption of new heavy duty vehicles” – INT/827

Antonio LONGO (IT) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Digital Single Market - mid-term review” – INT/828

Michael SMYTH (UK) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Capital Markets Union: mid-term review” – ECO/437

Victor ALISTAR (RO) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Disincentives to tax avoidance or evasion” – ECO/436

Krzysztof PATER (PL) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “EU personal pension product” – ECO/440

Seamus BOLAND (IE) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “The future of EU finances up to 2025” – ECO/439

Pavel TRANTINA (CZ) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Youth initiative/European Solidarity Corps” – SOC/566

Pasi MOISIO (FI) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Access to the international road haulage market and the occupa-tion of road transport operator” – TEN/636

Krzysztof BALON (PL) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Driving and rest time periods, working time and posting of workers” – TEN/637

Teresa TISZBIEREK (PL) is the President of the study group for the opinion on: “Hired vehicles without drivers for the carriage of goods by road” – TEN/638

Vitas MACIULIS (LT) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Interoperability of Electronic Road Toll System” – TEN/639

Benedicte FEDERSPIEL (DK) is the President of the study group for the opinion on: “Proposal for amending the regulation on the operation of air services” – TEN/641

Meelis JOOST (EE) is the President of the study group for the opinion on: “Initiative for the sustainable development of the Blue Economy in the Western Mediterranean” – REX/493

Cristian PIRVULESCU (RO) is the Rapporteur of the study group for the opinion on: “Exchanging and protecting personal data in a globalised world” – REX/494

Renate HEINISCH (DE) is the President of the study group for the opin-ion on: “Industrial change in the health sector” – CCMI/153

Mindaugas MACIULEVICIUS (LT) is the President of the study group for the opinion on: “ The LeaderSHIP 2020 strategy as a vision for the maritime technology industry: towards an innovative, sustainable and competitive maritime industry in 2020” – CCMI/152