21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/1

—

having regard to the ECJ judgments on Google (Joined Cases C-236/08 to C-238/08, judgment of 23 March 2010) and BergSpechte (Case C-278/08, judgment of 25 March 2010) that define the notion of the ‘normally informed and reasonably attentive internet user’ as the standard internet consumer,

—

having regard to its resolution of 9 March 2010 on consumer protection (1),

—

having regard to SOLVIT’s 2008 annual report on the development and performance of the SOLVIT network (SEC(2009)0142), the Commission staff working paper of 8 May 2008 on an action plan on an integrated approach for providing single market assistance services to citizens and business (SEC(2008)1882) and Parliament’s resolution of 9 March 2010 on SOLVIT (2),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 3 March 2010 entitled ‘Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2010)2020),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document of 3 December 2009 entitled ‘Guidance on the implementation/application of Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices’ (SEC(2009)1666),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 22 October 2009 on cross-border business to consumer e-commerce in the EU (COM(2009)0557),

—

having regard to the ‘Mystery shopping evaluation of cross-border e-commerce in the EU’, a study conducted on behalf of the European Commission, DG SANCO, by YouGovPsychonomics and published on 20 October 2009,

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document of 22 September 2009 on the follow up in retail financial services to the Consumer Markets Scoreboard (SEC(2009)1251),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 7 July 2009 on a harmonised methodology for classifying and reporting consumer complaints and enquiries (COM(2009)0346) and to the accompanying draft Commission recommendation (SEC(2009)0949),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 2 July 2009 on the enforcement of the consumer acquis (COM(2009)0330),

—

having regard to the Commission report of 2 July 2009 on the application of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws (the Regulation on consumer protection cooperation) (COM(2009)0336),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document of 5 March 2009 entitled ‘Report on cross-border e-commerce in the EU’ SEC(2009)0283,

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2009 on international trade and the internet (3),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 28 January 2009 entitled ‘Monitoring consumer outcomes in the single market: Second edition of the Consumer Markets Scoreboard’ (COM(2009)0025) and to the accompanying Commission staff working document entitled ‘Second Consumer Markets Scoreboard’ (SEC(2009)0076),

—

having regard to its resolution of 21 June 2007 on consumer confidence in the digital environment (4),

—

having regard to Article 20(2) of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (5),

—

having regard to Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 concerning misleading and comparative advertising (codified version) (6),

—

having regard to its resolutions of 23 March 2006 on European contract law and the revision of the acquis: the way forward (7) and of 7 September 2006 on European contract law (8),

—

having regard to current Community legislation in the area of consumer protection, e-commerce and the development of the information society,

—

having regard to the Commission communication on the Review of the EU Regulatory Framework for electronic communications networks and services (COM(2006)0334),

—

having regard to the First Application Report of 21 November 2003 on the E-Commerce Directive (COM(2003)0702,

—

having regard to Directive 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services and amending Council Directive 90/619/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC (9),

—

having regard to the UNCITRAL Model Law on electronic commerce 1996, the UNCITRAL Model Law on electronic signatures 2001 and the UNCITRAL Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracting 2005 (10),

—

having regard to Article 11 TFEU, which stipulates that ‘environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Union policies and activities, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development’,

—

having regard to Article 12 TFEU, which stipulates that ‘consumer protection requirements shall be taken into account in defining and implementing other Union policies and activities’,

—

having regard to Article 14 TFEU and Protocol 26 thereto on services of general (economic) interest,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0226/2010),

A.

whereas Europe should not only seek ways to continue developing the internal market for e-commerce but also look into how a sustainable re-launch of the internal market could be achieved by the further development of e-commerce,

B.

whereas Mario Monti's report of 9 May 2010‘A new Strategy for the Single Market’ stresses that ‘the single market is less popular than ever, yet it is more needed than ever’; whereas the report also notes that e-commerce together with innovative services and eco-industries holds the largest growth and employment dividends for the future and therefore represents a new frontier of the single market,

C.

whereas e-commerce is a vital force of the internet and an important catalyst for achieving the aims of the EU 2020 strategy for the internal market; whereas it is important for all stakeholders to cooperate to overcome remaining barriers,

D.

whereas e-commerce facilitates and promotes the development of new market niches for SMEs which would not otherwise exist,

E.

whereas, with a view to unlocking the full potential of the EU single market, e-commerce traders should be encouraged to promote their products in all EU Member States using direct marketing or other communication tools,

F.

whereas e-commerce is a key 21st century marketplace for the European Union, with the potential to reshape the European internal market, contribute to the knowledge economy, provide value and opportunities to European consumers and businesses at this time of financial strain, and impact significantly and positively on jobs and growth; whereas the development of e-commerce can improve the competitiveness of the EU economy, in the framework of the Commission's EU 2020 strategy, including the development and promotion of new forms of entrepreneurship for small and medium-sized enterprises,

G.

whereas it is crucial to achieve an effective functioning of the internal market to fulfil the Lisbon agenda goals of increasing growth, competition and the creation of inclusive and competitive jobs to serve the 500 million consumers in the EU and their well-being;(whereas cross-border e-commerce brings important socio-economic benefits to European consumers, such as increased convenience and empowerment, reinforcement of consumer rights, increased transparency and competition, access to a wider variety of products and services to compare and choose from, and considerable potential for savings,

H.

whereas, during the recent economic crisis, the development of the digital society and the completion of the internal market in ICT has enabled the e-commerce sector to continue growing and creating jobs, helping to keep online businesses economically active and allowing consumers to take advantage of greater choice and better prices; whereas cross-border e-commerce has significant benefits for EU companies – especially SMEs – which can provide innovative, high-quality and consumer-friendly services and products across the online European internal market, reinforcing their position and enabling them to remain competitive in the global economy,

I.

whereas e-commerce offers a wider choice to consumers, especially to those living in less accessible, remote or outlying areas, as well as those with reduced mobility, who would otherwise not have access to a wide choice of goods; whereas e-commerce is especially beneficial for citizens in rural, remote and peripheral areas who may otherwise not have access to a wide choice of goods with such convenience or at such value,

J.

whereas the Second Application Report on the E-Commerce Directive has been overdue since 2005, i.e. for five years (Article 21 of Directive 2000/31/EC),

K.

whereas the Digital Agenda for Europe sets reasonable performance targets for high-speed and ultra-fast broadband coverage and for e-commerce take-up,

L.

whereas European consumer and business confidence in the digital environment is low due to unnecessary barriers to e-commerce such as fragmentation of the EU market, consumers’ uncertainty about data confidentiality, security of transactions and consumer rights in case of problems, and whereas in certain aspects of e-commerce Europe is lagging behind the United States and Asia; whereas the creation of a ‘Digital Single Market’, facilitating transactions across national borders in an on-line environment for all consumers across the European Union, is an important part of the reinvigoration of the Single Market as it provides citizens with a wider choice of products and services, whereas overcoming barriers to cross-border e-commerce and boosting consumer confidence is essential to achieving an attractive, integrated digital single market for Europe and stimulating consumer markets and the broader economy,

M.

having regard to the Commission communication on the digital agenda, which recognises that consumers in the EU very often opt to engage in transactions with firms based outside the EU, for example in the US, a factor which points to the need to develop a policy for encouraging global forms of e-commerce, together with the necessity to promote the importance of internationalisation of internet governance in line with the Tunis Agenda, whereas neither consumers nor businesses can reap the benefits of a Digital Single Market since very few on-line retailers sell their products or services to other Member States and most of those sell only to a limited number of Member States; whereas there is a need to address consumer discrimination, including at the time of payment, by ensuring provisions are in place to make and receive payment and delivery; whereas e-commerce is now a significant part of the mainstream economy, and businesses and consumers increasingly utilise both online and offline commercial practices to their best advantage,

N.

whereas e-commerce is international and cannot be confined within EU borders,

O.

whereas the Digital Agenda for Europe sets reasonable performance targets for high-speed and ultra-fast broadband coverage and for e-commerce take-up,

P.

whereas the fragmentation of part of the electronic market within the EU endangers the rights laid down in the acquis communautaire,

Q.

whereas European consumers and businesses have little legal certainty as regards cross-border e-commerce and one single electronic transaction is subject to many legal provisions setting divergent requirements, which does not provide either business operators or consumers with clear and easily enforceable rules,

R.

whereas the same is true for extra-European e-commerce, as European consumers often do not differentiate between European or third States when buying and selling online; whereas there is therefore a need to also involve third countries in efforts to make e-commerce more transparent, reliable and accountable,

S.

whereas the increasing cross-border dimension of consumer markets raises new challenges for enforcement authorities, which are constrained by jurisdictional boundaries and the fragmentation of the regulatory framework,

T.

whereas the existence of illegal services online seriously hampers the development of legitimate markets for certain digital services, notably for music, films and, increasingly, books and magazines; whereas intellectual property plays a crucial role in the digital world and whereas its protection, particularly on the internet, remains a significant challenge,

U.

whereas e-commerce users have a right to compensation when they are affected by illegal practices, but in practice they face substantial barriers in bringing such cases to court due to lack of information on the legislation applying in the different Member States, long and complex procedures, the risks associated with litigation, particularly in cross-border cases, and high costs,

V.

whereas the enforcement of the fundamental right to privacy and to the protection of personal data constitutes an important condition for e-commerce,

W.

whereas, despite the potential of alternative dispute resolution, such systems are regularly used by only 5 % of retailers, and 40 % of retailers do not know about the possibilities of using these tools,

X.

whereas uniformising the most essential consumer rights, as well as postal and banking costs, copyright levies, VAT procedures and data protection practices would go a long way towards creating a genuine single market for businesses and consumers; stresses that Member States must retain competency over VAT procedures,

Y.

whereas different copyright levying systems across Member States need to be simplified and clarified so that it is easier for online goods and services providers to make products and services available to consumers of different Member States;.whereas this review of copyright levying systems would give online goods and services providers greater legal certainty in offering products and services to consumers; whereas it is crucial to ensure a high level of consumer protection to promote trust in online goods and services, ensuring that the online marketplace respects trading practices; whereas there remain a number of severe structural and regulatory barriers to a fully functioning European internal e-commerce market, such as the fragmentation along national lines of consumer protection rules and rules on VAT, recycling fees and levies, and the abuse of rules governing exclusive and selective distribution agreements,

Z.

whereas access to affordable, reliable and high-quality postal services throughout the European Union is a priority for realising an effective internal market for e-commerce; whereas the existing vertical distribution agreements are often used to avoid or restrict online sales, thus denying retailers access to wider markets, undermining consumers’ rights to a wider choice and better prices, and thus creating barriers to the expansion of commerce; whereas cross-border business-to-business e-commerce can boost the competitiveness of European companies, allowing them to source components, services and know-how easily from all over the internal market (also creating new economies of scale), and, moreover, represents an opportunity for enterprises, SMEs in particular, to internationalise their customer base without having to invest in a physical presence in another Member State,

AA.

whereas e-commerce encourages the development of an ecological single market through the use of low-carbon and environmental technologies, standards, labels, products and services,

AB.

whereas the legal protection and confidence of purchasers in e-commerce need to be enhanced, while not forgetting that sellers and businesspeople also need legal protection,

AC.

whereas flexibility in markets is the most effective way to encourage growth; calls for the European Institutions to ensure that online markets are as flexible as possible to allow for greater enterprise and enlargement in this sector; whereas the Digital Single Market can only be completed if important Single Market legislation, including the Services Directive, is correctly implemented across all EU Member States; whereas it is crucial to ensure legal certainty and transparency in the process of rights clearance when an e-retailer uploads content protected by copyright onto a website; whereas, whilst the Internet is the fastest-growing retail channel and e-commerce is steadily increasing at national level, the gap between domestic and cross-border e-commerce in the EU is widening and European consumers in some EU Member States face geographical, technical and organisational restrictions in their choices,

AD.

whereas the Commission's ‘Consumer Market Scoreboard’ is a good tool for monitoring the status of cross-border e-commerce in the EU by indicating to what extent consumers can exploit goods and services in the Single Market,

AE.

whereas the roll-out of internet broadband services across EU Member States within the target set for 2013 is vital in providing both consumers and businesses with access to the digital economy,

1.

Welcomes the Commission communication of 22 October 2009 on cross-border business to consumer e-commerce in the EU;

2.

Welcomes the Commission communication of 19 May 2010 on a Digital Agenda for Europe setting out the Commission strategy aimed, among others, at making online transactions straightforward and at building digital confidence;

3.

Calls on the Commission to respond to the urgency outlined in Monti's report ‘A New Strategy for the Single Market’, which concludes that, as a vital tool for the future of the internal market, the EU should urgently address the remaining obstacles to create a pan-European online retail market by 2012;

4.

Welcomes the EU2020 Strategy's promotion of a knowledge-based economy and encourages the Commission to take swift action on increasing the speed of broadband services as well as streamlining the charges of such services throughout the Union, so as to better achieve a single market for e-commerce;

5.

Calls on the Commission to harmonise all the principal definitions in this field over a reasonable period of time, while acknowledging the hard work already done in areas relevant to e-commerce;

6.

Stresses that the completion of the e-commerce single market requires a horizontal approach by the Commission, involving effective coordination between Directorates- General; therefore, welcomes the Commission's recent commitment to establish a ‘Commissioners' Group’ (in its Digital Agenda for Europe report) to ensure effective joined-up policy;

7.

Points out that e-commerce should be seen as an extra tool for SMEs in increasing their competitiveness, and not as a goal in itself;

8.

Stresses the importance of making full use of the potential of e-commerce as part of making the EU more competitive on the global level;

9.

Calls on the Commission to address the promotion of a well-functioning digital single market for goods and services as a matter of urgency in order to benefit from its huge untapped potential for growth and jobs;

10.

Stresses the need for an active policy to enable citizens and businesses to benefit fully from the internal market, which offers good quality goods and services at competitive prices; considers that this is all the more essential in the current economic crisis as a means of fighting against growing inequalities and protecting consumers who are vulnerable, live in remote locations or have reduced mobility, low-income groups, and small and medium-sized businesses which are particularly concerned to join the world of e-commerce;

11.

Calls for better approximation of pre-contractual information for e-commerce for a high level of consumer protection and insofar as this harmonisation can be adapted, so as to ensure greater transparency and confidence between consumers and sellers, while retaining a minimum harmonisation approach for contracts in specific sectors;

12.

Recalls that there are major differences between the rules and practices of distance traders as to the guarantees and liability they offer within and beyond their national borders and as to the benefits which harmonisation would bring them; calls for an in-depth impact analysis of the consequences for e-commerce of any harmonisation of rules concerning the legal guarantee of conformity with existing national legislation;

13.

Calls for uniformisation of rules and practices to allow distance traders to move beyond their national borders in the guarantees and liability offered;

14.

Advocates the development of an appropriate, efficient, safe and innovative system of on-line payment which can offer consumers freedom and choice as regards mode of payment, does not involve fees which might undercut or limit choice, and ensures protection of the consumer's data;

15.

Stresses the importance of enhancing confidence in cross-border Internet payment systems (e.g., credit and debit cards and e-purses) by promoting a range of payment methods, enhancing interoperability and common standards, tackling technical barriers, supporting the most secure technologies for electronic transactions, harmonising and strengthening legislation on privacy and security issues, combating fraudulent activities and informing and educating the public;

16.

Calls on the Commission to come forward with a proposal for establishing a European financial instrument for credit and debit cards, with a view to facilitating online processing of card transactions;

17.

Reaffirms the importance of cross-border business-to-business e-commerce as a means whereby European companies, SMEs in particular, can grow, become more competitive and create more innovative products and services; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide a sound and certain legal and regulatory framework to give companies the guarantees they need in order to carry out cross-border business-to-business e-commerce transactions with confidence;

18.

Welcomes the Commission proposal to promote electronic invoicing and calls on the Council to arrive speedily at an agreement with Parliament; also calls on the Commission and the Member States to propose measures and reach agreements respectively with a view to simplifying and streamlining VAT reporting obligations for cross-border e-commerce and simplifying VAT registration procedures;

19.

Welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the simplification of the Value Added Tax (VAT) reporting obligations and on ‘simplified invoicing’ for distance selling, and emphasises that, in the area of tax legislation, including VAT, the principle of subsidiarity should be respected;

20.

Calls on the Commission to make available an integrated VAT collection scheme to encourage SMEs to trade across borders at lower administrative cost;

21.

Stresses the need to clarify the impact of the VAT package on cross-border postal services, with a view to avoiding legal uncertainty and price increases; takes the view that the VAT exemption for universal postal services under the EU's VAT directive must not be affected by a new fiscal rule based on the place of supply of services;

22.

Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment on the creation or designation of national authorities to handle registration requests for on-line cross-border e-commerce from companies or entrepreneurs from their Member States, and a European authority to correlate the national authorities, so as to permit the rapid completion of the internal market;

23.

Stresses the need to simplify and streamline measures on electric and electronic waste, cross-border management of copyright levies on blank media and recording devices, the EU-wide licensing of content, and EU rules governing cross-border electronic invoicing (‘e-invoicing’) for distance selling;

24.

Supports a simplification of the present copyright levies due to the severe hindrance to consumers and barriers to the functioning of the Single Market that result from the current system;

25.

Calls on the Commission to come up with measures to support the e-invoice initiative with a view to ensuring Europe-wide use of electronic invoices by 2020;

26.

Suggests creating a ‘one-stop shop’ system at European level with a view to finding cross-border solutions for administering Member States’ different rules and regulations, as in the case of declaration and payment of VAT or other applicable taxes;

27.

Calls on the Commission to explore options on how to promote better access to creative content on the internet such as music and audiovisual works and on how to respond to citizens’ demand for consumer-friendly cross-border services;

28.

Calls on Member States and the Commission to better integrate Single Market centres incorporating SOLVIT, points of single contact (as required by the Services Directive), product centres (provided for in the Mutual Recognition Regulation), and further information, including legal requirements, required by businesses to sell their goods cross-border and over the internet; emphasises that the functioning of this ‘one-stop shop’ is essential for completing the single market for e-commerce;

29.

Reminds the Commission that there are still gaps in the legal framework for on-line services and calls on the Commission to come forward with targeted legislative proposals in order to strengthen consumer access to and trust in products and services traded online, and offer consumers a simple one-stop shop approach;

30.

Points out the significance of simplifying cross-border rules and lowering compliance costs for retailers and entrepreneurs by providing practical solutions on issues such as VAT reporting and invoicing, e-waste and recycling fees, copyright levies, consumer protection, labelling and sector-specific rules; calls, to this end, for the establishment of ‘one-stop’ schemes and the promotion of cross-border e-government solutions such as e-invoicing and e-procurement;

31.

Regrets that the Services Directive has still not been fully transposed in some Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to put an end to discrimination against consumers on the grounds of electronic address or residence, ensuring the effective implementation of Article 20(2) of the Services Directive, as well as the proper enforcement by national authorities and courts of the national provisions implementing this non-discrimination rule in the legal systems of Member States;

32.

Stresses the significance, for the further development of the e-commerce, of the free movement of goods and services, with particular emphasis on the principle of non-discrimination, within the internal market, on grounds of a recipient’s nationality or place of residence; reiterates that this principle of non-discrimination is incompatible with the imposition of additional legal and administrative requirements on nationals of other Member States seeking to benefit from a service or from more advantageous terms or prices; calls, therefore, on the Commission to act, on the basis of Article 20(2) of the Services Directive, against such discrimination;

33.

Highlights the importance of eliminating discrimination against consumers online and their country of origin online, by making provisions for online payment from all 27 EU Member States, including the possibility for consumers to choose from different means of online payment;

34.

Calls for an integrated political approach to the completion of the single market in transport, covering all modes (including cabotage by road and rail freight), as well as to environmental legislation, with a view to preventing inefficiencies in the supply chain or unnecessary cost increases for distance sellers and e-commerce clients;

35.

Believes that reform of the postal sector and the promotion of interoperability and cooperation among postal systems and services can have a significant impact on the development of cross-border e-commerce, which requires inexpensive and efficient distribution and tracking of products; highlights, therefore, the need for rapid implementation of the Third Postal Directive (2008/6/EC);

36.

Calls for measures to be taken in order to contribute towards an increase in the number of internet users and the improvement of the quality, price and speed of the net in those countries and regions within the Union that do not have a good-quality connection, ensuring that broadband access is available throughout the EU by 2013; stresses the need to develop availability for each citizen of broadband access, and underlines that, in rural, remote or peripheral areas, access to a fast internet connection should also be possible, paying particular attention to consumers and businesses in mountain areas or island regions where, in addition to more restricted Internet access, postal charges are very high and delivery times very long for goods purchased or sold;

37.

Notes that, in the context of revision of the Universal Service Directive, the further development, as a priority, of fast and affordable broadband access is essential to the development of e-commerce, as a lack of Internet access remains one of the most significant barriers to European citizens’ use of e-commerce;

38.

Supports the Commission’s broadband targets to enable all EU citizens to access basic broadband by 2013, to enable access to broadband at a minimum of 30Mbps for all citizens by 2020, with half of EU citizens having access to broadband of 100Mbps, and calls for concrete measures to ensure that these targets are met; stresses that specific measures should be put in place for the protection of children and young people, notably via the development of age verification systems and the prohibition of online marketing practices that have a negative impact on children’s behaviour;

39.

Calls on the Commission to begin formulating European standards to facilitate cross-border e-commerce, to bridge variations between the laws in force within the various Member States and to remove the obligation within a selective distribution network of having an off-line shop prior to selling online, where it is shown that such an obligation is in contradiction with competition law, or is not justified by the nature of the contract for goods and services sold, thus enabling consumers and small and medium-sized enterprises to fully exploit the internal market's potential in the electronic environment; expresses concern regarding the Commission's decision on the obligation of having an off-line shop prior to selling online as this requirement radically hampers online sales;

40.

Considers that online platforms have played an important role in boosting (especially cross-border) e-commerce in Europe, enabling market access by hundreds of thousands of SMEs, and offering consumers greater choice whilst introducing many examples of good practice for boosting trust and transparent information about rights and obligations and facilitating the resolution of disputes between parties to an online transaction, where necessary; calls for online platforms to provide their goods and services to all European consumers without any territorial discrimination based on Member States;

41.

Highlights the importance of an open document exchange format for electronic business interoperation and calls on the Commission to take concrete steps to support its emergence and spread;

42.

Stresses the importance of better guidance and accessible financial facilities for SMEs in order to help them set up an e-commerce dimension as an addition to their off-line shop;

43.

Stresses the importance of open and neutral access to a high-speed internet connection, without which e-commerce would be impossible;

44.

Highlights that the completion of the single market for e-commerce must not be limited to legislative measures and controls but must be accompanied, in addition, by the strengthening of other areas of the internet, namely those of e-government and e-learning;

45.

Stresses the need to monitor the application of the rules recently adopted in Commission Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 of 20 April 2010 on exclusive and selective distribution, on the basis of market information from the interested parties and national competition authorities, and, where necessary, to review those rules in order to reduce barriers to online sales; calls on the Commission to come up with proposals to tackle these problems before the end of 2011;

46.

Calls on the Commission to strengthen consumers’ privacy and to ensure all consumer data, including purchasing and viewing data, is available to consumers upon request and is held by suppliers for a duration that is accepted under EU law;

47.

Calls on the Commission also to work towards creating rules and standards so that the non-interoperability of software on commercial and social networking websites does not prevent consumers from changing their purchasing options;

48.

Stresses the importance of electronic signatures and of the public key infrastructure (PKI) for pan-European secure e-government services, and calls on the Commission to set up a European Validation Authorities Gateway to ensure cross-border interoperability for electronic signatures;

49.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States, bearing in mind how important it is to realise the full potential of the single market, to ensure that, by 2015, at least 50 % of all public procurement procedures are conducted electronically, in accordance with the action plan agreed by the Ministerial Conference on e-Government, held in Manchester in 2005;

50.

Believes that mobile commerce (m-commerce) can be a significant part of e-commerce, capable of reaching the millions of European citizens who use mobile phones but not personal computers, thus furthering the convergence of Internet and mobile technologies and fostering the EU lead in mobile communications;

51.

Believes that the development of, and support for, common, open technical and operational specifications and standards (for compatibility, interoperability, accessibility, security, logistics, delivery, etc.) will facilitate cross-border e-commerce by assisting consumers, especially vulnerable and inexperienced computer users, and by bridging the operational, technical, cultural and language barriers that exist between the various Member States;

52.

Recognises the particular legal challenges linked to the development of an internal market for m-commerce capable of ensuring consumer rights, personal privacy and the protection of underage customers; calls on the Commission to examine this issue in detail;

53.

Emphasises the need to make the e-commerce supply chain more transparent so that the consumer always knows the identity of the supplier, as well as the latter’s business name, geographical address, contact details and tax registration number, and whether the supplier is an intermediary or an end supplier, which is especially important in the context of online auctions;

54.

Calls on the Commission to set the clear standards required for cross-border e-commerce at EU level, including, for example, an obligation on merchants to give their customers and the public authorities easy, direct and permanent access, free of charge, to information regarding the name and registration number of the merchant or service provider, prices for the goods and services offered and any additional delivery costs that could add to the bill;

55.

Calls on the Commission to establish the requirement for entrepreneurs who voluntarily use standardised contracts and standardised general commercial terms and conditions to highlight those provisions which differ therefrom;

56.

Considers that the rules governing distance contracts should also cover contracts concluded between consumers and professional traders in online auctions and calls on the Commission to further examine and assess the rules governing specific distance contracts for tourist services (airline tickets, hotel accommodation, car rental, leisure time services, etc.) ordered individually over the internet, primarily in order to increase the liability of online auctions to better protect consumer rights;

57.

Calls on the Commission to clarify rules on soliciting (direct or indirect) using the internet in other Member States;

58.

Calls for the introduction of a requirement that an external audit be carried out in respect of certain specific types of electronic services where there is a greater need to ensure that those services are fully secure, to protect personal information and data (in the case, for example, of internet banking);

59.

Stresses that users (consumers and vendors) require legal certainty when operating on-line, and welcomes the Commission's suggestion in its communication ‘A digital agenda for Europe’ of updating the rules on the limited liability of information society services so as to keep up with technological progress, in the context of the e-commerce directive (see the communication's footnote no 13);

60.

Urges the Commission to take steps to create legal certainty and tackle the severe fragmentation that exists as regards the process of rights clearance and multiple Member State jurisdictions when uploading media content to websites;

61.

Believes that priority should be given to removing the administrative and regulatory barriers to cross-border e-commerce by 2013 through the introduction of a single set of rules for consumers and businesses across the 27 EU Member States that will create a favourable digital environment, provide legal certainty to both enterprises and consumers, simplify procedures, reduce compliance costs, reduce unfair competition and unlock the potential of the EU e-commerce market; stresses that, to this end, the uniform interpretation and application of legislative tools such as a consumer rights directive, the e-commerce Directive (2000/31/EC), Article 20(2) of the Services Directive (2006/123/EC) and the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC) can be of major importance; calls therefore on the Commission to further its ongoing assessment of the Community acquis affecting the digital single market and to propose targeted legislative action on key impediments;

62.

Considers that enhancing market surveillance, transparency of rules and enforcement mechanisms to encourage users’ confidence is crucial as consumer spending will be an important factor for the economic recovery; takes the view that public authorities must be given more resources to investigate and ultimately stop illegal commercial practices; calls on the Commission to create a European early-warning system, including a database, to combat fraudulent activities in the digital market; calls on the Commission to update RAPEX (rapid alert system) as necessary; stresses that such initiatives must respect data protection rules;

63.

Calls on public authorities to quickly act against rogue websites by paying greater attention to consumer rights, including measures aimed at introducing labels for safe and secure websites and ensuring that companies providing sponsored advertising services do not advertise illegal websites;

64.

Believes that consumer confidence can be built by standards and codes of conduct that allow online service providers to keep up with fast-changing technological developments;

65.

Stresses that online targeting and profiling should fully respect data protection rules;

66.

Emphasises the need to ensure consistent interpretation of the EU rules governing data privacy in order to ensure enhanced data protection and to promote consumer trust in online payment systems;

67.

Considers that an improvement of the consumer protection regimes across the EU can ensure consumer confidence in online cross-border transactions, including protection against credit card fraud;

68.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that the consistent enforcement of copyright laws in the area of e-commerce is not undermined;

69.

Believes that cross-border web searching and advertising should provide consumers and traders with better information and enhance their ability to make comparisons and identify offers; is concerned, in this regard, about possible distortions of competition that consumers and entrepreneurs may be experiencing in some EU Member States; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the industry, to address the shortcomings of web searching and advertising platforms and to encourage their cross-border operation, for example through the promotion of the.eu domains;

70.

Calls on the Commission to ensure, by means of monitoring, that the coherent application of copyright law is not circumvented in e-commerce;

71.

Asks the Commission to take the initiative and carry out an urgent impact assessment on the most appropriate method of tackling copyright levies, including the possibility of charging the levy when and where the product is first placed on the market in the European Union, since stakeholders are unable to reach agreement;

72.

Shares the Commission’s view that alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (ADR), such as mediation and arbitration or out-of-court settlements, can be an expedient and attractive option for consumers; notes that some private operators, such as online platforms, have established successful initiatives to boost consumer confidence, using internal dispute resolution instruments; urges Member States to encourage the development of ADR in order to enhance the level of consumer protection and maximise compliance with legislation; recalls the positive experiences of SOLVIT and of the network of European Consumer Centres; calls for the creation of a European e-consumer information system which would offer detailed guidance and information about rights and obligations in the digital market; but emphasises that such mechanisms should complement and not substitute judicial or administrative means of enforcement;

73.

Notes the importance of enhancing the current low level of consumer confidence and trust in cross-border transactions by strengthening the online and cross-border enforcement of existing rules, empowering consumer protection authorities, promoting cooperation between public authorities and setting up efficient EU-wide mechanisms for market monitoring and audits, complaint handling and dispute resolution;

74.

Encourages recourse to alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, with the option of having recourse to them through an online procedure, accessible without delay through the European e-Justice portal as and when it becomes available;

75.

Stresses the need to develop and standardise rules offering a high level of legal protection to minors, and encourages the launching of information and training campaigns for parents, teachers and guardians to make them aware of their responsibility in educating children about risks in the use of on-line commerce and the importance of vigilance with regard to children's use of the internet;

76.

Calls for the Commission and the Member States to take swift action to fight illegal online services which do not respect the rules on consumer protection, protection of minors, copyright, tax, and most other applicable laws;

77.

Stresses that care should be taken to avoid the risks posed by illegal product offers on the web – in particular counterfeit medicines and healthcare products – by promoting health literacy and using specific websites of the.eu domains to draw attention to misleading information;

78.

Calls for a proposal from the Commission to address appropriate actions or sanctions regarding e-commerce in counterfeit goods and medicines, including labels for safe and secure websites such as certification systems for authorised pharmacies;

79.

Emphasises the need for proper training and education of civil servants and judicial authorities as regards EU consumer protection rules;

80.

Calls for a single legal instrument combining the various texts currently in force in order to clarify the rules applicable to e-commerce; welcomes the Commission's proposal for a Directive on Consumer Rights and calls, where relevant, for an appropriate level of harmonisation of certain aspects of consumer contract law, especially regarding the handling of certain types of warranty claims; considers that this should include other directives, such as those on distance selling of financial services and e-commerce;

81.

Calls on the Commission to assess whether the creation of a portal for e-commerce monitored by the Commission, involving stakeholders and Member States, could better contribute to the dissemination of best practices and information and therefore enhance consumer trust and increase cross-border e-commerce;

82.

Invites the Commission to continue investigating the reasons why consumers reject e-commerce, with a view to drawing up effective guidelines for suitable legislation, and suggests creating a ‘scoreboard’ dedicated exclusively to e-commerce with the aim of obtaining a behavioural picture of the on-line consumer and identifying the factors which affect and determine such consumers’ choices;

83.

Recognises that citizens will refrain from interacting, expressing their opinions freely and entering into transactions if they do not have sufficient confidence in the legal framework of the new digital space; whereas the guarantee and enforcement of fundamental rights in this context is an essential condition for confidence on the part of citizens; whereas the guarantee of protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) and other rights is an essential condition for confidence on the part of business;

84.

Calls on the Commission to remove the obligation of having an off-line shop prior to selling on-line, as this requirement radically hampers online sales;

85.

Stresses the importance, for the further development of cross-border e-commerce, of establishing a coherent EU-wide framework, within the limits of the acquis communautaire, for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, stepping-up the fight against illegal and counterfeit goods and raising awareness of these issues among European consumers;

86.

Points out that it is necessary to introduce legislation applicable to all electronic transactions, this being essential to protect the rights of e-commerce service users;

87.

Calls for the development, under the framework research programmes, of innovative research projects aimed at promoting and unifying the EU e-commerce market by increasing consumer confidence, empowerment and choice in the digital environment;

88.

Calls for the efficient monitoring of legal, technical and economic developments in e-commerce and points out the need for an impact assessment of all decisions affecting the digital single market and the information society; to this end an ‘e-commerce scoreboard’ for assessing the European online market environment would be a useful tool;

89.

Believes that consumer confidence can be developed by removing barriers to cross-border e-commerce, while preserving the highest level of consumer protection and can be built up through European trusted authorities or trust marks that guarantee the reliability and quality of goods placed on the cross-border electronic market; considers that a sustainable European trust mark needs to be established, with clear, transparent and supervised rules, by the Commission; whereby such a European trust mark scheme needs to be backed with a standards-control or enforcement mechanism, as is already the case at national level in some Member States; recognises that a cross-border European trust-mark scheme may only function in the context of EU law on which the European trust mark can be based; believes that any European trust mark scheme must be subject to a thorough impact assessment and must be implemented in cooperation with existing trust mark labels in Member States;

90.

Stresses the significance of promoting and enforcing EU-wide logos, trust marks and quality marks that will help consumers in identifying reputable online traders, reward best practices and encourage innovation, thus supporting EU companies in their efforts to reach beyond their home market;

91.

Underlines that in the online environment, where the buyer and seller are remote and the buyer has limited ability to assess the physical quality of products, access to accurate and clear information is essential for transparency;

92.

Emphasises the efforts of the Commission and the national postal regulators for the correct and timely implementation of the third Postal Services Directive (2008/6/EC) in the 27 Member States in order to achieve an increase in competition, lower prices and better services, to improve the conditions for delivery of goods purchased in cross-border e-commerce; emphasises also the importance of ensuring the availability of insurance services for parcel delivery;

93.

Calls for a programme to be established and for use to be made of existing financial instruments for projects to increase users’ confidence in e-commerce, including educational and information campaigns at both European and national level, and projects verifying online services in practice (such as ‘mystery shopping’); emphasises the need to develop online tools to educate consumers about e-commerce and new digital technology (principal rights of internet consumers, e-commerce, data protection rules, etc.) such as the Dolceta project (Development of On-Line Consumer Education Tools for Adults); thus enabling citizens to enhance their digital skills and their knowledge of their rights and obligations, and to benefit from the advantages of e-commerce in a digital society;

94.

Believes that consumer confidence can be further enhanced by ensuring public trust in the online environment, addressing concerns over the protection of personal data, regulating data collection, behavioural targeting, profiling and advertising, and raising consumer awareness through educational and information campaigns; calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for the adaptation of the Data Protection Directive to the current digital environment;

95.

Stresses the need to make the supply chain and the terms and conditions of cross-border online trade simpler and more transparent by establishing rules on misleading or incomplete information about consumer rights, total costs and traders’ contact details and by promoting best and fair practices, recommendations and guidelines for electronic shops; recognises the efforts made by the EU in this area to clarify the terms, conditions and prices of air fares as a positive example to be followed;

96.

Stresses the importance of fast and effective implementation of the European Progress Microfinance Facility, operational as of June 2010, which could provide new impetus for the promotion of on-line businesses, especially amongst the recently unemployed;

97.

Believes that media and computer literacy and awareness are essential to the development of the European digital environment; calls, therefore, for the launch of a ‘Digital literacy and inclusion action plan’ at EU and Member State levels, comprising, in particular: specific digital literacy training opportunities for unemployed people and groups at risk of exclusion, incentives for private-sector initiatives to provide digital skills training to all employees, a Europe-wide ‘Be smart online!’ initiative to make all students, including those engaged in life-long learning and professional training, familiar with the safe use of ICT and online services, and a common EU-level ICT certification scheme;

98.

Welcomes the Commission commitment to issue a Code of EU Online Rights by 2012 summarising existing digital user rights and obligations in the EU in a clear and accessible way, complemented by an annual review of breaches of online consumer protection law and appropriate enforcement measures, in coordination with the European Network of Consumer Protection Agencies;

99.

Believes that the development of self-regulatory codes of conduct by trade, professional, and consumer associations, and implementation of the provisions of Parliament’s report on ‘a new Digital Agenda for Europe: 2015.eu’ calling for the creation of a European charter of citizens’ and consumers’ rights in the digital environment and developing a ‘fifth freedom’ permitting the free circulation of content and knowledge, would enhance consumer confidence in e-commerce by clarifying the rights and obligations of all information-society players;

100.

Calls on the Commission to act swiftly and to report in 2012 on its progress in tackling the ten barriers to cross-border e-commerce, as stated in its communication of 22 October 2009 on cross-border business to consumer e-commerce in the EU (COM(2009)0557); calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure a high level of consumer protection in e-commerce and the removal of the barriers to the development of e-commerce identified in the Commission’s 2010 communication on the Digital Agenda and its 2009 communication on cross-border business to consumer e-commerce in the EU, through both legislative and non-legislative means;invites the Commission to launch a dialogue between interested parties and the US, with a view to examining means of developing a transatlantic electronic market;

101.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/15

—

having regard to the Commission’s Turkey 2009 Progress Report (SEC(2009)1334),

—

having regard to the Agreement of 12 September 1963 establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey,

—

having regard to the Additional Protocol to that Agreement of 23 November 1970, and in particular Article 41(1) thereof (‘Standstill Clause’),

—

having regard to Decision No 1/80 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 19 September 1980,

—

having regard to Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 22 December 1995 on implementing the final phase of the Customs Union (96/142/EC),

—

having regard to the rulings of the European Court of Justice concerning the four fundamental movements, in particular in the Demirel, Sevince, Savas, Abatay-Sahin, Tum-Dari and Soysal cases,

—

having regard to the latest WTO Trade Review on Turkey, published in 2007,

—

having regard to its previous resolutions on Turkey,

—

having regard to the Policy Department’s analysis of the 2009 annual programme for Turkey under the Pre-accession Instrument (IPA) in the context of the 2009 enlargement package,

—

having regard to the Council Conclusions of 11 December 2006,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0238/2010),

A.

whereas the Customs Union with Turkey remains one of the most advanced and close commercial relationships that the EU has with any third country,

B.

whereas Turkey is the seventeenth largest economy in the world, according to World Bank statistics, and the sixth largest economy in Europe, with industrial goods amounting to over 90 % of its exports; whereas in 2008 Turkey ranked as the world’s twentieth largest receiver of FDI and its FDI inflow amounted to 18 billion,

C.

whereas Turkey has become the EU’s seventh largest trade partner and the EU is Turkey’s largest trading partner,

D.

whereas in 2009 Turkey exported EUR 33,6 billion’s worth of products to the EU and imported EUR 40,4 billion’s worth of products from the EU,

E.

whereas average unemployment in Turkey reached an alarming 12,5 % in 2009 and decreased to 10,8 % in April 2010 according to OECD data, youth unemployment stands at 25 % and the 2010 Millennium Development Goals Report on Turkey indicates that the extreme poverty ratio is 17,1 %,

1.

Welcomes the fact that the EU’s trade relations with Turkey are at an advanced level; calls on Turkey to simplify procedures and bureaucracy and remove remaining tariff and non-tariff barriers; stresses the importance of constructive dialogue between the two parties in order to further improve these relations;

2.

Recalls that, according to the combined reading of Article 205 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 21 of the EU Treaty, the Union’s external action, including the common commercial policy, seeks to promote ‘(…) democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law’ as well as to build partnership with third countries which share the principles referred to above;

3.

Calls on the Commission to continue its engagement and dialogue with Turkey on trade, particularly within the Joint Consultative Committee and the EC-Turkey Customs Union Joint Committee; encourages both sides to use these platforms more effectively, by rapidly resolving outstanding issues such as Turkey’s ban on imports of beef meat, live bovine animals and derivative products and some EU Member States’ road quotas applied to vehicles registered in Turkey;

4.

Notes Turkey’s long-term growth potential and demographic specificities; encourages both the EU and Turkey to pay due attention to their interlinked economies, to maintain open trade and investment regimes and their ability to withstand domestic protectionist pressures in line with their commitments in various international platforms, and to use trade defence instruments in compliance with the WTO;

5.

Is concerned about the low level of participation of women in the labour market and their employment in the informal sector; encourages Turkey to put women’s employment at the core of its economic, social and employment policies;

6.

Stresses the severity of the youth employment situation and the lack of specific actions to tackle the problem; refers to a recent ILO study which describes employment creation in general and women’s and youth employment in particular as the key labour-market challenge for Turkey’s development; calls, therefore, for an employment strategy which targets youth employment in general and the situation of young women in particular;

7.

Welcomes the establishment of the Customs Union (CU) in 1996, which has provided increased market access and allowed trade volumes between the EU and Turkey to reach EUR 100 billion per annum at their peak in 2008;

8.

Highlights the fact that the CU covers manufactured goods and processed agricultural products; looks forward to the inclusion of agricultural products in the CU as soon as possible; considers that the CU can be deepened to include coverage of other areas such as services and public procurement;

9.

Finds it regrettable that, according to the latest WTO review, the average tariff rate on agricultural products applied by Turkey is relatively high and in some cases extremely high (on corn, for example the duty applied is 130 %); calls on the Turkish Government to substantially reduce these barriers;

10.

Welcomes the alignment of the Turkish Customs Code with that of the EU and, in particular, the adoption of the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP); calls for greater alignment of Turkish legislation with the Community acquis as regards free trade, combating counterfeiting, and post-clearance checks and authorisations for duty-free shops;

11.

Deplores the fact that, for the fifth consecutive year, Turkey has neither fully implemented the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement nor removed all the obstacles to the free movement of goods; calls on Turkey to implement fully and without delay all its obligations deriving from this Protocol in a non-discriminatory way that will contribute to the further development of its trade relations with all EU Member States, and recalls that failure to do so may further seriously affect the negotiating process;

12.

Reiterates that Turkey’s full compliance with its undertakings under the customs union is essential; considers also that there is a need for further harmonisation with the Community acquis in certain sectors such as free trade zones and customs duty relief;

13.

Stresses that the CU would greatly benefit from a review of the Dispute Settlement Mechanism, which would allow a swift and fair resolution of pending issues;

14.

Calls for the removal of all unnecessary barriers to trade between the EU and Turkey, including technical ones such as non-recognition of certification, duplicative testing, duplicative inspections, mandatory technical regulations and standards, in compliance with the WTO; also calls on the Commission to share good practice in this area;

15.

Acknowledges the difficulties faced by Turkey in concluding Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with third countries, which has negative effects on the Turkish economy by enabling unilateral preferential access to the Turkish market for the EU’s FTA partners with which Turkey has not yet been able to sign FTAs; calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that Turkey is included in the impact assessment studies of prospective FTAs between the EU and third countries and to further strengthen the transmission of information on the EU’s position and the state of play of the FTA negotiations; encourages the Commission to take account, in the FTAs, of the CU between the EU and Turkey;

16.

Calls on Turkey to remove the remaining import licences for goods which are in breach of the commitments under the Customs Union and to agree to update Decision 2/97 of the EC-Turkey Association Council on the removal of technical barriers to trade;

17.

Welcomes the legislation on standardisation in foreign trade adopted by the Turkish Government in 2009; notes, however, the introduction of conformity assessment procedures and physical customs checks; encourages both the EU and Turkey to fully apply the principles of mutual recognition;

18.

Calls on Turkey to withdraw the burdensome import procedures and to align its duty-free quota system for processed agricultural products which do not comply with the Customs Union;

19.

Welcomes the positive conclusions of the latest WTO review on Turkey; urges the Turkish Government, however, to take the necessary measures to fulfil the recommendations therein and to accelerate structural and legislative reforms;

20.

Calls on Turkey to suspend the new requirements on Good Manufacturing Practices as they de facto ban imports of certain pharmaceutical products, as well as to participate in, and adhere to, international initiatives for harmonising Good Manufacturing Practices procedures and standards such as those of the WHO and the EU;

21.

Notes Turkey’s dynamic international trade strategy and its conclusion of 16 FTAs to date; encourages the EU and Turkey to work together to deepen trade relations with Central Asia;

22.

Notes the fact that 88 % of total FDI stock in Turkey comes from the EU; points out, however, that the share of FDI in Turkey’s GDP is relatively small;

23.

Notes the role of Turkey within regional platforms such as the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organisation, the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank and the South East European Cooperation Process; encourages Turkey to take a leading role in promoting open and fair trade with due regard for social, economic and environmental wellbeing;

24.

Notes Turkey’s role in the Mediterranean region as a founding partner of the Barcelona Process and calls on Turkey to fully respect all the states partners of the Process; emphasises that there is huge scope to improve Turkey’s trade in the Mediterranean basin;

25.

Notes that while the EU remains Turkey’s largest trade partner, Russia, China, the United States and Iran were amongst Turkey’s main trade partners as of 2009; underlines that the trade volume between Turkey and the EU decreased during 2009, while an increasing trend has been noted in the first two quarters of 2010; notes also that Turkey is diversifying its trade partners; asks the Commission to conduct a study on the causes, which may involve the financial crisis, and economic impact of the relative decline of EU’s share in Turkey’s foreign trade volume;

26.

Notes that Turkey and the EU face similar challenges in energy supply; underlines the importance of the Nabucco project for the security of energy supply in the EU and therefore calls on Turkey to take the initiative to swiftly implement the Nabucco Intergovernmental Agreement; stresses the need to define a common external energy strategy and the opening of the energy chapter that would further increase cooperation in the field of energy; urges Turkey to ratify the Energy Charter Treaty Trade Amendment and encourages Turkey to invest in the enormous potential of its renewable energy sources;

27.

Notes that the recurrent visa problems under GATS 4 substantially limit the movement of Turkish businessmen and lorry drivers into the EU; underlines the successive ECJ rulings on this matter and calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States respect these rulings; calls on the Commission and the Council to re-examine visa procedures with a view to eliminating obstacles to trade;

28.

Finds it regrettable that the legislation ensuring full respect for trade union rights in line with EU standards and the relevant International Labour Organisation conventions has not yet been completed, particularly with regard to the rights of trade union organisation and collective bargaining and the right to strike;

29.

Urges Turkey to avoid discriminatory practices against foreign enterprises by giving a 15 % price advantage to Turkish bidders in the field of public procurement; invites Turkey to become a party to the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) within the WTO;

30.

Stresses that counterfeit products, including pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, represent a problem in EU-Turkey trade relations and reduce the attractiveness of Turkey for FDI; encourages Turkey to enforce the new IPR legislation effectively in order to foster trade relations with the EU; underlines the need to strike a better balance between international requirements in intellectual property law and domestic economic development needs when developing an intellectual property regime;

31.

Notes that SMEs make up 99 % of Turkish enterprises and provide 70 % of employment opportunities in Turkey; encourages Turkey to improve SMEs’ access to finance; welcomes Turkey’s Ninth Development Plan, which focuses on the R&D spending that is crucial to increasing SME competitiveness;

32.

Welcomes the outcome of the referendum in support of constitutional reform;

33.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Government of Turkey.

21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/19

—

having regard to the communication from the Commission on halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 – and beyond: sustaining ecosystem services for human well–being (COM(2006)0216),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on the mid-term assessment of implementing the EC biodiversity action plan (COM(2008)0864),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on options for an EU vision and target for biodiversity beyond 2010 (COM(2010)0004),

—

having regard to the report from the Commission on the conservation status of habitat types and species as required under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive (COM(2009)0358),

—

having regard to Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1) (Birds Directive) and to the European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2001 (2) on implementation of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (3) (Habitats Directive),

—

having regard to the Environment Council conclusions of 25 June 2009 on the ‘Mid-term assessment of implementing the EU biodiversity action plan’ and ‘Towards an EU Strategy on invasive alien species’,

—

having regard to the informal Council held on 26-27 January 2010 in Madrid, which adopted the so-called ‘Cibeles’ priorities, and the Environment Council conclusions of 15 March 2010 on biodiversity post-2010 – EU and global vision and targets and international access and burden sharing regime,

—

having regard to the European Council conclusions of 25-26 March 2010, in particular paragraph 14,

—

having regard to its resolution of 22 May 2007 on halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 (4),

—

having regard to the European Summit in Gothenburg in 2001, where it was agreed to halt the loss of biodiversity by 2010 as part of a Sustainable Development Strategy,

—

having regard to the study on The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) (http://www.teebweb.org),

—

having regard to the Commission communication towards an EU strategy on invasive species (COM(2008)0789),

—

having regard to the EU’s Blue Paper on an Integrated Maritime policy (COM(2007)0575 and SEC(2007)1278) and the ongoing preparations for the reform of the common fisheries policy,

—

having regard to the measures aiming at enhancing nature conservation and biodiversity forming part of the ‘Health check of the CAP’ and the opportunities offered by the reform of the CAP currently being discussed,

—

having regard to the findings of independent experts in ‘National implementation of Council Directive Habitats’ - Study PE 410.698 - Policy Department C, 2009, on the application of the Habitats Directive, notably as regards a lack of assessment of alternative options to and the cumulative effects of projects, inadequate site management and, when compensatory measures are decided upon, the failure to verify such measures and the fact that they are often carried out too late, if at all,

—

having regard to the fact that the United Nations has declared 2010 the Year of Biodiversity,

—

having regard to the outcome of the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which took place in Doha, Qatar, from 13 to 25 March 2010,

—

having regard to the upcoming fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (COP-MOP 5) and the Conference of the Parties (COP 10) of the UN Convention on Biodiversity (CBD),

—

having regard to EEA Report No 4/2009 ‘Progress towards the European 2010 biodiversity target’, in particular the annex ‘SEBI 2010 Biodiversity indicator’,

—

having regard to the Commission Guidance document ‘Guidelines for the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in the marine environment – Application of the Habitats and Birds Directives’ (May 2007),

—

having regard to the EU 2020 strategy,

—

having regard to the third United Nations Global Biodiversity Outlook,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions of the Committee on Fisheries and the Committee on Petitions (A7-0241/2010),

A.

whereas EU law-making should have an impact on biodiversity, as was the case with the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC),

B.

whereas it has become clear from the Commission’s communications that the EU has not met its 2010 biodiversity target,

C.

whereas the health check of species and habitat types protected under the Habitats Directive shows that a majority of species and habitat types have an unfavourable conservation status, that the extinction rate is disturbingly high – according to certain estimates the biodiversity rate has fallen by 30 % in the last 40 years – and that the drivers of excessive biodiversity loss show no evidence of declining; whereas habitats and species of EU interest are potentially threatened by anthropogenic climate change; whereas scientists estimate there are many unrecorded species, making it impossible to gauge the full extent of biodiversity loss,

D.

whereas several factors have prevented the EU from achieving its 2010 target, such as the failure to recognise and deal with the driving forces behind the reduction in biological diversity, incomplete implementation of legislation, incomplete and poor integration into sectoral policies, insufficient scientific knowledge and data gaps, lack of political will, insufficient funding, lack of additional efficiently-targeted instruments to tackle specific problems such as invasive alien species,

E.

whereas biodiversity, as the world’s natural capital, is essential to the existence of human life on Earth and societies’ well-being, both directly and indirectly through the ecosystem services it provides; whereas biodiversity plays a central role in the global fight against hunger and in favour of food security; whereas conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity is one prerequisite for mitigation of and adaptation to climate change,

F.

whereas biological biodiversity is the irreplaceable pillar on which mankind has evolved and its loss and that of the natural heritage it brings with it creates disequilibrium and gives rise to substantial economic and welfare losses, of the same order of magnitude as the cost of inaction on climate change,

G.

whereas the study on The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) also confirms that the loss of biodiversity gives rise to substantial economic and welfare losses,

H.

whereas a recent study by Eurobarometer shows that EU citizens are largely unfamiliar with the term biodiversity and the consequences of the loss of biodiversity,

I.

whereas the disappearance of species may break the food chain that is key to the survival of other animal and plant species of vital importance for food production, adaptation to climatic conditions, resistance to external agents and the preservation of genetic values,

1.

Is deeply concerned about the very fast pace of human-induced biodiversity loss which, if it continues as in the last decades, will leave us with a greatly impoverished and irreversibly damaged nature by 2050 and underlines that functioning ecosystems are a prerequisite for our subsistence;

2.

Highlights the fact that biodiversity is the most important indicator of good environmental status;

3.

Is aware that failure to stop biodiversity loss is unacceptable, not only from an ethical but also from an ecological and economic perspective, as it deprives future generations of the ecosystem services and welfare aspects of a rich, natural biodiversity; calls therefore on the Commission and the Member States to improve biodiversity governance and compliance in internal as well as in external relations;

4.

Is aware, moreover, that a successful tackling of the threefold crises of food security, biodiversity loss and climate change requires a coherent approach and a future EU biodiversity strategy that is fully integrated with the strategies for combating poverty and hunger and for the mitigation and adaption of climate change;

5.

Recognises that NGOs have an important role to play in biodiversity protection, as regards contributing to the decision-making process, as actors on the ground and in raising the public awareness;

6.

Underlines that ongoing studies, such as the TEEB study, estimate that the welfare loss from biodiversity loss is currently around EUR 50 billion per year (just under 1 % of GDP), rising to EUR 14 trillion or 7 % of estimated GDP per year in 2050;

7.

Agrees, nevertheless, with the TEEB study report that there are methodological limitations to measurement of the economic value of biodiversity and this should not overshadow the ethical and inter-generational aspects of biodiversity conservation;

8.

Is deeply concerned about the absence of any sense of urgency in halting the loss of biodiversity in the international political agenda;

9.

Deeply regrets that the EU’s objective, as agreed to at the European Summit in Gothenburg in 2001, to halt biodiversity loss by 2010 has not been met and shares the concern expressed by many petitioners to the European Parliament;

10.

Welcomes the Commission’s communication on options for an EU vision and target for biodiversity beyond 2010;

11.

Welcomes furthermore the conclusions on biodiversity of the Environment Council of 15 March 2010, including the new headline target of halting the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020 and restoring them in so far as feasible, without prejudice to natural changes in biodiversity, as well as the European Council Conclusions of 25-26 March 2010 confirming the urgent need to reverse continuing trends of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation;

12.

Believes that halting biodiversity loss constitutes the absolute minimum level of ambition to be realised by 2020;

13.

Points to the valuable initiatives aimed at restoring biodiversity and ecosystem services already taking place and believes that such restoration activities must also be part of the 2020 headline target;

14.

Considers that a thorough environmental, economical and social impact assessment is needed in cases where data are lacking;

15.

Given the global character of biodiversity and ecosystem services and their crucial role for the global objectives of sustainable development, reducing poverty and hunger and improving health and human well-being, is convinced that the future EU strategy must also step up EU international efforts to avert biodiversity loss, as studies such as TEEB have delivered sufficient evidence that doing this is cost effective and feasible, and thereby contribute more effectively to achieving the Millennium Development Goals by 2015;

16.

Underlines furthermore that, as a part of a policy aimed at protecting and improving biodiversity, a common EU policy to tackle the problem of invasive alien species is necessary, and points out the particularly close link between transport corridors and the large-scale introduction of alien species;

17.

Recognises that a full and correct implementation of Natura 2000 legislation plays a major role in achieving the EU’s biodiversity, climate change, and sustainable development objectives; in this regard, considers it vital that future cooperation with land users in implementing Natura 2000 be thoroughly reinforced and cooperative; emphasises that the Natura 2000-approach has already shown some remarkable successes;

18.

Calls on the Commission and Member States, to fully implement Article 6 of the Habitats Directive;

19.

Remains concerned, despite the positive and tangible results achieved by some Member States in the conservation status of several species, about the full and thorough implementation of Natura 2000 legislation; urges the Member States to give higher priority to the implementation of Natura 2000;

20.

Welcomes the fact that the Natura 2000 network represents 18 % of EU territory (on land) and the early progress made in the formulation of conservation measures or management plans; is dismayed at the failure of Member States to respect the deadlines laid down in the Directives; and therefore urges Member States to take prompt action to achieve full implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives;

21.

Expresses its concern about the lack of progress in the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in the marine environment and asks the Commission and Member States to speed up the necessary procedures;

22.

Calls on the Commission to adopt a model network of marine protected areas (MPAs) making it possible to reconcile preserving the environment and practising sustainable fishing; asks it to report regularly on the progress made by Member States in implementing the Habitats and Birds Directives, in particular the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in the marine environment, since currently less than 10 % of protected areas are marine sites, as well as on the reporting and monitoring obligations of the Member States;

23.

Notes that marine species and habitats enjoy less protection than terrestrial species and habitats in EU biodiversity legislation, and therefore calls on the Commission to assess the weaknesses in the legislation and its implementation, and to develop MPAs in which economic activities, including fishing, are the subject of strengthened ecosystem-based management;

24.

Further notes that the various conventions for the regional seas around the EU, such as OSPAR, HELCOM and Barcelona, provide an important framework for protecting marine ecosystems;

25.

Considers that Member States must be allowed to take initiatives to protect marine biodiversity going beyond the action required under EU legislation;

26.

Recalls that the establishment of a coherent NATURA 2000, requires the maintenance of those features of the landscape which are of major importance for wild flora and fauna; calls therefore on the Commission and Member States to actively engage in maintaining and developing the connectivity of protected areas, whether terrestrial or marine, as well as agricultural areas of high nature value;

27.

Supports the findings of the European Environment Agency when it states that the conservation status of species and habitats protected under the EU Habitats Directive is a cause for concern and that we should not ‘focus all our efforts on preserving islands of biodiversity, while losing nature everywhere else’, as this reflects the views very often expressed by European citizens in their petitions to the European Parliament;

28.

Reminds the Commission and Member States that the Marine Strategy Directive does not limit the use of marine protected areas to Natura 2000, and therefore requests that Member States and the Commission take account of and create linkages between all marine protected areas, including those designated under regional seas conventions, with the aim of creating a coherent and comprehensive network;

29.

Takes note of a certain unavoidable degree of subsidiarity in EU environmental legislation, but is concerned that this degree of flexibility can lead to abuses by Member States when implementing it; regrets the striking differences between Member States regarding, for example, the ‘external effect’ of Natura 2000 sites, block exemptions for certain ‘existing activities’ or the application of the precautionary principle; calls, in the event of such striking differences, for inquiries into whether the Member States in question are not applying the rules in such a way as to hamper the effective achievement of the intended biodiversity goals;

30.

Given these differences between Member States, invites the Commission to provide further clarification of the Directives or guidance where necessary, with such clarification or guidance ideally being based on and/or illustrated by best practices;

31.

Emphasises the importance of implementing the precautionary principle on nature related to biodiversity in line with the decisions of the Court of Justice;

32.

Encourages Member States to ensure that environmental impact assessments and strategic environmental assessments are of sufficient quality in relation to biodiversity, in order to guarantee a sound implementation of Natura 2000 legislation;

33.

Calls for a strengthening of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, and a much more rigorous interpretation of its objectives, in order to achieve no net loss, and, where possible, gains in biodiversity, and to introduce specific requirements for the ongoing monitoring of the biodiversity impacts of projects and the effectiveness of mitigation measures, with appropriate provisions for access to this information and for enforcement;

34.

Believes that better cross-border cooperation could have significant benefits for meeting the Natura 2000 objectives;

35.

Furthermore expresses its concern about the lack of cross-border cooperation, which can lead to identical areas being approached differently, and stresses the usefulness of harnessing existing instruments, such as the European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC), a judicial tool;

36.

Urges the Commission to focus more on ecosystem services in its future biodiversity strategy and within the context of Natura 2000 while at the same time building on and strengthening efforts to achieve favourable conservation status for species and their habitats;

37.

Is convinced that the Natura 2000 land and marine network is not the only EU instrument for biodiversity conservation, but that a more integral approach is needed for the EU biodiversity policy to be successful;

38.

Therefore, calls on the Commission to ensure a further mainstreaming of biodiversity into other EU policy areas – such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, regional policy and cohesion, energy, industry, transport tourism, development cooperation, research and innovation – in a mutually reinforcing way and to make the European Union’s sectoral and budgetary policies more consistent; stresses the great opportunities that exist, particularly in the common agricultural policy, regional policy and the common fisheries policy, to give biodiversity a higher priority;

39.

Highlights the link between water management and biodiversity as a key factor in supporting life and in sustainable development;

40.

Takes the view that farmers play a vital role in achieving the EU’s biodiversity objective; points out that in 1992 an initial impetus was given to integrating protection of biodiversity into the common agricultural policy (CAP), and that subsequently the 2003 reform has introduced measures such as cross compliance, the single farm payment (decoupling) and rural development which have benefits for biodiversity;

41.

Expresses, however, its concerns about the EU farmers’ ability to continue to produce high-quality food competitively; believes that the CAP reform should properly reward EU farmers for their efforts in achieving the EU’s biodiversity objective;

42.

Points out that agricultural and forestry-related activity in Europe has contributed substantially to a diversity of species and biotopes and a varied agricultural landscape now considered in need of protection; underlines, therefore, that in the long term it is only through agricultural and forestry-related activity that the agricultural landscape can be retained and biological diversity conserved in Europe;

43.

Welcomes the previous attempts to integrate environmental considerations as an integral part of the common agricultural policy (CAP), such as the introduction of agri-environment measures and good agricultural and environmental conditions; calls on the Commission to use the reform of the CAP as an opportunity to further enhance this trend, working towards fully sustainable farming in the EU, whereby the benefits to nature constitute a guiding principle, for example through the introduction of remuneration for eco-services or the delivery of well defined public goods, including sustainable farming in ecologically sensitive areas, such as Natura 2000 sites, so as to ensure that sustainable ways of farming are funded in the future, that where good practice exists it is properly rewarded and encouraged and that farmers are not financially or otherwise disadvantaged, thus creating the conditions for farms to be able to continue contributing to biodiversity in the future;

44.

Calls on the Commission to pay greater attention to ensuring compliance with all European regulations and directives dealing in particular with maintaining biodiversity;

45.

Finds that the EU has, in the Union’s agricultural policy, laid down regulations under cross compliance which conserve biodiversity, but regrets that they are often not implemented and monitored throughout the EU;

46.

Is aware that land use policy is another key element in the conservation of nature and urges the Commission and Member States to continue to improve the integration of biodiversity criteria in decision-making processes at local and regional level in matters concerning land use and territorial policy, including in regional and cohesion policy;

47.

Emphasises that land management and the conservation of biodiversity are not opposites and that integrated management creates habitats for biodiversity;

48.

Stresses the importance of halting and reversing the decline in the diversity of cultivated plant species and varieties, which leads to the erosion of the genetic basis on which human and animal nutrition depends; underlines the need to promote the use of traditional agricultural varieties specific to certain regions;

49.

Taking into account the economic, social and environmental value of agricultural and livestock genetic diversity, urges the Commission to define specific priority targets to halt the loss of genetic diversity and halt the loss of native species; calls further for the adoption of a definition of ‘native’ / ‘non-native’ breeds and measures for their conservation;

50.

Considers that the CAP should reward farmers who provide additional ecosystem services which help conserve biodiversity via an EU-funded top-up direct area payment; reiterates its request for ‘bonus’ cross-compliance that awards farmers bonus points for actions fostering biodiversity and implemented in addition to the obligations arising from good agro-environmental cross-compliance;

51.

Notes that much progress has been made in environmental legislation, such as the introduction of integrated pest management and the new EU pesticide legislation, which makes it possible for pest management to target harmful organisms, thereby protecting beneficial organisms;

52.

Welcomes the reform of the common fisheries policy currently being prepared and calls on the Commission to mainstream biodiversity criteria in its future legislative proposals; furthermore, insists that, as a possible alternative to fishing, sustainable aquaculture models should be developed along the lines proposed by the Commission in its communication on building a sustainable future for aquaculture (COM(2009)0162), taking into account the European Parliament’s position in its resolution of 17 July 2010;

53.

States that the major tools for achieving biodiversity objectives in the marine environment, in addition to the Habitats and Birds Directives, are the Water Framework Directive for coastal waters and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive for all marine waters;

54.

Considers that a reduction in discards must be a major objective of the CFP and calls on the Commission to identify the causes of discards and to work out solutions specific to each fishery, in particular through the introduction of multi-species or biomass quotas, through the selectivity of gear, such as the general use of square-meshed nets, and through spatial management of stocks;

55.

Considers that regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs) are responsible for the management of fisheries and guarantors of responsible fishing on the high seas; considers that it is therefore essential to strengthen their powers, in particular with regard to controls and deterrent penalties, and that it is first and foremost up to RFMOs to manage the stocks of certain marine species of commercial importance and to require the use of catch certificates;

56.

Stresses the need for further action in the field of integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) and maritime spatial planning as these could be important elements of a participatory ecosystem approach, ensuring the conservation and sustainable management of marine and coastal resources, respecting natural processes and ecosystem carrying capacity;

57.

Given the significant decline in aquatic biodiversity and degradation of freshwater ecosystems, emphasises the importance of ensuring the full implementation of the Water Framework Directive and stresses the need to address biodiversity decline in river basin management planning;

58.

Urges Member States to design their forestry policy in a way that takes fully into account the role of forests as a reserve for biodiversity, soil retention and formation, carbon sequestration and air purification characteristics and for purposes of recreation for our citizens;

59.

Welcomes the Commission’s communication on addressing the challenges of deforestation and forest degradation to tackle climate change and biodiversity loss (COM(2008)0645 final), which calls for halting the global forest cover loss by 2030 at the latest;

60.

Points out that growing demand for agri-fuels and the consequent intensification of pressure for their production are threatening biodiversity, notably in developing countries, owing to the degradation and conversion of habitats and ecosystems such as wetlands and forests, among others;

61.

Stresses the need to increase the budget for research dedicated to the environment and biodiversity under the Eighth Framework Programme, proportionate to the huge needs and challenges of tackling both biodiversity loss and climate change;

62.

Notes that paragraph 8 of the Council conclusions of 21 October 2009 invites the Commission to undertake an urgent sector-by-sector review of subsidies which have an adverse environmental impact; calls on the Commission to act on those conclusions immediately in order to avoid subsidies to policies which have a negative impact on European biodiversity;

63.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the preparatory phase of the development of the Seventh Environment Action Programme to advance and promote the debate as well as specific actions on biodiversity in the EU;

64.

Underlines the vital importance of biodiversity and resilient ecosystems for climate change mitigation and adaptation, given the fact that terrestrial and marine ecosystems currently absorb around half of anthropogenic CO2 emissions;

65.

Welcomes the increasing support for measures to reduce the impact of climate change from which biodiversity can also benefit, but which should not have a negative impact on the funding for biodiversity as such;

66.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that actions taken in the context of climate change mitigation and adaptation do not have adverse effects on marine and terrestrial biodiversity;

67.

Underlines that soil plays a vital role in achieving the EU’s biodiversity objective; recognises that soil degradation has primarily local and regional causes and impact, and that the principle of subsidiarity should consequently be respected; calls on all Member States to fulfil their obligations in terms of guaranteeing soil quality and keep the soil in good condition and urges those Member States without soil protection legislation to shoulder their responsibilities;

68.

Stresses the essential role played by fisheries from an economic and social point of view in coastal development and from an environmental point of view in marine ecosystems; considers that the CFP must not hinder but facilitate Member States’ compliance with biodiversity legislation, in particular the establishment of adequate protection measures in marine Natura 2000 sites;

69.

Recognises the considerable job potential that is linked to the development of a sustainable economy and green infrastructure, which by their nature would imply local jobs (which cannot be relocated to third countries), thus contributing considerably to the EU’s 2020 Strategy;

70.

Furthermore, strongly believes that resource efficiency, sustainable economic development and nature conservation can and should go hand in hand; draws particular attention to the development of eco- and agri-tourism, whereby recreation and conservation are mutually reinforcing;

71.

Emphasises the importance of biodiversity conservation in the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy, owing not only to the employment potential it can generate, but also to the contribution it makes to the efficient and sustainable use of resources; recognises that rising levels of materials production, trade, and consumption are an important driving force behind biodiversity loss, and therefore calls on the Commission and Member States to adopt measures to promote and develop resource efficiency and sustainable consumption and production (SCP) policies;

72.

Takes note of the Commission’s estimates in 2004 for the annual cost of managing the Natura 2000 network at EUR 6.1 billion; points out however, that according to the TEEB report, the return on biodiversity conservation investment is up to a hundred times more;

73.

Deplores, however, the fact that no additional sources of funding for the implementation of the NATURA 2000 directives have been made available by the Commission, and that a clear breakdown of the actual amounts being spent per annum on biodiversity conservation in the EU is lacking, and insists that Member States and the Commission cooperate to provide a clearer picture;

74.

Believes that the Community should take greater responsibility for safeguarding natural values in the Natura 2000 network, particularly in the context of funding;

75.

Welcomes the increase in spending for LIFE+ (+ 8 % in the 2011 draft budget), but underlines that this instrument continues to represent only a very small part of the EU budget (0,2 %); notes, moreover, that EU-funded conservation measures are not always continued once Community financing stops; calls on the Commission to give fuller consideration to the various factors relevant to the sustainability of projects and to introduce systematic monitoring of projects after the final payment;

76.

Is aware that additional funding for biodiversity conservation is available through other instruments, such as the Structural Funds and the Rural Development Fund, but deplores the limited use most Member States make of this possibility; recalls that the biggest contribution for financing biodiversity is currently available through the EAFRD;

77.

Without pre-empting future discussions and decisions about the new multiannual financial framework (from 2014 onwards) and the mid-term review of the current budgetary framework (2007-2013), expects that budgetary constraints will make it more necessary than ever to achieve high added value and increased effectiveness of European spending, including biodiversity spending;

78.

Therefore, underlines the need to gain greater insight into the effectiveness of biodiversity spending and calls on the Commission to provide examples of good practice in terms of effectiveness and added value;

79.

Welcomes the recommendation made by IUCN for 0,3 % of GDP to be spent on national biodiversity conservation measures;

80.

Notes with concern that the number of projects financed under the LIFE+ programme each year is below the indicative allocation in various Member States; invites the Commission to assess the reasons for this under-implementation and where necessary to propose changes to the rules governing the programme, particularly as regards co-financing levels;

81.

Is convinced that public spending alone will not suffice to reach the EU headline target and underlines the importance of corporate responsibility to also take into account biodiversity; calls on the Commission to look into means of implementing policies that encourage positive investments in conserving biodiversity and discourage investment which impacts on biodiversity, in both the public and private sectors; welcomes in this regard the launch of the Business and Biodiversity Platform by the Commission to engage the private sector in the biodiversity agenda;

82.

Recommends that greater flexibility be injected into the rules on eligibility for financing biodiversity-related projects and to encourage all the relevant players to apply for it;

83.

Underlines the need to incorporate external costs, risks and effects, such as the preservation of agricultural land, the damage done to biodiversity or the costs incurred to support biodiversity, into the final price of products on the market; points out that this is in the long-term interest of companies if they wish to continue to have access to natural resources; urges the European Commission to publish the communication that it has announced on the future financing of Natura 2000 as soon as possible and in any event during 2010 so that this aspect can be examined together with the new biodiversity strategy for the period up to 2020;

84.

Stresses the importance of integrated environmental accounting in analysing the link between the environment and the economy at European, national and regional level in order to assess the effects of production and consumption patterns on the natural resources and calls on the Member States to regularly provide Eurostat and the European Environment Agency with the necessary data;

85.

Points out that research and development are of key importance in order to close current knowledge gaps and ensure regular monitoring of biodiversity trends, as well as for developing policy tools to halt biodiversity loss;

86.

Welcomes the Commission’s composite report 2001-2006, evaluating the conservation status of protected habitats and species in the EU and the progress made by Member States in implementing Natura 2000 legislation, but regrets the high number of ‘unknown’ qualifications; calls on Member States to improve their reporting and on the EEA and the Commission to ensure a better reliability and comparability of data in its future reports;

87.

Stresses the need to develop a clear baseline, on the basis of which the Commission is to measure progress towards the (sub-)targets; welcomes in this regard the work of the European Environment Agency with regard to the Biodiversity Information System (BISE) and the biodiversity baseline, which will provide useful tools to improve and fine-tune biodiversity policy-making, in particular for the strategic plan being developed by the Commission; underlines that existing data should be used rather than insisting on the collection of new data;

88.

Given the current lack of knowledge among the general public about the importance of biodiversity, welcomes the Commission’s information campaign and calls on the Member States to substantially increase their awareness-raising efforts and best practice exchanges;

89.

Expresses its concern about the failure to realise or even approach the global target to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010, as defined at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, and about the implications of the continuous biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the 2015 objective of reducing poverty and hunger and improving health and human well-being and calls on the Commission and Member States to support the mainstreaming of biodiversity into global processes such as the Millennium Development Goals;

90.

Welcomes the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Nagoya in October 2010 and urges the EU to send a broad delegation, well prepared and coordinated, to this conference; underlines the necessity for the EU to define a strong and coherent position upstream; is concerned, however, about the fact that only environment ministers will attend the conference, whereas securing progress on the global biodiversity agenda requires a cross-sector approach;

91.

Urges the Commission to support the creation of an intergovernmental platform for policies in the field of biodiversity and ecosystem services science, under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme, and to help create that platform;

92.

Supports the idea, discussed at a July 2008 meeting under the French Presidency, to develop ‘Natura 2000-like’ networks in the EU’s Overseas Countries and Territories and Outermost Regions, which host some of the richest biodiversity hot-spots on the planet and underlines the need to support this development through EU policy instruments, such as development policy;

93.

Points out that deforestation accounts for more CO2 emissions than the whole transport sector and that conservation of forests is one of the core elements for the global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services;

94.

Encourages the Commission and Member States to effectively mainstream environmental sustainability in their relations with third countries alongside respect for social rights and guarantees regarding the protection and participation of local communities and indigenous populations in decision-making processes, with particular regard to soil use and forest protection and to continue the ‘Green Diplomacy’; calls on Member States and the European Commission to ensure that the ‘twelve-point EU action plan in support of the Millennium Development Goals’ recognises the imperative for environmental sustainability to be mainstreamed through its development cooperation and external actions and provides for a focused financial intervention in support of biodiversity and ecosystem services;

95.

Underlines that innovative financial systems are needed to promote the recognition of the (economic) value of biodiversity; encourages Member States and the Commission to engage in a global discussion on the need for and possible modalities of innovative systems for the payment of ecosystem services;

96.

Insists that, in international trade agreements, sustainability of the products being traded is a key element; underlines in this regard the need to incorporate ‘non-trade concerns’, including production methods and respect for biodiversity, in any future WTO agreement;

97.

Strongly regrets the disappointing outcome of the CITES conference, where the main elements of the EU mandate were not realised, such as the protection of marine species of high commercial interest;

98.

Strongly urges the Commission and Member States to improve the speed and efficiency of their internal decision-making procedure and to devote more resources and time to their diplomatic efforts vis-à-vis third countries and to strengthen capacities and synergies between Conventions; considers that, since many Natura 2000 protected areas are directly or indirectly affected by pollution and environmental damage also originates outside Europe, the need to include European environmental standards in our partnership agreements with neighbouring countries should be stressed;

99.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/30

—

having regard to the Commission Communication of 23 February 2009 entitled ‘A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters’ (1) and the corresponding impact assessment (2), and to the Commission working document of 14 December 2007 on strengthening early warning systems in Europe (3),

—

having regard to its resolutions of 16 September 2009 on forest fires in the summer of 2009 (4), 4 September 2007 on natural disasters (5), 7 September 2006 on forest fires and floods (6), 5 September 2002 on floods in Europe (7), 14 April 2005 on the drought in Portugal (8), 12 May 2005 on the drought in Spain (9), 8 September 2005 on natural disasters (fires and floods) in Europe (10), its resolutions of 18 May 2006 on natural disasters (forest fires, droughts and floods) – agricultural aspects (11), regional development aspects (12) and environmental aspects (13), its resolution of 11 March 2010 on the major natural disaster in the autonomous region of Madeira and the effects of the storm ‘Xynthia’ in Europe (14), and its position of 18 May 2006 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (15),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 16 June 2008 on reinforcing the Union’s disaster response capacity (16), and points 12 to 15 of the Presidency conclusions of the Brussels European Council of 15-16 June 2006 on the European Union’s responsiveness to emergencies, crises and disasters (17),

—

having regard to Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom of 5 March 2007 establishing a Civil Protection Financial Instrument (18),

—

having regard to Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (19) (Seveso II Directive),

—

having regard to Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks (20) (Floods Directive),

—

having regard to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (21) (EIA Directive),

—

having regard to the Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters, adopted on 22 January 2005 in Kobe, Hyogo (22),

—

having regard to the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted on 5 June 1992 in Rio de Janeiro,

—

having regard to Article 196 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions of the Committee on Regional Development, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0227/2010),

A.

whereas prevention should constitute an increasingly important stage in disaster management and be given greater social importance,

B.

whereas natural disasters compromise ecosystems and biodiversity, affect sustainable development and jeopardise social cohesion,

C.

whereas factors such as, inter alia, intensive land use, haphazard industrial and urban growth, abandonment of the countryside, desertification and the increased frequency of extreme weather events make Member States, and convergence regions in particular, more vulnerable to disasters, both natural and man-made,

D.

whereas climate change is causing ever more frequent natural disasters (floods, extreme droughts and fires), resulting in loss of human life and serious environmental, economic and social damage,

E.

whereas disasters generally have many causes, they are not always solely attributable to extreme natural phenomena, but are frequently made more likely by mankind’s flawed relationship with the surrounding physical environment,

F.

whereas disasters may be caused by technological and industrial accidents which can entail the release of dangerous chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) agents with major effects on health, crops, infrastructure, or livestock,

G.

whereas often to a large extent damage caused by natural and man-made disasters could have been prevented; whereas, furthermore, EU policies must ensure consistent incentives for the national, regional and local authorities to develop, fund and implement more efficient prevention and conservation policies,

H.

whereas a holistic, proactive, intelligence-led and effective approach to disaster prevention should incorporate various levels of cooperation between local, regional and national authorities and should also involve other actors with links to and, therefore, a knowledge of the land,

I.

whereas disaster prevention measures in force have been shown to be lacking, and the previous European Parliament proposals have not yet been fully implemented, thus hindering the implementation of a consolidated strategy for the prevention of natural and man-made disasters at EU level,

J.

whereas persistent drought and fires are also speeding up the process of desertification, especially in southern Europe, above all affecting Mediterranean forest areas and extensive woodlands comprising a single, non-native species which is highly vulnerable to fire, threatening the lives of citizens and the quality of life of the populations affected,

K.

whereas the balanced occupation / utilisation of land, economic and social development that are in harmony with nature, respect for energy, natural resources and the environment, reinforced cohesion across the EU, combating rural depopulation, desertification and soil erosion, and maintaining an environmentally sustainable agricultural activity are some of the fundamental elements of disaster prevention,

L.

whereas forests play a crucial role in preserving the environment through the balances created in both the carbon cycle and the water cycle,

1.

Notes that natural and man-made disasters may have very serious consequences for the economic and social development of regions and Member States; points out that the main objective of disaster prevention is to safeguard human life, the safety and physical integrity of individuals, fundamental human rights, the environment, economic and social infrastructures, including basic utilities, housing, communications, transport and the cultural heritage;

2.

Stresses that a proactive approach is more effective and less costly than one based simply on reacting to disasters; takes the view that knowledge of the local geographical, economic and social context is fundamental to the prevention of natural and man-made disasters;

3.

Welcomes the commitment made by the Commission to ensuring that disaster-prevention-related issues are taken into account more coherently in EU policies and programmes, and stresses the need for a holistic approach to disaster prevention; recalls that all types of natural and man-made disasters must be taken into account and that these may include, among other hazards (23), floods, storms, droughts, tsunamis, earthquakes, forest fires, extreme temperature events, volcanic eruptions, avalanches, landslides, technological and industrial accidents, soil erosion, contamination of the subsoil and groundwater and pollution of the seas, lakes and rivers;

4.

Invites the Commission to encourage the exchange of good practices between Member States in preventing man-made disasters, and calls on the Member States to ensure that regional authorities undergo disaster management training;

5.

Considers that, given the scale and/or the cross-border nature that disasters may assume, it is appropriate and necessary to enhance cooperation, both at regional and EU level, based on complementarity of action, dissemination of best practices and the principle of solidarity between Member States;

6.

Takes note of the proposal to set up a network made up of representatives of the various competent national services of all the Member States; stresses that this network should operate within the scope of the cooperation between national, regional and local authorities with responsibilities in disaster management, spatial planning and risk mapping and management; emphasises the role of this network in exchanging experience and prevention measures and in establishing a common methodology and minimum requirements for hazard and risk mapping at EU level; calls for the inclusion in this network of representatives from agriculture and for consideration also to be given to hearing UNEP, social and non-governmental organisations working in this area and other actors with links to and, therefore, a knowledge of the land;

7.

Regards as essential cooperation on the dissemination of information and experience, technical and scientific applications and also the coordination of strategies for the development of intervention capacities;

8.

Calls on regions to build on already existing territorial and cross-border coordination networks in order to develop cooperation focusing more specifically on disaster prevention; believes that cross-border cooperation structures, such as the macro-regions, with their functionally-oriented cooperation, can become effective platforms for cooperation in the field of disaster prevention; advocates making use of the valuable experience acquired in this field through projects implemented in the past under the Community’s INTERREG Initiative;

9.

Takes the view that coordinated actions and strategies between Member States, the different sectors and the different actors involved in the disaster management cycle can lead to real advances in the field of disaster prevention; highlights the role that voluntary work can play in these strategies and calls on the Member States to foster cooperation to this end at national, regional and local level; suggests that the possibility be assessed, in the context of the European Year of Volunteering 2011, of organising voluntary work cooperation at Member State level with a view to disaster prevention;

10.

Urges cooperation between Member States, countries neighbouring the EU and developing countries in cross-border projects sharing best practice and disseminating practical knowledge through the EU’s neighbourhood policy programmes and development programmes;

11.

Emphasises that the principle of non-discrimination must be included in aid provision; notes that assistance should be provided on the basis of need, without discrimination based on the race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status of recipients;

12.

Points out that environmental problems, caused and exacerbated by climate change, are currently responsible for a growth of forced migration and therefore wishes to highlight the increasing link between asylum seekers and areas of environmental decline; calls for better protection and resettlement of ‘climate refugees’;

13.

Stresses that it is the regions and local communities that bear the brunt of natural disasters and that, generally speaking, neither their material and human resources nor their know-how or financial resources are sufficient to cope with these disasters under a purely national and/or regional approach, and that these disasters call for an effective European-level solidarity-based response;

14.

Points out the importance of reducing inequalities between regions and Member States in terms of their capacity to protect their populations, and their property, including the cultural heritage, by supporting their efforts to improve prevention, particularly in the regions and Member States that are highly vulnerable to the risk of disasters; urges that particular attention be paid to the most isolated, most sparsely populated, mountainous and border regions of Europe, and the most economically disadvantaged European regions;

15.

Stresses that the natural characteristics and constraints of isolated regions, mountainous regions, regions with low population density and those suffering from depopulation, outlying and outermost regions, islands, naturally disadvantaged regions, as well as regions facing a combination of risks, need to be acknowledged and taken into due account; draws attention to the added difficulties faced by these regions in tackling disasters; asks for special attention to be paid to those regions through the various financial instruments available and calls for the conditions for mobilising the Solidarity Fund for those areas to be made more flexible;

16.

Highlights the need for the Solidarity Fund Regulation to be revised by adapting the eligibility criteria to the characteristics of each region and each disaster, including slowly evolving disasters such as drought, paying particular attention to production sectors, the most vulnerable areas and the populations affected, and enabling mobilisation to be more flexible and timely; considers that the eligible operations listed in Article 4 of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) are too restrictive; takes the view that, when setting eligibility thresholds, consideration of the regional dimension is vital, as otherwise regions facing very serious disasters can find themselves excluded because the threshold set for the whole Member State is not reached;

17.

Stresses the need to create a suitable financial framework for disaster prevention, with adequate financial resources for preventing and combating disasters, that will strengthen and link existing instruments such as cohesion policy, rural development policy, regional policy, the Solidarity Fund, the Seventh Framework Programme and the Life+ programmes; asks that, in this context, prevention should be taken into account in the 2014-2020 Financial Perspective; calls on the European Commission to assess the possibility of proposing a more systematic pooling of available resources in order to strengthen the effectiveness of prevention mechanisms across the EU;

18.

Urges the Commission to ensure that the current budgetary pressures arising from the crisis do not lead to a reduction in the resources allocated to existing disaster prevention policies and, as part of the current budget review, to carefully assess any gaps in the field of prevention and ascertain whether each type of disaster is covered by the instruments available;

19.

Points out that cohesion policy is an essential tool in natural disaster risk prevention; considers that it must be possible for the various funds and instruments to operate flexibly and in a coordinated manner in order to improve the functioning and effectiveness of that policy; stresses that risk prevention must also dovetail with other policies pursued in the field of prevention, in order to prevent the fragmentation of measures and increase their effectiveness and added value;

20.

Reaffirms the need to verify that EU funds have been used in an adequate manner, and for any misused funds to be repaid;

21.

Emphasises that responsibility for disaster prevention lies primarily with the Member States and that the principle of subsidiarity in this area should continue to be considered;

22.

Calls on the Member States who are responsible for land management to introduce criteria and legislation in order to prevent catastrophes in areas at risk of flood and landslides and other geological risks, taking into account the problems created by indiscriminate deforestation, and furthermore to prevent construction in these areas;

23.

Invites the Member States to assess the possibility of improving the inclusion of disaster prevention in national operational programming of EU funding, as well as in national, regional and local operational programmes; considers that all public actors involved in environmental protection should be engaged and participate effectively in this process; urges the Commission to support the need to reformulate the operational programmes identified by Member States in this area; with a view to exchanging experience, asks the Commission to invite Member States to supply details of their operational programmes in place for dealing with natural and man-made disasters;

24.

Considers that, inter alia, the following prevention measures should be the subject of priority support from the EU to the Member States:

25.

Calls on the Commission to support Member States in promoting awareness-raising campaigns for prevention and in adopting best practices, providing relevant updated information and training to the general public through channels that are easily accessible to all citizens on identified risks and procedures to be adopted when faced with natural or man-made disaster situations; urges that, in training schemes for populations, particular attention be paid to young people from school age on and to rural communities; in the context of public awareness-raising, stresses also the role of the European single emergency telephone line ‘112’ and the need to make it better known;

26.

Recalls that water is often involved in natural disasters, not only in floods – often due to inadequate planning – frost, hail and contamination of river basins, but also through its scarcity, which can wreak significant change, such as the desertification of large areas of southern Europe and south-eastern Europe;

27.

Highlights the fact that persistent droughts have in recent years encouraged the proliferation of forest fires in Europe, at the same time worsening the desertification of a large number of regions;

28.

In view of the interconnections between drought, forest fires and desertification, calls on the Commission to present a proposal for a directive, similar to the directive on floods, to promote the adoption of an EU policy on water scarcity, drought and adaptation to climate change;

29.

Reiterates its call on the Commission to promote the entry into operation of the European Drought and Desertification Observatory which would be responsible for studying, mitigating and monitoring the effects of droughts and desertification, aiming to enhance sound, strategic decision-making and better coordination between Member States; considers that the interconnections between drought, forest fires, desertification and climate change adaptation should be taken into consideration and that serious and solidarity-based objectives should be set in the context of drought risk prevention and management policy;

30.

Since forests are important for the production of wood, maintaining biodiversity, the prevention of floods, avalanches and erosion, management of groundwater resources and carbon capture, the fact that they are threatened by fire should be an issue of concern to all Member States; therefore calls on the Commission to present and to carry out, together with the Member States, legislative proposals and initiatives in the area of forest protection and fire prevention; considers that forestation and reforestation projects should be supported, with preference given to native species and mixed forests, to encourage biodiversity and greater resistance to fire, storms and disease, as well as the sustained collection and use of residual forest biomass - a renewable energy source; considers that, within the framework of a genuine cooperation in this domain, the regular collection of data, preparation of risk maps, preparation of fire risk management plans, identification of the resources needed and those available in the 27 Member States and coordination at different levels should be carried on;

31.

Given that the starting of fires and the increase in their frequency are by nature environmental offences, calls on the Commission to study and propose to the Council and the European Parliament ways of implementing coercive measures which will discourage negligence and deliberate action in the starting of fires;

32.

Highlights the importance of viewing prevention from a cross-cutting perspective, incorporating it in the relevant sectoral policies to promote balanced land occupation and cohesive economic and social development that is in tune with nature;

33.

Recognises that some sectoral policies have led to certain regions being more exposed to risk by encouraging abandonment of the countryside and excessive concentration of the population in urban areas;

34.

Considers that agricultural and forestry production are vulnerable to climatic phenomena such as drought, frost, ice, hail, forest fires, storms, floods, torrential rainfall and storms, to health risks such as pest infestations, animal diseases, epidemics, and epizootics, to destruction due to wild animals, and to consequences of human activities like climate change, pollution, acid rain and unintentional and deliberate genetic contamination, to landslides because of problems related to urban and regional planning, to technological and transport-related hazards, to the desertification of mountain areas and to forest fires primarily due to absence of forest maintenance and criminal behaviour, and to contamination of rivers due to chemical discharges from factories, nutrient leakage and the negligence of forest visitors;

35.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to encourage the implementation of good agricultural practices, which in some Member States has made it possible to halve infiltration of nitrogen-based fertilisers without reducing crop yields;

36.

Advocates, as an essential element in the effective prevention of natural disasters, an environmentally and socially balanced agricultural policy that takes into account the need to support and stimulate sustainable agricultural production and rural development in the various countries and regions; advocates effectively strengthening incentives for agro-environmental and agro-rural jobs, encouraging people to settle in rural areas, as a key factor in conserving ecosystems, tackling the current trend of depopulation and impoverishment of these locations and relieving the pressure on urban areas; furthermore, highlights the role played by farmers as custodians of the countryside and regrets the insufficiency of key elements concerning the agricultural sector in the Commission communication;

37.

Advocates the creation of an European agricultural public insurance scheme; urges the Commission to come forward with a proposal for an European public insurance system to better address the risk and income instability of farmers related to natural and man-made disasters; stresses that it must be more ambitious than the present model in order to avoid a multiplicity of different insurance schemes in the EU, creating huge imbalances between farmers’ incomes; considers it urgent for a minimum compensation scheme for natural or man-made disasters to also be accessible to farmers across all Member States;

38.

Calls on the Commission and Member States to include in the calculation of agri-environmental premiums the additional costs borne by farmers in order to take measures designed to prevent fires (such as cleaning of firebreaks, removal of dead arboreal plants, working of the soil along the perimeter of land parcels, etc.) and to dispose of water (cleaning of collecting ditches and canals);

39.

Points out the importance of studying rural and urban adaptation measures, given the increased frequency and magnitude of extreme weather events in various geographical areas; considers that foreseeable negative effects of climate change will represent an additional constraint for agricultural activity and food security and sovereignty, and stresses the need to respond to this and to other challenges in the context of adapting to climate change and reducing its negative effects;

40.

Emphasises the importance of public research and development (R&D) in preventing and managing disasters and calls for increased coordination and cooperation between the R&D institutions of Member States, especially those facing similar risks; calls for enhanced early warning systems in Member States and the creation and strengthening of links between the various early warning systems; recommends to the Commission that it should take due note of these needs and ensure appropriate funding;

41.

Stresses the need to prepare the healthcare systems of the Member States from the point of view of human resource structure, good practice and risk awareness so that they are able to cope with disaster situations;

42.

Underlines that it is important to have a comprehensive collection of data and information on the risks and costs of disasters and to share them at EU level, with a view to carrying out comparative studies and determining the likely cross-border impact of the disasters, thus making it possible for Member States to pool information on national civil capabilities and medical resources, and that we should use and develop already existing structures such as the Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) rather than build up new ones;

43.

Regrets the fact that the Commission has still not carried out a study on hazard and risk mapping practices in the Member States, as provided for in its Communication of 23 February 2009 on ‘A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters’; urges the Commission to make good on this commitment in an effective way during the first half of 2010;

44.

Considers that a common methodology and minimum requirements for hazard and risk mapping need to be established at EU level;

45.

Underlines the importance of drawing up standards to analyse and express the socio-economic impact of disasters on communities;

46.

Recommends that issues relating to disaster prevention should be more fully included in the revision of the EIA Directive, particularly with regard to the assessment, communication and publicising of risks;

47.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/37

—

having regard to the United Nations Millennium Declaration of 8 September 2000, which sets out the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as criteria collectively established by the international community for the elimination of poverty,

—

having regard to the commitments on aid volume, aid to Sub-Saharan Africa, and aid quality made by the G8 at the 2005 Gleneagles Summit,

—

having regard to the Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness of 2 March 2005 and the conclusions of the high-level forum which met in Accra between 2 and 4 September 2008 concerning the follow-up to that Declaration,

—

having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘EU aid: delivering more, better and faster’ (COM(2006)0087),

—

having regard to the UN report ‘Rethinking Poverty: Report on the World Social Situation 2010’,

—

having regard to the annual reports by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the implementation of the Millennium Declaration,

—

having regard to the joint statement by the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission on European Union Development Policy: ‘The European Consensus’ (1), signed on 20 December 2005,

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation (2) (the ‘Development Cooperation Instrument’ (DCI)),

—

having regard to the Abuja Declaration by African Heads of State and Government on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and other related Infectious Diseases of 27 April 2001,

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1889/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on establishing a financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide (3),

—

having regard to the Council Conclusions of 21 June 2007‘Promoting Employment through EU Development Cooperation’,

—

having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘The European Union's role in promoting human rights and democratisation in third countries’ (COM(2001)0252),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘Education and training in the context of poverty reduction in developing countries’ (COM(2002)0116),

—

having regard to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly resolution of 3 December 2009 on global governance and the reform of international institutions,

—

having regard to the ILO Decent Work Agenda and to the ILO Global Jobs Pact, adopted by global consensus on 19 June 2009 at the International Labour Conference,

—

having regard to the ILO report entitled ‘World of Work Report 2009: The Global Jobs Crisis and Beyond’, published in December 2009,

—

having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2009 on MDG contracts (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2006 on aid effectiveness and corruption in developing countries (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 May 2007 on promoting decent work for all (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2009 on an approach to EC development assistance to health services in sub-Saharan Africa (7),

—

having regard to the current reforms of the Common Agriculture Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Development and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0192/2010),

A.

whereas strong and sustainable economic growth within a stable, business-friendly environment helps create wealth and jobs and is therefore the surest and most sustainable route out of poverty,

B.

whereas a secure, corruption-free legal environment is essential for business to flourish,

C.

whereas EU15 states are committed to spending 0,7 % of their GNI on ODA by 2015; whereas current ODA levels are around 0,4 %,

D.

whereas poverty reduction and policy coherence for development are now EU Treaty obligations,

E.

whereas developing countries should be supported in their desire to achieve maximum added value in their own countries, which calls for an industrial development strategy that must nevertheless continue to be compatible with sustainable development requirements, with particular reference to conservation of the environment,

F.

whereas both EU donors and developing country governments are failing to meet their spending benchmarks for health and education,

G.

whereas the developing world faces an urgent shortage of qualified health personnel; whereas the lack of qualified health personnel in developed countries constitutes one of the factors which aggravates the fragile health system in developing countries, and whereas many skilled workers, in health and other sectors, are not returning home to benefit their own communities, due to a number of reasons,

H.

whereas the recent food-price crisis highlighted the ongoing importance of agriculture and food security for poor countries,

I.

whereas 90 % of EU citizens are in favour of development cooperation, although the downturn threatens to weaken this support,

J.

whereas the G20 has promised to crack down on tax havens,

K.

whereas tax evasion and illicit capital flights from developing countries represent several times the value of development aid,

L.

whereas remittances represent more capital inflows for developing countries than ODA,

M.

whereas 2,7 billion people currently have no access to credit,

N.

whereas, to reduce poverty, it is necessary not only to generate employment but to create quality jobs,

O.

whereas the poorest countries are severely underrepresented in international institutions and global fora,

P.

whereas social protection systems have been proven as powerful instruments for poverty reduction and social cohesion and the majority of the global population has no adequate social protection coverage,

1.

Urges governments in developing countries to diversify their economy through the development of their manufacturing sector and to avoid overburdening businesses – especially SMEs, motors of jobs and growth – with excessive red tape;

2.

Calls on all developing countries to sign up to the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda and the UN Social Protection Floor initiative in order to guarantee satisfactory labour standards, high levels of comprehensive social protection coverage that reaches the poorest and most marginalised groups, genuine social dialogue and, in particular, involvement in the Employment Intensive Investment Programme;

3.

Underlines the importance of signing up to and implementing the various ILO conventions on international labour standards and recommends employing the provisions of the ILO resolution ‘Recovering from the crisis: A Global Jobs Pact’;

4.

Calls for the implementation of the right to freedom from forced labour and especially from child labour without exception, as without education children are condemned to a life in poverty;

5.

Calls for particular emphasis to be placed on combating child labour, with a view to creating jobs for adults instead and enabling children to receive a suitable education;

6.

Urges governments to prioritise action to help meet basic social needs and to promote the protection of children and vulnerable women who have been severely affected by the crisis, as well as young people at risk, unqualified, migrant and low-paid workers, rural workers and differently-abled persons;

7.

Recalls that small and micro enterprises, especially in the agricultural sector, need adequate financing to preserve existing jobs and create new ones; encourages developing countries to promote saving and credit access, via micro-credit, micro-insurance and innovative credit agents, such as rural post offices or m-banking;

8.

Calls on the EU to recognise the contribution of the social economy (e.g. cooperatives) to job creation and the promotion of decent work in developing countries, and to include the social economy in EU development programmes and cooperation strategies;

9.

Invites developing countries to extend land ownership among the poor and dispossessed, for instance by giving squatters in shanty towns the titles to the land they live on;

10.

Encourages developing countries to diversify their economies to the maximum, so as no longer to be exclusively dependent on a very limited number of products, particularly agricultural products for export;

11.

Reminds developing countries to respect local traditions of common land use for agriculture in order to facilitate and to protect existing small farming;

12.

Calls on the developing countries to treat the development of the agricultural sector and of food security as a priority when drawing up Country Strategy Papers and National Indicative Programmes;

13.

Recalls that governance is included in the idea of a ‘just state’, that is, a state which guarantees democracy and civil rights and – at the same time as performing its executive functions such as ensuring access to justice, health care, education and administrative services – promotes and protects human rights and fundamental freedoms;

14.

Calls on all developing countries to sign the UN Convention against Corruption urgently and to implement its provisions effectively; also urges EU Member States, and EU companies, to respect the UN Convention;

15.

Believes that EU Member States should act as role models for developing countries in terms of budgetary discipline, tax collection and good governance;

16.

Believes that anti-corruption action should also target the private sector, as well as enhancing international cooperation, for instance through information exchange and asset-recovery programmes;

17.

Urges all developing countries to foster independent parliaments, able to contribute effectively to deepening democracy by freely exercising their legislative, budgetary and scrutiny functions; at the same time, draws attention to the enormous importance of a judicial system which operates independently and is properly developed;

18.

Encourages governments in developing countries to maximise involvement by civil society organisations in formulating and monitoring public policy;

19.

Stresses that the social partners play an important role in economic development and can strengthen social cohesion, and consequently that the setting-up and consolidation of the relevant representative organisations should be encouraged;

20.

Calls for the implementation of the freedom of association for trade unions and the right to bargain collectively without exemption in order to enforce, improve and defend decent work conditions;

21.

Exhorts all states which have introduced laws restricting the freedom of civil society organisations to repeal such legislation;

22.

Calls for the implementation of the right to freedom from discrimination, i.e. the right to work and be treated equally regardless of gender, ethnic origin, age, disability or sexual orientation, as a core principle in the fight against poverty;

23.

Calls for the legal and social position of women to be significantly strengthened so as to prevent discrimination and make use of women’s potential contribution to economic and social development;

24.

Supports developing countries in their efforts to strengthen and deepen regional integration, through free-trade areas, regional economic communities, regional development banks, etc.;

25.

Reiterates its call for developing countries’ national budgets and EU development aid to allocate at least 20 % of their spending to health and basic education;

26.

Calls for a rethinking of privatisation policies, especially concerning utilities like water, sanitation and services of general interest, and for the social role of states in development governance, including the role of state-owned enterprises as employers and social service providers, to be reconsidered;

27.

Draws attention to the crucial role of social protection systems as mentioned in the ILO Global Jobs Pact and the United Nations Social Protection Floor Initiative; calls, therefore, for a stronger emphasis on social protection systems to prevent increased poverty and address social hardship, while helping to stabilise the economy and maintain and promote employability;

28.

Asks for free and full access for all to educational systems, i.e. basic and higher as well as vocational education, so that the local population can become qualified skilled workers;

29.

Insists that both donor and developing countries have to fulfil their commitments to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015;

30.

Supports measures, such as salary subsidies and job and training opportunities, that encourage local scientists as well as other skilled workers to remain and practise within their communities and that strengthen medical systems which are accessible for everybody;

31.

Supports the creation of new job positions within the developing countries;

32.

Supports measures that invest in and build up public services in general in order to create jobs and strengthen state capacities, facilities and social cohesion as mentioned in the UN Report ‘Rethinking poverty’;

33.

Calls for more emphasis to be placed on practical healthcare and awareness raising among the population about the merits of medical treatments, e.g. distributing blood analysers and training local people to use them;

34.

Highlights that the development of human resources is indispensable in all development strategies and crucial to job creation; calls on the EU and developing countries to analyse employment needs and the labour market, make forecasts and anticipate the major challenges involved in adapting vocational training to employment;

35.

Believes all development strategies should pay special attention to the most vulnerable and marginalised, especially women, children, older people and people with disabilities;

36.

Considers it indispensable to meet basic needs, and therefore assigns particularly high priority to measures promoting food security and access to drinking water;

37.

Highlights the problem of child labour and recognizes that it is one of the major obstacles to achieving universal primary education completion and reducing poverty and hampers the healthy upbringing and necessary education of these children; thus calls for the promotion of inter-agency coordination and alignment in education aid and child labour policy through strengthening existing mechanisms, including the Global Task Force for Child Labour and Education; finally, calls on the international community, all states concerned and the EU to commit themselves to doing their utmost to eradicate child labour as a matter of urgency and dedicated action;

38.

Points out the importance of gender equality for the economic success of states, and calls therefore for greater efforts to also ensure gender equality in the economy;

39.

Insists that donors and partner countries should ensure that agriculture, particularly smallholder farming and small and medium-sized eco-friendly agro-industries, move up the development agenda;

40.

Emphasises that small farming based on decentralised, green and sustainable means of production facilitates job creation and sustainable development, since per hectare they employ more people than large farms, with the farmers and employees spending pro rata more on employment-intensive rural non-farm products;

41.

Calls for jobs and employment creation to be given more effective support by coordinating employment and macro-economic policies, bearing in mind that the latter should not be restricted to controlling inflation and trade and fiscal deficits but also focus on the stability of real output, incomes and employment;

42.

Supports investment in ‘green jobs’ and in green industry, for example by developing renewable energy and energy efficiency systems in poor countries, including solar power for the benefit of local communities, as a way to provide sustainable sources of energy and, at the same time, to create jobs while protecting the environment;

43.

Calls for an increase in equal access to, and opportunities for, skills development, quality training and education; calls for improvements to be made as regards access to credit (including micro-finance) to encourage job creation;

44.

Looks forward to increased cooperation between Parliament and its regional counterparts in developing countries;

45.

Stresses the importance of promoting alternative indicators to GDP to measure social progress in developing countries, particularly in light of the suggestions made by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress chaired by Joseph Stiglitz;

46.

Calls for responses to the global economic crisis to be devised by country and region and to include the measures mentioned in the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) policy instrument ‘A Global Jobs Pact’ in order to facilitate investment in employment-intensive and environment-friendly sectors and social protection systems;

47.

Urges all rich countries, especially EU states, to keep their spending promises as regards aid, i.e. at least 0,7 % of GNI by 2015;

48.

Calls for a common definition of poverty among the Member States to identify the relevant working fields and the beneficiaries entitled to EU development aid;

49.

Believes that policy coherence can bring fruitful results in terms of job creation in developing countries; calls therefore for a change in EU external polices as these have a direct impact on developing countries’ economies and should be designed to support their sustainable needs in order to fight poverty, guarantee a decent income and livelihood and fulfil basic human rights, including social and economic rights and environmental protection;

50.

Calls for substantial additional funding in order to combat the effects of climate change and the global economic crisis in developing countries;

51.

Calls for basic education and public health to form the basis of development policies and insists that the current situation cannot justify any reduction in national spending and international aid to these sectors;

52.

Calls on the EU to honour its aid-for-trade commitments;

53.

Emphasises that the EU has to revise its subsidy policies, especially in the agricultural sector and in line with the needs of small and medium farmers in the EU, in order to facilitate fair trade conditions regarding developing countries;

54.

Asks all donors, once again, to adhere more faithfully to the aid effectiveness agenda, especially as regards donor coordination and accountability;

55.

Insists that the Commission make sure that the external dimension of the current reform of the Common Fisheries Policies will be mainstreamed with EU development policy as these are directly linked to the livelihood of the population in developing countries;

56.

Emphasises that the fisheries sector in many countries is crucial for employment and food security and therefore all developing countries should be eligible for EU sector support to develop their own sustainable fisheries industry, research, control and enforcement to combat Illegal Unreported and Unregulated fisheries, independent of any fisheries access agreement with the European Union;

57.

Underlines that EU sector support to the fisheries industry in third countries is aimed at equipping harbours in these countries with the proper infrastructure to facilitate the local landing and processing of fish in order to create new jobs; calls on the Commission to monitor and verify that these goals are achieved, and to provide financial and technical support to improve the ability of the third country to monitor fishing activities in its waters and to apprehend vessels seen to be committing infractions;

58.

Insists that the EU should simplify its aid architecture and related procedures;

59.

Calls for reinforced development policy coordination between the Commission and the EU Member States to prevent different policy actions having a negative impact on the achievement of the MDGs;

60.

Expects that, since policy coherence for development is now a Treaty requirement, EU policies in areas such as farming, trade, migration and fisheries will not in any way undermine development efforts; intends to monitor closely how the EU fulfils this obligation;

61.

Invites donors to invest intelligently in development education for their citizens;

62.

Encourages donor countries to use this crisis to further explore existing possibilities in terms of additional and innovative sources of financing for development and to identify new ones to allow developing countries to diversify their sources of revenue and implement effective, concrete and operational spending programmes;

63.

Calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to promote sustainable enterprises with decent jobs creation as a specific sector of development cooperation in line with the 2005 European Consensus on Development, and to foster its integration in more traditional sectors of development cooperation such as infrastructure, rural development, governance and trade-related assistance;

64.

Urges G20 nations to carry through on pledges to stamp out tax havens, to tighten up supervision of financial markets and to usher in tax information exchange; furthermore, the G20 should instruct the International Accounting Standards Board to adopt a new standard that includes country-by-country reporting;

65.

Calls on the G20 and EU states to take steps to make remittances cheaper and easier;

66.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to enhance public financial support to small and micro enterprises and farmers in the developing countries, including the informal sector, as called for in the ILO Global Jobs Pact, in order to combat poverty and unemployment;

67.

Urges the EU to target its aid towards promoting capacity building in areas that will directly benefit the partner countries’ economic fabric and create jobs, i.e. developing their productive capacity, building efficient tax systems, fighting corruption, strengthening institutions and civil society, facilitating access to microcredit and other sources of finance, etc.;

68.

Calls for all EU development policies with an impact on job creation and poverty reduction to focus on measures which require governments, civil society, companies, foundations and local communities to achieve the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015;

69.

Calls on the EU to target its aid also towards building up social protection systems in developing countries as an important and effective means to reduce poverty;

70.

Calls for priority to be given to education, follow-up assistance to school-leavers, vocational training, technology education, skills training, lifelong learning, access to finance, setting up high-quality training courses which improve the prospects of those who take them, health and safety, and encouraging entrepreneurial initiative schemes primarily for small and micro enterprises to create a sustainable workforce, thereby focusing especially on young, elderly, disabled and displaced people, women and any other marginalised groups;

71.

Believes that the EU should take account of human rights and governance criteria when drawing up trade agreements with developing countries and should not hesitate to apply sanctions when states fail to respect their governance obligations; recalls that conditionality criteria apply to both the European Development Fund (EDF) and the Financing Instrument for Development Cooperation (DCI);

72.

Asks the EU authorities to ensure scrupulous respect for the principle of conditionality, as stipulated in the Cotonou Agreement;

73.

Emphasises that the same conditionality criteria apply to the provision of support under both the European Development Fund (EDF) and the Financing Instrument for Development Cooperation (DCI);

74.

Calls on the Commission to promote appropriate methods and timetables for monitoring the production chains of European undertakings operating abroad in order to verify the elimination of child labour and compliance with the labour standards promoted by ILO Conventions, and to promote access to education, which is a crucial factor in combating poverty;

75.

Urges the establishment of a reliable network for close relations among major governmental and non-governmental institutions and organisations dealing with poverty reduction in all developing countries in order to share views and experiences with EU assistance in formulation, implementation and monitoring;

76.

Supports the establishment of databases at national and EU levels in order to collect and compare basic data relevant to poverty in developing countries as a way of facilitating and increasing efforts towards poverty reduction;

77.

Stresses the need to strengthen existing coordination among international and regional organisation as an additional effort in providing technical support to the implementation and monitoring of an EU Action Plan on Poverty Alleviation;

78.

Notes the need to establish ‘Advisory Groups’ on specific issues as a concrete step and reliable way of providing technical support in order to implement the objectives set out in an EU Action Plan on Poverty Alleviation in developing countries;

79.

Accepts the use of budget support only where there are watertight guarantees that funds will reach their intended destination and satisfy their original purpose and where recipients fulfil human rights and democratic governance criteria; looks forward to more effective assessment and auditing of budget support to analyse if the intended goal is achieved and if governments in the recipient countries comply with the abovementioned criteria; calls on the Commission to establish an IT-based scoreboard under the scrutiny of the European Parliament to assess the efficiency of Community aid in the field of poverty reduction, education and job creation, with this scoreboard being based on the degree of compliance with the expected financial ratios and aims;

80.

Calls on the Commission to present to the European Parliament a coherent and credible proposal on EU post-election policy, which respects the free choice of the population in a given country, and fears that the current absence of a coherent post-election policy undermines the credibility of the EU Election Observation Missions;

81.

Supports more democratic representation of developing countries in global institutions;

82.

Invites the international financial institutions to review their loan policies in order to support democratic and sustainable economic development choices by developing countries;

83.

Calls on the EU and the G-20 to take concrete action to eradicate abuses of tax havens, tax evasion and illicit financial flights from developing countries and to promote these resources to be invested in developing countries;

84.

Calls for a new binding global financial agreement on the automatic disclosure by transnational corporate companies of the profits they made and the taxes they paid on a country-by-country basis;

85.

Calls on the EU to support the UN Social Floor Initiative to extend or implement sustainable social protection systems in developing countries by ensuring greater coherence in external relations policies and developing a Communication on Social Protection in development cooperation, as suggested in the Council Conclusions on Promoting Employment through EU Development Cooperation;

86.

Agrees with the Commission that having a job is the best way to avoid poverty and social exclusion; believes that tackling the education gap in developing countries is one of the most effective strategies for breaking the cycle of poverty and unemployment;

87.

Welcomes the Education For All - Fast Track Initiative (FTI) and the Commission's support of it in principle; urges the Commission to clarify what funds it currently makes available to the countries covered by this initiative, and for which purposes, particularly in the field of:

88.

Urges the EU to introduce assistance programmes for parents in various fields where poverty leads to a lack of knowledge with regard to bringing up children to ensure that children in developing countries have real opportunities;

89.

Notes that the quality of mental and physical health is not just a question of education, training and new information technologies, but also of access to water, food and medicine, so the EU should pay more attention to clustering free teaching materials, free meals, free school buses and free examinations into comprehensive aid projects; deems it imperative to call for a clear interrelation between EU-funded school-based projects and food and health programmes in developing countries;

90.

Calls on the EU to concentrate its efforts on identifying branches where developing countries have a competitive advantage, whereby the establishment of work-based apprenticeships in these sectors shall be one of the main priorities of EU development aid;

91.

Calls on the EU to provide more education opportunities for developing-world students but to encourage them to return home after their studies to benefit their own communities;

92.

Points out that developing countries are advised that their products must compete in the open market while the same principle is often not applied to the developed world;

93.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop a coherent approach which respects the fundamentals of the free market and which guarantees reciprocity in the field of trade;

94.

Stresses that many developing countries, particularly with regard to the agricultural sector, are characterised by subsistence economies and these economies are often the only source of income and living;

95.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments of the Member States and the ILO.

21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/48

—

having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 September 2009 on enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market (COM(2009)0467),

—

having regard to the resolution of the Competitiveness Council of 25 September 2008 on a comprehensive European anti-counterfeiting and piracy plan,

—

having regard to Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (1),

—

having regard to Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (2),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 of 22 July 2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights (3),

—

having regard to Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (4),

—

having regard to Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs (5),

—

having regard to its position of 25 April 2007 on the amended proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights (6),

—

having regard to the Commission Strategy for the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Third Countries of 2005 and to the Commission Staff Working Document ‘IPR Enforcement Report 2009’,

—

having regard to its recommendation of 26 March 2009 to the Council on strengthening security and fundamental freedoms on the Internet (7),

—

having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Human rights and Fundamental Freedoms,

—

having regard to the legally binding character of the Charter of Fundamental Rights,

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 April 2008 on cultural industries in Europe (8),

—

having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 25 June 2008 on the Small Business Act for Europe establishing the ‘Think Small First’ principle for an ambitious policy agenda for SMEs,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A7-0175/2010),

A.

whereas infringements of intellectual property rights (IPR) constitute a genuine threat not only to consumer health and safety but also to our economies and societies,

B.

whereas scientific and technical innovation, patents and the cultural industries make a decisive contribution to the competitiveness of the European economy, both through the number and diversity of the job openings they provide and through the wealth created; whereas the cultural economy, from creation through to distribution, must be supported,

C.

whereas the European Union, as a member of the World Trade Organisation, is bound by the Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS); whereas EU Member States are thereby committed to the adoption and implementation of effective measures against all infringements of IPRs,

D.

whereas knowledge sharing and dissemination of innovation are strong traditions in the European Union; whereas access by the greatest possible number to technological progress and cultural products continues to be the foundation of education and development policy,

E.

whereas in order properly to address the question of IPR enforcement in the internal market, it is important to take into consideration not only EU territory but also the situation at the EU’s external borders and in third countries, in order to ensure compatibility between the protection of content of Community origin and the holders of rights thereto and consumer access to non-Community content,

F.

whereas data concerning the scale of IPR infringements are inconsistent, incomplete, insufficient and dispersed, and whereas an objective, independent impact assessment is needed for any additional legislative proposal,

G.

whereas innovation and creativity have considerable added value for the European economy and, taking account of the economic context, they should be preserved and developed,

H.

whereas the violation of IPRs is a problem across the board which affects all sectors of industry, particularly the creative and innovative industries and sport,

I.

whereas ongoing infringements of IPRs will lead to a fade-out of innovation in the EU,

J.

whereas the phenomenon of on-line IPR infringements has assumed worrying proportions, particularly for the creative content industries, and whereas it has not been established yet whether the existing legal framework is capable of effectively protecting rights holders on the Internet while guaranteeing a balance between all the interests at stake, including those of consumers,

K.

whereas efforts to tackle infringement of copyright must enjoy public support in order not to risk eroding support for intellectual property rights amongst the citizens,

L.

whereas the unauthorised uploading of copyrighted material to the Internet is a clear infringement of intellectual property rights and is prohibited by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) treaties on copyright (WCT) and performances and phonograms (WPPT), to which the European Union is a contracting party,

M.

whereas the creative sector should continue to develop models enabling access to creative content online which offer improved and cost-effective choices to consumers, including access to unlimited subscription services; whereas the development of these legal services is inhibited by the growth of unlawfully uploaded content online,

N.

whereas, in order to maintain and increase the attractiveness of what they can offer their public, producers of audiovisual media must be in a position to use all the new means of distribution; whereas the current system of granting licences must be improved in such a way that the Member States have a flexible system available to them which can be adapted to the new technologies,

O.

whereas, with the exception of legislation on penalties under the criminal law, a Community legal framework already exists with regard to the phenomenon of counterfeiting and piracy of physical goods, but whereas lacunae persist with regard to online IPR infringements,

P.

whereas the measures provided for by Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights on the internal market have not yet been assessed, from the point of view of the protection of rights or from the point of view of its effects on consumers’ rights,

Q.

whereas the telecoms regulatory framework has recently been amended, includes provisions for standardised public interest notices which can address, among other things, copyright and infringement thereof without jeopardising data protection and privacy rights and stresses the need to respect fundamental rights in matters relating to Internet access,

R.

whereas the possibility should be created in the European legal framework of proceeding against infringers of copyright, since international treaties are barely able to address IPR infringements,

S.

whereas, in the case of patents, their protection is crucial in order to efficiently fight patent violations; whereas the question of the unified patent system at EU level has yet to be resolved,

T.

whereas there are proven connections between various forms of organised crime and IPR infringements,

U.

whereas the co-decision role of the European Parliament in commercial matters and its access to negotiation documents is guaranteed by the Lisbon Treaty,

V.

whereas it is desirable that, alongside measures to prevent offences in this area, protection should be provided for consumers who legally make use of products that are covered by protection of intellectual property,

W.

whereas current Community law constitutes no impediment to the development of multi-territory licensing systems,

X.

whereas in various areas, including the text- and image-based sector, there are business models and channels and licensing schemes that provide broad access to works in a wide range of forms and formats, both within and across national borders,

1.

Welcomes the communication of 11 September 2009 from the Commission concerning additional non-legislative measures; regrets however that the communication does not deal with the matter of completing the legislative framework by introducing a set of measures to combat intellectual property right infringements in an effective manner; welcomes the progress made in the EU in harmonising the fight against counterfeiting; encourages the Commission to step up its efforts in areas that are sensitive in terms of health and safety, including that of medicines;

2.

Recalls that an exception to IPRs exists in the cultural area: the ‘private copy’;

3.

Calls on the Commission to urgently present, by the end of 2010, a comprehensive IPR strategy addressing all aspects of IPRs, including their enforcement as well as their promotion, in particular the role of copyright as an enabler and not an obstacle, helping creators earn a living and disseminating their works;

4.

Calls on the Commission to propose a comprehensive strategy on IPRs which will remove obstacles to creating a single market in the online environment and adapt the European legislative framework in the field of IPRs to current trends in society as well as to technical developments;

5.

Stresses that any measures taken to enforce IPRs must respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Article 7 and Article 8, and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in particular Article 6, Article 8, and Article 10, and be necessary, proportionate, and appropriate within a democratic society; recalls in this connection that Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides for the protection of intellectual property;

6.

Considers that the Commission should take IPR aspects into account in all relevant policies or legislative initiatives and consider these aspects in all processes relating to impact assessments where a proposal would have an impact on intellectual property;

7.

Takes the view that the Commission should take into account the specific problems encountered by SMEs when it comes to reinforcing the intellectual property rights corresponding to the principle of ‘Think Small First’ established by the Small Business Act for Europe, inter alia by applying the principle of non-discrimination for SMEs;

8.

In the light of the experiences undergone by rights-holders in some Member States, does not share the Commission’s certitude that the current civil enforcement framework in the EU is effective and harmonised to the extent necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market and reminds the Commission that the report on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC is essential to confirm those claims;

9.

Is of the opinion that the possibility of proceeding against infringers of intellectual property rights should be created in the European legal framework and reminds the Commission that the report on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC is essential to confirm those claims;

10.

Calls on the Commission to draw up a report on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC, including an assessment of the effectiveness of the measures taken, as well as an evaluation of its impact on innovation and the development of the information society, in accordance with Article 18(1) of that Directive and, if necessary, to propose amendments; calls for that report also to include an assessment of the ways to strengthen and upgrade the legal framework with respect to the Internet;

11.

Take account of the existence of particular formats making works accessible for those with disabilities and adopt the necessary measures to promote the distribution thereof;

12.

Does not share the Commission’s view that the principal body of laws with respect to IPR enforcement is already in place; points out in this respect that negotiations on the directive on criminal sanctions have not been successfully concluded;

13.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that the measures aimed at strengthening the application of intellectual property rights in the internal market do not impinge on the legitimate right to interoperability, this being essential to healthy competition on the digital works distribution market, inter alia for the authors and users of free software;

14.

Calls on the Commission to put forward appropriate legislative proposals based on Article 118 of the TFEU which will address the issue of an effective EU patent system and welcomes in this respect the Council conclusions of 4 December 2009 on an enhanced patent system in Europe as a significant positive development;

15.

Recognises the importance of comprehensive and reliable information and data on all types of IPR infringements for the development of evidence-based and result-oriented policy making;

16.

Welcomes the establishment of the Observatory as a tool for the centralisation of statistics and data which will serve as a basis for proposals to be implemented to combat effectively the phenomena of counterfeiting and online IPR infringements; urges the Commission to produce a report on how best to use Europol and existing structures for cooperation between customs authorities in this field to combat criminal IPR infringements effectively;

17.

Wishes the Observatory to become a tool for collecting and exchanging data and information on all forms of all IPR infringements, including compiling scientific research on counterfeiting and IPR regulation;

18.

Calls on the Commission to clarify the tasks which are to be entrusted to the Observatory and stresses that the success of the Observatory largely depends on the involvement and cooperation of all stakeholders, including the national authorities, rights holders, consumers’ organisations and the industries concerned, in order to increase transparency and avoid duplication of effort;

19.

Calls on the Commission to inform Parliament and the Council fully and comprehensively about the results of the Observatory’s activities through annual reports in which the Commission draws conclusions and proposes solutions necessary to improve IPR law;

20.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States in association with the stake holders to organise a campaign to raise awareness at European, national and local level of the risks to consumer health and safety arising from counterfeit products and also the adverse impact of counterfeiting and on-line IPR infringement on the economy and society; emphasises the need to increase awareness, especially among young European consumers, of the need to respect IPR;

21.

Calls on all parties concerned, including Internet service providers, online sales platforms, rights holders and consumers’ organisations, with regard to IPR infringements and the sale of counterfeit products online, to adopt practical measures to alert and educate people on the value of copyright and the impact of IPR infringements and counterfeiting on jobs and growth, such as brief, visible and relevant educational and warning messages;

22.

Stresses the need to educate young people to enable them to understand what is at stake in intellectual property and to identify clearly what is legal and what is not, by means of targeted public awareness campaigns, particularly against online IPR infringement;

23.

Calls on the Commission therefore to put pressure on the industry to devise even more payment facilities, in order to make it easier for European consumers to buy legally-offered content, so as to increase legal downloading in the EU;

24.

Agrees with the Commission that additional non-legislative measures such as discussions on possible improvements to the digital market in Europe through voluntary harmonisation of procedures and standards amongst stakeholders can be useful to improve the application of IPRs, particularly measures arising from in-depth dialogue among stakeholders;

25.

Stresses that the enormous growth of unauthorised file sharing of copyrighted works and recorded performances is an increasing problem for the European economy in terms of job opportunities and revenues for the industry as well as for government;

26.

Stresses that a number of factors have allowed this phenomenon to develop, particularly technological advances and the lack of legal offers; recalls however that this phenomenon constitutes a violation of IPRs to which appropriate, urgent solutions need to be found, geared to the sector concerned and in compliance with fundamental rights;

27.

Stresses that support for and development of the provision of a diversified, attractive, high-profile, legal range of goods and services for consumers may help to tackle the phenomenon of online infringement, and recognises in this respect that the lack of a functioning internal European digital market constitutes an important obstacle to the development of legal online offers and that the EU runs the risk of condemning to failure efforts to develop the legitimate online market if it does not recognise that fact and make urgent proposals to address it;

28.

Asks, therefore, the Commission to pressure the industry to come up with new payment facilities, in order to make it easier for European consumers to buy legally-offered content, thereby ensuring that legal downloading will increase in the EU;

29.

Calls for specific legislation ensuring that private consumers who have legitimately received, for their own private use, reproductions of original products which are covered by protection under intellectual property rights are not required to demonstrate the legitimacy of those reproductions, but that it should be up to interested parties to prove any violation of rules under the protection of intellectual property rights;

30.

Stresses that all parties concerned, including Internet service providers, must join in the dialogue with stakeholders in order to find appropriate solutions; calls on the Commission, failing this, to submit a legislative proposal or to amend existing legislation, particularly Directive 2004/48/EC, so as to upgrade the Community legal framework in this field on the basis of national experiences;

31.

Calls on the Commission to think broadly about methods of facilitating industry access to the digital market without geographical borders, taking account of the particular features of each sector, by addressing urgently the issue of multi-territory licences, where there is substantial demand from consumers, and the lack of harmonised legislation with regard to copyright as well as an effective and transparent system for rights management, which would complement this existing growth in services which are legal and which meet consumer demand for easier ubiquitous, instant and customised access to content;

32.

Stresses that the system for granting licences should be improved on the basis of technical neutrality, in such a way that the Member States have available to them a flexible, effective and transparent system which can be adapted to the new technologies;

33.

Calls on the Commission to review the issue of cross-border management of rights and change the current situation of legal uncertainty created by Commission Recommendation 2005/737/EC of 18 October 2005 on collective cross-border management of copyrights, taking into account the fact that copyright is inherently territorial for cultural, traditional and linguistic reasons and ensuring a pan-European licensing system providing consumers with access to the widest possible choice of content and not at the expense of European local repertoire;

34.

Draws attention, furthermore, to the growing problem of Internet-based industrial espionage and theft of data constituting industrial property, in particular technical documentation and source code;

35.

Proposes that the Observatory should carry out a detailed analysis of the problem of data theft and put forward proposals for combating the problem;

36.

Calls on the Commission to identify the particular problems and needs of SMEs, to develop specific measures to assist SMEs in the fight against infringements of intellectual property rights and to enable SMEs to better protect themselves both in the EU and in third countries;

37.

Supports steps taken by the Commission with a view to identifying the best ways to further improve the EU Customs Regulation, which allows the detention of goods suspected of infringing IPRs and is, as such, one of the pillars of the Union’s legal framework designed to enforce IPRs;

38.

Calls on the Commission to pursue innovative and upgraded cooperation between administrative departments and the various sectors of industry concerned;

39.

Calls on the Member States and the Commission to extend the cooperation between the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market and national intellectual property offices to also cover the fight against infringements of intellectual property rights;

40.

Recognises the need for the use of existing institutional structures in the Member States in the fight against counterfeited goods, and therefore calls on the national patent and other intellectual property offices to provide greater support and training to small and medium-sized enterprises and to the public;

41.

Calls on the Commission to step up its cooperation with priority third countries with regard to intellectual property and promote a balanced approach in the context of the negotiations on intellectual property under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation concerning intellectual property, particularly in the framework of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS);

42.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that its efforts to further the negotiations on the multilateral Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) with a view to improving the effectiveness of the IPR enforcement system against counterfeiting are continued with full account being taken of the Parliament's position, in particular as expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2008 on the impact of counterfeiting on international trade, and calls on it to fully inform Parliament on the progress and outcome of the negotiations and to ensure that the provisions of ACTA fully comply with the acquis communautaire on IPR and fundamental rights;

43.

Supports the continuation and enhancement by the Commission of bilateral cooperation initiatives, including ‘IP dialogues’ with third countries and technical assistance projects;

44.

Notes that the biggest challenge for the internal market lies in combating infringements of intellectual property rights at the EU’s external borders and in third countries; in this respect, calls on the Commission to create more intellectual property helpdesks in third countries (notably in India and Russia) in order to help European entrepreneurs with the more active enforcement of their intellectual property rights and in combating infringements of intellectual property rights in third countries and the entry into the Internal Market of counterfeited goods manufactured in such third countries;

45.

Stresses the importance of fighting organised crime in the area of IPRs, in particular counterfeiting and online IPR infringement; points out in this context the need for appropriate EU legislation on proportional and fair sanctions and supports close strategic and operational cooperation between all the interested parties within the EU, in particular Europol, national authorities and the private sector, as well as with non-EU states and international organisations;

46.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee and the parliaments and governments of the Member States.

21.2.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 50/55

—

having regard to Part III, Title XVIII of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in particular to Article 174 thereof,

—

having regard to the regulations governing the Structural Funds for the period 2007-2013,

—

having regard to the Council Decision 2006/702/EC of 6 October 2006 on Community strategic guidelines on cohesion (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 2 September 2003 on structurally disadvantaged regions (islands, mountain regions, regions with low population density) in the context of cohesion policy, and their institutional prospects (2),

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 7 July 2005 on the revision of the guidelines for regional State aids (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 March 2007 on the islands and natural and economic constraints in the context of the regional policy (4),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 6 October 2008 entitled ‘Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion - Turning territorial diversity into strength’ (COM(2008)0616),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Regions 2020 - an assessment of future challenges for EU regions’ (SEC(2008)2868),

—

having regard to its resolution of 24 March 2009 on the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion and the state of the debate on the future reform of cohesion policy (5),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 25 June 2009 on the Sixth Progress Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (COM(2009)0295),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 31 March 2010 entitled ‘Cohesion policy: Strategic Report 2010 on the implementation of the programmes 2007-2013’ (COM(2010)0110),

—

having regard to Rule 110(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas the principle of territorial cohesion was consolidated in the regulations on the Structural Funds 2007-2013 and is one of the new key objectives established for the European Union by the Treaty of Lisbon, aimed at securing the harmonious development of the EU by reducing regional disparities and removing obstacles to development, including obstacles linked to natural and geographical handicaps,

B.

whereas it is important to clarify the impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the status of regions deserving particular measures in the framework of regional policy,

C.

whereas, in keeping with Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, particular attention shall be paid to regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions,

D.

whereas mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas are exposed to particular challenges linked to demographic changes, poor accessibility, climate change, migratory phenomena, energy supply and regional integration,

1.

Welcomes the inclusion of territorial cohesion as a new objective of the Union, as well as new Article 174; believes that the provisions of Article 174 should be translated into specific development strategies and concrete measures aimed at overcoming the handicaps and exploiting the potentials of these regions;

2.

Considers that mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas constitute homogeneous groups of regions and that they share some important common features which differentiate them from other regions; believes that they deserve specific regional development programmes; stresses, in this context, the special situation of the island Member States located on the periphery of the Union;

3.

Is of the opinion that GDP must remain the main criterion for determining eligibility for regional policy assistance; calls nevertheless on the Commission and the Member States to work towards more pertinent and territorialised statistical indicators, in order to provide a more comprehensive picture of the development level of these disadvantaged regions; stresses that indicators other than GDP (total population, unemployment/employment rates, education levels, population density) can already be used by the Member States in redistributing funds among regions, within their allocated envelopes, taking into account the specific attributes of each region;

4.

Calls for the establishment of a specific European integrated and flexible policy framework for dealing with mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas on the basis of their shared features, while also taking proper account of different situations and showing due regard for the principle of proportionality; is of the opinion that cohesion policy should address the situation of the islands not just through regional policy measures, but also using other EU policies that have a significant territorial impact on the development of these regions; believes that a European policy framework for mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas may have the added value required in order to overcome the permanent handicaps of these regions and adapt their development model in such a way as to make good use of their assets;

5.

Calls on Member States and regional and local authorities to play a major role in the development strategies of mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas, because a vertical approach involving all levels of government, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, is required in order to place these regions on the right path towards sustainable development, taking into consideration other important sectors in each region; stresses that the potential within these regions, many of which have very substantial natural resources, can make a positive contribution towards achieving the goals, especially in the fields of energy policy and R&D, set out in the EU2020 strategy;

6.

Stresses that the objective of economic and social development in these handicapped regions can be achieved only through carefully devised EU programmes and actions specifically adapted to each region and aimed at achieving a structural adjustment of these regions and making them more competitive and capable of coping with the main challenges facing them, and also through efficient coordination and implementation of the four Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund and other financial instruments, such as those provided by the European Investment Bank;

7.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas will continue to benefit from specific provisions under the new multiannual financial framework and during the next programming period;

8.

Welcomes European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) as an instrument aimed at overcoming the obstacles to territorial cooperation; encourages mountain regions, islands and sparsely populated areas to make use of EGTCs for the management of territorial cooperation projects with other regions that are cofinanced by the EU, as a way of bringing them closer to their surrounding economic areas;

9.

Encourages the Member States to make full use of the European Neighbourhood Policy instruments in mountain areas, sparsely populated areas and islands, so as to enable them to benefit from the resources available across borders;

10.