11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/1

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/2

—

having regard to Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport (1),

—

having regard to Commission Regulation (EU) No 454/2011 on the technical specification for interoperability relating to the subsystem ‘telematics applications for passenger services’ of the trans-European rail system (2),

—

having regard to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (3),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Action Plan for the Deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in Europe’ (COM(2008)0886),

—

having regard to the 2011 Commission White Paper entitled ‘Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area — Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system’ (COM(2011)0144),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2011 on the Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area — Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system (4),

—

having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document entitled ‘Towards a roadmap for delivering EU-wide multimodal travel information, planning and ticketing services’ (SWD(2014)0194),

—

having regard to the Action Plan on Urban Mobility (COM(2009)0490),

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee,

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions,

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A8-0183/2015),

A.

whereas, despite ongoing efforts, the aim outlined in Initiative 22 in the 2011 White Paper (5) of enabling seamless multimodal door-to-door travel using intelligent systems for interoperable and multimodal scheduling, online reservation systems and smart ticketing has not yet been realised;

B.

whereas most travellers continue to prefer individual transport, and whereas, given that creating EU-wide journey planners will not in itself be enough to achieve better integration of the various modes of transport, each of these transport modes needs to become more efficient, sustainable and user friendly, and that process will be significantly assisted by, inter alia, the adoption of the Fourth Railway Package to the extent that it would ensure equal access to infrastructure also for smaller operators, SMEs and start-ups, the adoption of the Regulation on air passengers’ rights and of a European waterways strategy and the implementation of the Single European Sky and TEN-T priority projects;

C.

whereas, despite the Commission defining integrated ticketing as a combination of different transport methods into one single ticket, such a definition is not always shared by businesses and some service providers only aim to provide interoperable tickets, which hampers further developments in the sector;

1.

Points out that EU-wide multimodal travel information, a cross-border integrated approach on journey planning and ticketing services, especially for long-distance travel are part of the answer to major challenges in the European transport sector, including those of sustainability, multimodality, improvement of safety in all transport modes, efficiency and economic viability, the creation of quality jobs and labour mobility and are therefore equally beneficial to society, the economy, the environment, social cohesion and the tourism industry;

2.

Emphasises that EU-wide integrated multimodal travel information, planning and ticketing services provide European businesses, especially SMEs and start-ups, with opportunities for innovation and hence constitute a major contribution to a globally competitive European single market and the completion of a single European transport area;

3.

Emphasises that EU-wide personal mobility is a prerequisite for the exercise of basic freedoms and that consumers should therefore be able to access comprehensive, accurate and neutral information regarding both timetables and connections about multimodal and cross-border transport links for seamless, facilitated door-to-door travel with high standards of comfort and to make the necessary reservations and payments online; welcomes incentives to encourage travellers to combine several available modes of transport; notes that in most of the Member States the option of purchasing tickets for national and cross-border journeys within the EU via the Internet or mobile application is still lacking; is of the opinion that geo-blocking should not be permitted;

4.

Underlines the importance for users of getting one ticket for one multimodal journey and sees the enabling of fair and equal access to multimodal travel and traffic data and therefore the provision of comprehensive, easily accessible, neutral, reliable and real-time information for travellers as a prerequisite for integrated ticketing systems and emphasises that, in order to ensure that measures to that end are fair, it is of prime importance that they be accompanied by the internalisation of external costs for all modes of transport and by information on the environmental performance of the different modes;

5.

Notes that consumers should at all times be given transparent pricing information; stresses therefore that reservation and payment systems should clearly indicate the total ticket price for any selected journey, including compulsory elements such as taxes and charges; emphasises the importance of innovative IT-based platforms that reduce reservation and transaction charges overall and underlines the importance of allowing for a variety of payment options for purchasing travel tickets; calls upon the EU and Member States to do more to restrict fees for the use of credit cards or other reasonable forms of payment for public transport services;

6.

Emphasises that the incompatibility and inconsistency of data layers, the diversity and the missing interoperability of data formats and data exchange protocols undermine the existence of integrated multimodal information, planning and ticketing services in the EU and create additional costs; calls on the Commission to ensure that any regulatory action keeps up with the rapid developments in the transport sector and does not create an unnecessary burden;

7.

Welcomes efforts in both the public and private sectors to introduce journey planners together with the required open standards and interfaces, but notes that many such services cover only specific regions or countries and that few are multimodal; calls therefore, as a first step, for transport services providers and providers of journey planners to build on existing synergies and to focus more closely on providing multimodal, cross-border journey planners with tailored ticketing arrangements, devoting particular attention to the language in which services are provided, taking into account the use of minority languages and linking long-distance and local transport including the ‘first and last mile’, i.e. by upgrading the different systems to develop their interoperability and enable communication between them; calls on the Commission to use the TEN-T corridors as a pilot project for the identification of passenger flows and the potential for multimodal information, travel planning and ticketing services;

8.

Calls on the Commission to develop a repository of good practices for locally, regionally or nationally run projects, to serve as a basis for implementation of the latter across the EU;

9.

Stresses that the ease and convenience of purchase using multimodal integrated ticketing systems will attract more passengers to public transport, which will increase their satisfaction and benefit public transport companies;

10.

Calls on the Commission, with regard to multimodal integrated ticketing services, to take the measures necessary to create a clear framework, supporting and facilitating the efforts being made by the stakeholders and the competent authorities, the agreements they have already concluded and the innovative nature of the products and services on offer and in the event that no significant progress in creating integrated, interoperable multimodal, cross-border ticketing systems is made by 2020 calls on the Commission, building on the progress already made and the voluntary initiatives already introduced, to take legislative action by introducing minimum rules and a timetable;

11.

Highlights the active role and the responsibility of local and regional authorities with regard to the ‘first and last mile’ of journeys; considers it essential that they be involved in implementing individual measures, in supervising their operation and in ensuring that the system as a whole functions effectively; taking the above points into account, calls on the competent authorities in the Member States

12.

Shares the Commission’s view that fair, open and equal access for all information, travel planning and ticketing service providers, including SMEs and start-ups, to comprehensive, multimodal real-time transport and travel data is a prerequisite for EU-wide multimodal travel information, planning and ticketing services, and calls on the Commission to circulate a proposal requiring all providers to make available, on fair and equal terms, all the information needed for putting in place more comprehensive services and thereby giving travellers a genuine and accessible choice between the most sustainable, best-value or fastest connections, without prejudice to the commercial interests of the service providers involved;

13.

Emphasises that, in line with the EU’s competition policy, it is incumbent on the Commission to identify and counter any potential danger of multimodal information and ticketing providers’ monopolising information; adds that the Commission must also ensure that the share assigned to paying for the electronic ticketing service does not assume such proportions as to penalise passenger transport undertakings;

14.

Urges that a platform for dialogue be established, involving all the representatives of the transport sector and competent authorities on a local, regional, national and European level, to develop feasible arrangements for the phased EU-wide introduction of interoperable electronic ticketing systems taking account of the entire journey cycle from planning to the purchasing of tickets and to identify and address the problems of distributing ticket-sales income in a proportionate manner and of cost-sharing in the event of disputes between contracted parties; is of the opinion that these solutions should be developed in a market-driven manner without burdening operators and passengers with disproportionate costs; calls on the Commission to strongly promote through EU co-financing synergies in this field between Trans-European Telecommunications and Transport networks;

15.

Points out that European passenger rights are limited to the extent that they apply separately to each contract of carriage individually, but when a journey involves cross-border legs or multimodal transport, passenger rights cannot be guaranteed in the usual way and urges therefore the Commission to respond to Parliament’s call, in its resolution on the 2011 Roadmap (6), for a Charter of Passengers’ Rights covering all forms of transport by bringing forward a proposal for such a Charter, including a separate section on multimodal journeys with clear and transparent protection of passengers’ rights in the multimodal context taking account of the specific characteristics of each transport mode, and integrated multimodal ticketing, by the end of 2017;

16.

Emphasises the crucial importance, in terms of social mobility, and considering the demographic change in Europe, of equal barrier-free access to transport for all and in particular for vulnerable people, and calls for more attention to be paid to the needs of people with disabilities or limited mobility as well as to the special requirements of elderly people in relation to access to travel information before and during journeys, ticketing options and reservation and payment systems, including the ability to reserve wheelchair spaces; welcomes the Commission’s European Accessibility Act Roadmap and the potential for legislative action to remove economic and social barriers facing people with disabilities; urges the Commission to tackle barriers to transport as part of its efforts to improve accessibility;

17.

Underlines the importance of safeguarding different pricing models and payment options (allowances, discounts, etc.) so as to ensure that certain groups in society (the unemployed, retired, students, large families, people with low income and other disadvantaged social groups) may benefit from multimodal ticketing systems in the EU;

18.

Notes that multimodal transport information systems should be user-friendly and hence complemented by updated map and geographical data;

19.

Calls for the continuation of support for stakeholders for innovative problem solving, and therefore for the relevant sources of EU financing, e.g. the Shift2Rail Innovation Programme 4 under the Horizon 2020 programme and the Connecting Europe Facility, along with the structural funds to be not only maintained but developed; urges the European Investment Bank to make appropriate use of the European Fund for Strategic Investment in this regard;

20.

Calls on the Commission to publish an easily accessible list with a regular evaluation of EU co-financed projects on ‘intermodal integrated ticketing’;

21.

Highlights the vital role of global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) and, in particular, the Galileo European navigation satellite system, in dynamic data collection, enabling travellers to be informed about possible disruption and alternative travel options both before they set off and en route; stresses that the benefits of satellite systems must at all times be matched by sufficient data protection provisions;

22.

Points out the need to reduce congestion and air pollution in urban areas and calls for the introduction of incentives to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport across Europe, with the inclusion in travel information and journey-planning services of information about diverse mobility services, e.g. car sharing, carpooling, park-and-ride systems, bicycle rental systems, cycles lanes and footpaths;

23.

Welcomes the increasing availability of integrated electronic ticketing systems in cities and other urban areas, such as inclusive digital ‘smartcard’ technologies that can be used across the different transport modes, and also for cross-border travel, but emphasises that technical solutions should be left to the market and not be imposed at European level;

24.

Notes that permanently good network connections are one of the prerequisites for creating a passenger-friendly smart system capable of providing dynamic information on the traffic situation in real time; calls on the Commission therefore to prioritise facilitating, encouraging and supporting the wide availability of free or low-cost high-speed digital infrastructures, on all transport modes and at all transport interchanges, via the Connecting Europe Facility, Horizon 2020, EFSI and other relevant funding sources;

25.

Underscores the importance of data protection, urges compliance with Directive 95/46/EC and calls for clear conditions to be laid down for the use and transmission of data, particularly in respect of personal data, which should be processed and used only in ‘anonymised’ form and only for the purposes of facilitating intermodal ticketing; outlines that the purchase and payment of tickets via mobile and internet applications should preferably be available without need of registration in the system;

26.

Highlights the importance of journey planning, accessible multimodal information and clear and transparent ticketing, including through digital and online platforms, and the need for better access to public transport whilst travelling abroad in the EU and for encouraging the modernisation of sustainable transport services in order to attract tourists from within and outside the EU, since this will facilitate the entire journey planning process; highlights also the potential positive effects of an integrated ticketing system in terms of a better connection of all regions, particularly the most remote regions, such as the outermost regions;

27.

Stresses the need for more and better promotion and showcasing of the more than a hundred multimodal journey planners that are already available in cities, regions and on the national level in the EU, and calls also for efforts promoting the interconnection of these services;

28.

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

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/7

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 261/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards contractual relations in the milk and milk products sector (1),

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (2),

—

having regard to the Commission report of 13 June 2014 entitled ‘Development of the dairy market situation and the operation of the “Milk Package” provisions’ (COM(2014)0354),

—

having regard to the Commission report of December 2014 on the ‘Prospects for the EU agricultural markets and income 2014-2024’,

—

having regard to Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on the subject of the outermost regions of the EU,

—

having regard to the Commission report of 10 December 2012 entitled ‘Evolution of the market situation and the consequent conditions for smoothly phasing-out the milk quota system — second “soft landing” report’ (COM(2012)0741),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 December 2013 on maintaining milk production in mountain areas, disadvantaged areas and outermost regions after the expiry of the milk quota (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2011 on the EU protein deficit: what solution for a long-standing problem? (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 September 2009 on the crisis in the dairy farming sector (5),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 15 July 2014 on tackling unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food supply chain (COM(2014)0472),

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 (6), which establishes specific measures in the field of agriculture in favour of the outermost regions of the European Union

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (7),

—

having regard to the Commission proposal for a regulation of 13 January 2015 on the European Fund for Strategic Investments (COM(2015)0010),

—

having regard to the Draft Opinion of the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘The future of the dairy industry’,

—

having regard to the Memorandum of Understanding in respect of cooperation in agriculture and rural development within the EU between the European Commission and the European Investment Bank signed on 23 March 2015,

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the opinion of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0187/2015),

A.

whereas the ‘Milk Package’ came into force on 3 October 2012 and applies until 30 June 2020;

B.

whereas, as decided in the 2003 Mid-Term Review of the CAP, dairy quotas will expire on 31 March 2015;

C.

given the importance and topicality of the measures contained in the resolution of 11 December 2013 on maintaining milk production in mountainous areas, disadvantaged areas and the outermost regions of the Union after the expiry of the milk quota;

D.

whereas the global dairy market is increasingly volatile, with the highest-ever price since records began noted in January 2014, followed by substantial drops in prices throughout the rest of 2014; whereas livestock farming and the input products used in dairy production are particularly vulnerable to the challenges of volatility, resulting in farm-gate prices that are below the costs of production;

E.

whereas sustainable farming as a source of high-quality food can only be ensured if farmers receive adequate farm-gate prices which cover all the costs of sustainable production;

F.

whereas the Russian ban on European dairy products since August 2014 has had a negative impact on the EU internal market, thus demonstrating the need to be prepared for the application of crisis-related market measures, irrespective of their nature, as well as the importance of securing diverse export markets for EU products, particularly as global demand for dairy products is predicted to increase, combined with ensuring a stable, solvent domestic market;

G.

whereas the Milk Package brought in the possibility for Member States to introduce compulsory contracts to help producers and processors plan their production volumes, as well as to bolster the structuring of supply chains in view of the end of milk quotas, and whereas few Member States have made use of that prerogative so far;

H.

whereas the Milk Package obliged Member States to recognise producer organisations and their associations and the crucial role that cooperatives continue to play, bearing in mind the need to improve the concentration of supply so as to provide producers with greater negotiating power;

I.

whereas the Milk Market Observatory was established in April 2014 to improve monitoring of the dairy sector for both the Commission and the industry, and whereas its function needs to be strengthened so as to create within the sector an efficient crisis-warning system for dairy farms of various sizes, geographical locations and with differing production and distribution methods;

J.

whereas the current safety net is too low to provide protection in the event of a fall in the price of milk;

K.

whereas one of the main objectives of the common agricultural policy (CAP) is balanced territorial development, in economic, social and environmental terms; whereas this presupposes that agriculture will continue to be productive and sustainable in disadvantaged, outermost, remote or mountainous areas;

L.

whereas the end of quotas will have a considerable negative impact on the outermost regions, particularly in the Azores, where dairy farming is the main economic activity, representing around 46 % of the regional economy;

M.

whereas for a large number of dairy farms located in disadvantaged, outermost, insular, remote and mountainous areas the costs of production, collection and marketing of milk and dairy products outside their production area are much higher than in other areas, and whereas they cannot utilise the opportunities for growth created by the abolition of the quota to the same extent because of the natural constraints of these regions; for these reasons, such farmers could be threatened by a larger concentration of producers in the best-placed economic areas within the EU;

N.

whereas compulsory declarations of delivered volumes of milk will apply from 1 April 2015;

O.

whereas generational renewal, modernisation and investment are crucial for a functioning and sustainable European dairy sector;

P.

whereas milk and, in particular, ‘protected designation of origin’ (PDO), ‘protected geographical indication’ (PGI) and ‘traditional specialties guaranteed’ (TSG) products produced throughout the EU significantly contribute to the success of the EU’s agri-food industry and the prosperity of rural economies where small and medium-sized family farms predominate and where extensive milk production must be maintained, provides the raw material for large numbers of processors in the private and cooperative sectors, preserves a diverse European agri-food heritage, and plays a key role in Europe’s territorial and environmental configuration, as well as in the social sphere, with a multiplier effect on other business sectors such as tourism;

Q.

whereas significant fines have been imposed on farmers and milk producers in some Member States for exceeding milk quotas during the last two quota years;

1.

Recalls that a viable, sustainable and competitive dairy sector across the EU, with responsive tools allowing for fair remuneration of dairy farmers, is the goal of the Milk Package; stresses that the issues identified in the Milk Package remain a barrier to a sustainable, competitive and equitable milk market and a fair income for farmers;

2.

Recalls the important role of dairy farming in terms of land management, rural employment and the economic, environmental and social development of numerous European agricultural regions;

3.

Highlights the fact that dairy farmers, and in particular small-scale farmers, are particularly vulnerable to income variations and risks owing to high capital costs, the perishability of production, volatile dairy commodity prices and input and energy costs, and that a sustainable livelihood from dairy farming is an ongoing challenge, as production costs are frequently close to or above farm-gate prices;

4.

Stresses that European farmers have to cope with high costs owing to the prices of items involved in production, such as livestock feed, and that, as a result of stringent European regulations on animal welfare and food safety, their competitiveness is reduced in comparison with other countries;

5.

Urges the Commission to reflect on the causes of the crisis and on measures to put in place to prevent future crises, as indicated in Articles 219, 221 and 222 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products;

6.

Urges the Commission to address, with further targeted market measures, the crisis currently affecting domestic dairy markets as a result of downward price pressure resulting from a lack of adequate crisis instruments, a dip in global demand, global price volatility and the Russian embargo, whilst recognising the first steps that have been taken thus far in addressing the impact of the Russian embargo;

7.

Points out that the surplus of dairy products from certain Member States that have traditional commercial relations with Russia creates major imbalances on their domestic markets, leading to a sharp decrease in prices and causing local producers to become uncompetitive; calls upon the Commission in this regard to analyse the newly created situation and take priority action;

8.

Recalls that the dairy crisis of 2009 occurred under the quota structure and because of the malfunctioning of the dairy products value chain, resulting in downward pressure on the price paid to producers; reminds the Commission that the delay in responding to the crisis forced many dairy farmers out of business, and expresses concern regarding the Commission’s capacity to respond rapidly and effectively to market crises; highlights the fact that the drop in prices at source that has affected livestock breeders was not reflected in consumer prices, which demonstrates the major imbalance between the different stakeholders in the dairy supply chain;

9.

Regrets that Parliament’s request, which aimed, in the event of severe crises, to provide subsidies for farmers who voluntarily reduced their production, has been rejected by the Council; underlines the importance of reopening the debate on this crisis management tool;

10.

Underlines that the abolition of quotas risks leading to an additional concentration of milk production to the advantage of the largest dairy farmers and to the detriment of the smallest farmers, without guaranteeing efficiency or income;

11.

Notes that the medium- and long-term prospects for the dairy sector in both domestic and global markets remain fluid with fluctuating demand, but at the same time emphasises that, as a key part of the agri-food industry, the dairy sector has significant long-term growth and job creation and development potential in rural areas, which should also be targeted under the new Investment Plan;

12.

Stresses the importance of encouraging research and innovation in order to allow all producers and processors to adapt their apparatus and production techniques in response to economic, environmental and social expectations;

13.

Highlights the important role that generational renewal has for the future of the milk sector and the significant opportunities for young farmers in dairying;

14.

Calls on the Commission to establish new financing opportunities for Member States, including with the aid of the European Investment Bank (EIB), by means of which the dairy industry will be reformed; considers financial support, such as guarantee funds, revolving funds and investment capital, to be essential, along with resources provided by the EIB, in order to intervene at the level of structural and European investment funds, in particular in harmony with rural development; this would enable a multiplier effect to be achieved in terms of growth and income, as well as facilitating access to credit for dairy farmers; welcomes in this regard the financing opportunities presented to farmers in the dairy sector by the EIB’s new fund, which offers lower interest rates to facilitate on-farm investment and modernisation, while offering financing opportunities to young farmers to grow their businesses; further highlights the complementary nature of the European Fund for Strategic Investments financing, which would help to develop the milk sector by attracting private capital with a view to expense accountability and increased investment effectiveness;

15.

Notes that the high degree of price volatility and recurring crises that are incompatible with major investments in livestock and the establishment of new producers are the main challenges facing the dairy sector; urges the Commission in consequence to consider measures to mitigate the risks arising from increased exposure to the world market, to monitor more closely the correct functioning of the single market in milk and milk products and to set up an action plan in order to show how it intends to mitigate these risks;

16.

Commits to maintaining milk production, as dairy farming makes an important socio-economic contribution to agricultural and rural development across the EU, and emphasises its particular importance in disadvantaged mountainous, insular and outermost regions, where it is sometimes the only type of farming possible; adds that for these regions this sector is responsible for social, economic and territorial cohesion, the subsistence of many families, the organisation, occupation and protection of the territory and the maintenance of cultural and traditional practices and also, as dairy farming has shaped centuries-old cultural landscapes in these regions, creating an important basis for tourism; highlights the fact that in these regions the abandonment of milk production equates to the abandonment of agriculture;

17.

Stresses that it is essential to create a transition mechanism in the outermost regions between the elimination of quotas and the liberalisation of the markets which makes it possible to protect farmers and the sector in these regions;

18.

Requests that the safety-net measures be activated as specific indicators for dairy operations and businesses in mountainous regions, given the difference in production between mountainous dairy regions and other territories;

19.

Expresses disappointment with the low levels of implementation of Milk Package measures in outermost regions and mountainous, insular and disadvantaged areas, and underlines that it is indispensable to maintain dairy farms as viable and competitive businesses in all of the territories of the Union; considers, in this respect, that these areas must be the focus of special attention and specific studies by the Commission and Member States and that the use of short supply chains, giving preference to local production in these specific cases, must be encouraged in order to ensure continued production in these regions and to avoid abandonment of the sector; urges the Commission and the Member States furthermore to improve and strengthen the milk distribution regimes in schools, favouring short supply chains and thereby enabling the distribution of production in these regions; highlights the fact that in these areas production costs are typically close to or above farm-gate prices and considers that the current uncertainties of the supply chain are particularly detrimental to these areas, which have the strongest barriers and reduced opportunities for economies of scale; recalls that farmers in these areas depend directly and exclusively on a small number of input suppliers and buyers for their agricultural production because of their geographic isolation; stresses that support for the setting-up and activities of producer organisations should better reflect the realities of these regions; stresses that it is necessary to carry out ambitious policies to support these regions with the aid of policies for rural development, the Investment Plan and the promotion and fine-tuning of CAP aid, as permitted by the latest reform; calls on the Commission, therefore, to encourage the Member States to implement such measures, in order to enable the preservation of milk production in these regions; urges the Commission to closely monitor the evolution of dairy production in these areas and to assess the economic impact of the end of quotas on dairy farms; believes that it is necessary to allocate additional resources to the POSEI programme so as to assist milk producers in adapting to the effects resulting from the deregulation of the markets and enabling them to maintain viable and competitive dairy production relative to the rest of the European area;

20.

Emphasises the importance of using the voluntary quality term ‘mountain products’ in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012; calls on the Commission to support this designation by promoting sales;

21.

Emphasises the importance of the indigenous breeds of mountain cattle for dairy production in mountainous areas; calls on the Commission to take measures to strengthen the promotion of these mountain cattle breeds;

22.

Takes the view that EU dairy policy after the expiry of milk quotas must include means for making the most of the expansion opportunities for the EU economy in order to make milk production attractive to farmers, and considers that any future measures must strengthen its competitiveness and stability in order to facilitate sustainable growth and innovation in the agricultural sector and the quality of life in rural areas;

23.

Acknowledges the decision to spread payment over three years as regards the final sums charged to farmers under the quota regime, but notes that significant funds have been removed from the dairy sector in the last quota year as a result of the implementation of the superlevy, and therefore recommends that this revenue remain within the CAP budget to strengthen the competitiveness of the dairy sector;

24.

Calls on the Commission to present one or more regulatory tools to prevent and effectively manage new crises in the dairy sector, notably by facilitating the organisation of dairy production in terms of supply management; urges the Commission to engage in formal talks with all the stakeholders in the sector in order to achieve this;

25.

Considers that stronger competition should be used as a means of ensuring territorial balance and more balanced remuneration for producers within the dairy value chain;

26.

Highlights the fact that implementation of the Milk Package is still at an early stage; expresses disappointment, nevertheless, with the low levels of implementation of compulsory contracts, and therefore urges that these be extended to all Member States;. calls on the Commission to carry out an in-depth study of the obstacles to implementing the Milk Package and of measures that would ensure optimal use of tools made available to the Member States;

27.

Regrets the fact that the milk package was not considered a priority in the Commission’s work programme for 2015, and requests that the Commission urgently insert this priority;

28.

Regrets the fact that it is not clear from the report whether the Commission is satisfied with the implementation of the new regulatory tool and that the Commission does not quantify how many new producer organisations, participating Member States or collective negotiations are expected; notes that the effect of the new tools on milk prices is not clear either; calls in this connection for a precise list of the effects on milk prices and an accurate record of participating producer organisations;

29.

Recommends that the Commission adopt clear objectives as regards producer organisations, contracts and collective negotiations;

30.

Recalls that Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 provides that ‘in order to ensure the viable development of production and a resulting fair standard of living for dairy farmers, their bargaining power vis-à-vis processors should be strengthened, which should result in a fairer distribution of added value along the supply chain’;

31.

Notes that the contract model has not yet been implemented as envisaged, as dairy farmers are still in a weak market position, there are no minimum standards in the contracts and cooperatives are excluded from them;

32.

Stresses that strengthening and improving contractual relations by expanding to include the entire sector, and in particular large-scale distribution, helps to ensure equitable distribution of earnings along the supply chain, allowing more value to be added, and reinforces the responsibility of stakeholders to take account of the market situation and respond accordingly; stresses the importance of risk management training and education as an integral part of the agricultural curriculum in order for farmers to cope with volatility and effectively use the risk management tools available;

33.

Highlights the risk that the industry in any given Member State may introduce unfair clauses into contracts so as to offset the objective of stability in deliveries, which is necessary for ensuring the continued viability of dairy farms;

34.

Notes that the sector could further explore the potential offered by longer-term integrated supply chain contracts, forwards contracts, fixed-margin contracts, and the opportunity to ‘lock in’ a milk price reflective of production costs for a set period of time; believes that the option to make use of new instruments in contractual relations should be available and that contract mediation tools must also be made available;

35.

Highlights the important role of producer organisations (POs) and their associations in increasing the bargaining power and influence producers have in the supply chain, as well as in research and innovation, and regrets the fact that there have only been limited moves towards setting up POs, particularly in the new Member States; considers that the rules for recognition of POs should be strengthened to increase more effectively the influence of producers in the negotiation of contracts; highlights that POs can benefit from financial support under Pillar II and urges further incentivisation at EU and Member State level, for example through making further information available and reducing the administrative burden on stakeholders wishing to create and join POs and to participate in different ways in their activities and to conduct educational activities among producers about POs as a tool for helping to address imbalances in the supply chain; considers it necessary to improve the capacity for regulation and organisation of the market by POs;

36.

Defends the need to improve the provisions of the Milk Package with a view primarily to setting up producer organisations with a greater capacity for management and negotiation on the market;

37.

Notes that the establishment of POs could be promoted by providing proactive political support to encourage farmers to regard POs as appropriate instruments;

38.

Emphasises the importance of facilitating information exchanges and dialogue with producers and producer organisations (POs) in order to enable them to take into account market developments and to anticipate crises;

39.

Insists on the need for producer organisations to be of an adequate size and to be legally linked to the output of their farmer members, since merely representative POs have no real capacity to ensure compliance with the contracted quality and quantity conditions and lack interest in acting as serious negotiators with the industry;

40.

Calls for greater support for the establishment of independent producer organisations through more widespread information mechanisms and support for management activities, so as to encourage farmers to see them as effective instruments and participate therein;

41.

Invites the Commission to promote the interprofessional management tools set out in Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets;

42.

Underlines the role of cooperatives in providing long-term stability for their members; asks the Commission to facilitate sharing of best practice;

43.

Notes the significance of establishing Interbranch Organisations for ensuring transparency and sharing of best practice;

44.

Reminds the Commission of the importance of transparency across the whole supply chain if the sector is to encourage stakeholders to respond to market signals; notes the increased importance of accurate and timely information in the post-quota market;

45.

Welcomes the establishment of the Milk Market Observatory (MMO) and emphasises its importance in disseminating and analysing market data, and calls for an increased role for the MMO; recommends the definition of a market index comprising trends in product quotations, milk prices and production costs; recommends that the Commission take the necessary action to ensure that the MMO is in a position to, on the one hand, produce accurate data in real time and, on the other, communicate earlier and more frequent warnings, crisis anticipation and recommended actions based on market analysis and predictive tools to the Commission, Member States and relevant stakeholders when the market index falls below a certain level, and when the market situation so requires; considers that the information provided by the MMO should involve updates on market and price trends, data on production costs and the interactions between beef and milk production, consumption, stock situation, prices and exchanges of imported or exported milk at European level; notes that it is equally useful to integrate the monitoring of production costs and of international markets in order to identify any trends and seize export opportunities; stresses that the data should be easily accessible and user-friendly for all stakeholders;

46.

Underlines the importance of Member States providing the relevant information to the MMO and of the MMO publishing the monthly data it receives in a timely manner for the benefit of all stakeholders, and recommends that the Commission consider additional means of ensuring this information is received on time; calls on the Commission to specify the rules for data transmission by Member States in order to ensure that the information is comparable at European level;

47.

Calls on the Commission to set up comprehensively equipped separate structures for data acquisition for all agricultural sectors;

48.

Notes that, under Pillar I, optional coupled support is a tool available to assist the dairy sector, while under Pillar II producers can avail themselves of advisory services to support business decisions and sound financial management — if necessary, Member States can use insurance measures such as the Income Stabilisation Tool and can also determine the grouping and targeting within the sector of rural development measures with a higher level of aid;

49.

Calls on the sector to investigate the development of further insurance tools when the market is strong, in order to curb milk price volatility and so as not to deprive European dairy farms of income; stresses the need to study the possibility of incorporating tools aimed at risk management, such as programmes based on the protection of margins, into Pillar 1 of the CAP;

50.

Emphasises that, in applying Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013, a number of Member States opted for an incomplete and slow internal convergence process, once more favouring lowland farming, which has good working conditions;

51.

Defends the need to review the requirements for triggering the income stabilisation mechanism available within Rural Development, as it considers the demand for losses of 30 % for accessing Community aid to be excessive;

52.

Points out that global dairy demand is predicted to grow by 2 % per annum, offering opportunities for products of EU origin, but stresses that these export opportunities must be balanced by a stable domestic market, the latter representing more than 90 % of the dairy product market in Europe; notes, however, that the market is increasingly dominated by dried dairy products;

53.

Points out that the EU remains the first agricultural importer in the world and that growth in milk production for exports is reliant on the import of feed and fodder;

54.

Underlines that bilateral trade negotiations may represent strategic opportunities for the EU dairy sector, in connection with which it calls on the Commission to engage more in opening new markets in third countries and removing trade barriers, and urges the Commission to take due regard of ‘protected designation of origin’ (PDO), ‘protected geographical indications’ (PGI) and ‘traditional speciality guaranteed’ (TSG) concerns during trade negotiations, subject to the preservation and enhancement of European quality and health and safety standards in production and in the supply of products to consumers;

55.

Stresses the continuing need to identify and develop new markets, increase the EU global market share, secure fair access for EU exporters and stimulate sustainable export growth; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to take the necessary action and to participate more actively in the identification of new export markets; takes the view that future opportunities must be explored by improving commercial relations with third countries and dynamising the dairy industry, and emphasises the importance of being aware of the consumption trends on these markets in order to build the capacity for timely responses to future changes;

56.

Notes furthermore that EU companies face competition from a few powerful global exporters (including New Zealand, the United States and Australia) which have historically had access to Asian markets and which have a decisive influence on the price of dairy products on the global market;

57.

Points out that the dairy sector could benefit from increased promotion initiatives on domestic and third-country markets under new Promotional Measures and urges producers to participate in the new campaigns after the entry into force in 2016 of the new regulations on promotion, taking into account that an increase in EU financial support is planned;

58.

Stresses that the need for the sector’s greatest potential for creating value does not lie solely in the production of unprocessed products and considers that full use should be made of research measures to develop innovative high-value dairy products in high-growth markets, such as medicinal nutritional products and nutritional products for infants, the elderly and athletes;

59.

Notes that the European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI) under the Horizon 2020 programme can support innovative projects contributing to a sustainable and highly productive dairy sector in order to meet the global demand in high-value dairy products;

60.

Underlines the importance of reinforcing the aid scheme for the distribution of milk in educational establishments, encouraging the participation of POs and giving priority to local dairy products and short supply chains, with a view to contributing to the promotion of healthy eating habits among European consumers;

61.

Notes that the sector has so far not engaged with the ‘protected designation of origin’ (PDO), ‘protected geographical indications’ (PGI) and ‘traditional speciality guaranteed’ (TSG) schemes in a meaningful and equal manner across all Member States; calls on the Commission to simplify access to, and the administrative requirements for the approval of, these schemes for small producers and businesses, to reduce the administrative burden associated with the application process, retaining them as the quality benchmark for European products, unquestioned among EU export markets, and to undertake targeted promotion of marketing activities for these products;

62.

Calls on the Commission to simplify the rules concerning the regulation of supply of cheese with a ‘protected designation of origin’ or ‘protected geographical indication’, in particular as regards the minimum conditions required for the approval of those schemes;

63.

Urges the Commission to publish as soon as possible the report referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, in relation to an impact analysis of the implementation of the mandatory indication of country of origin or place of provenance of milk and dairy products; regrets that the Community Executive has not yet prepared this report, which was to be submitted by 31 December 2014;

64.

Stresses that existing ‘safety-net’ measures such as public intervention and private storage aid alone are not sufficient tools for addressing persistent volatility or a crisis in the milk sector; adds that the intervention prices are too low, have no connection with current market prices any more and have proved to be ineffective in guaranteeing adequate and stable farm-gate prices in the long term;

65.

Reminds the Commission of its obligation under Article 219 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 not only to address actual market disturbance, but also to take immediate action to prevent it, including in cases where action would prevent such threats from materialising, continuing or turning into a more severe or prolonged disturbance, or where delaying immediate action would threaten to cause or aggravate the disturbance or would increase the extent of the measures which would later be necessary to address the threat or disturbance or would be detrimental to production or market conditions;

66.

Calls on the Commission to engage with stakeholders in the sector and to implement more responsive and realistic safety-net provisions based on the recommendations of the MMO, which provide safety in crises in which a substantial decrease in milk prices and a simultaneous substantial rise in commodity prices have a severe impact on the margin of revenue for farmers; calls for the intervention to be updated to reflect production costs and adapted as the market changes;

67.

Calls on the Commission to implement more responsive and realistic safety-net provisions, and for the intervention price to better reflect real production costs and real market prices, and to be adapted as the market changes; asks the Commission, therefore, to immediately adapt the intervention prices; acknowledges, furthermore, that the export refund should be restored temporarily in the case of a market crisis based on objective criteria;

68.

Calls on the Commission to work together with stakeholders to fix indicators on production costs which take into account energy costs, fertilisers, animal feed, salaries, rent and other key input costs, and to revise the reference prices accordingly; calls on the Commission, furthermore, to work together with stakeholders to define a market index comprising the trend in product quotations, milk prices and production costs;

69.

Underlines that current experience of the Russian embargo shows that it is desirable to have guidelines that are discussed between the Member States, the Commission and Parliament and which serve as a guide for the activation of measures;

70.

Underlines the importance of a more responsive and realistic crisis instrument, and recommends that the Commission, together with Parliament, as co-legislator, engage with the sector on the possibility of using risk-management instruments such as the futures markets to take advantage of the volatility in the sector in order to increase its competitiveness; considers that new income stabilisation instruments should also be studied, such as income insurance or implementing a dairy Margin Protection Programme;

71.

Requests that the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States and participants from the dairy sector, develop effective and appropriate instruments to safeguard against sudden significant falls in the price of milk;

72.

Stresses that dairy producers, especially small-scale dairy producers, are particularly vulnerable to imbalances in the supply chain, in particular owing to fluctuating demand, rising production costs and decreasing farm-gate prices, but also to the economic priorities in each Member State; considers that the downward pressure on prices by retailers from own-brand labelling and the persistent use of liquid milk as a ‘loss leader’ by retailers undermines the work and investment of producers in the dairy sector and devalues the end product for the consumer; defends the need to introduce codes of good practice among the various participants in the food supply chain; stresses the need to find mechanisms that effectively protect farmers from abuse by industry and distributors and their dominant position in the retail market, and asks the Commission to present its proposal on the containment of unfair trading practices as soon as possible and to consider a sector-specific approach to competition law and unfair trading practices;

73.

Considers that unfair commercial practices severely restrict the sector’s ability to invest and adapt, and that it is necessary to combat them at both EU and Member State level;

74.

Notes that dairy producers will be in an even weaker position without a crisis programme, while the milk industry and large corporate food groups will get more power;

75.

Calls for wider inclusion of dairy farmers and their organisations into food supply chain management mechanisms, groups and initiatives;

76.

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

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/17

—

having regard to Article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (1),

—

having regard to Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (2),

—

having regard to Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (3),

—

having regard to the respective opinions of the Committee on International Trade on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement (COM(2011)0896), on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (COM(2011)0895), and on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the award of concession contracts (COM(2011)0897),

—

having regard to the Commission’s communications entitled ‘Mobilising private and public investment for recovery and long term structural change: developing Public Private Partnerships’ (COM(2009)0615), ‘A Stronger Role of the Private Sector in Achieving Inclusive and Sustainable Growth in Developing Countries’ (COM(2014)0263), ‘Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2010)2020), ‘Trade, Growth and World Affairs — Trade Policy as a core component of the EU’s 2020 strategy’ (COM(2010)0612), ‘Towards a job rich recovery’ (COM(2012)0173) and ‘A renewed EU strategy 2011-2014 for Corporate Social Responsibility’ (COM(2011)0681),

—

having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2011 on a New Trade Policy for Europe under the Europe 2020 Strategy (4), of 6 February 2013 on Corporate social responsibility: promoting society’s interests and a route to sustainable and inclusive recovery (5), and of 26 October 2006 on public-private partnerships and Community law on public procurement and concessions (6),

—

having regard to the 2010 report by EIM for the Commission entitled ‘Internationalisation of European SMEs’,

—

having regard to paragraph 5 of the Commission’s communication entitled ‘Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015’ (COM(2010)0491), to the UN Women’s Empowerment Principles launched in March 2010, to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions of 8 December 2009, and to paragraph 46 of the final document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Río+20),

—

having regard to the OECD Recommendation of May 2012 on Principles for Public Governance of Public-Private Partnerships (7), the 1997 OECD Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, updated in May 2011 (8),

—

having regard to the relevant ILO Conventions,

—

having regard to the UN Economic Commission for Europe’s 2008 Guidebook on Promoting Good Governance in Public-Private Partnerships (9),

—

having regard to the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Legislative Guide on Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects of 2001 (10), and to the papers presented at the UNCITRAL International Colloquium on Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) held in Vienna on 2 and 3 May 2013,

—

having regard to the CAF report of 2010 entitled ‘Infraestructura pública y participación privada: conceptos y experiencias en América y España’,

—

having regard to the ‘Public-Private Partnerships Reference Guide: Version 2.0’ of July 2014 produced by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the World Bank Group and the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) (11),

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A8-0182/2015),

A.

whereas countries’ societies and economic structures, and the dynamism thereof, benefit from environments which allow interaction between the public and private sectors, and cooperation between public and private entities, for example through joint initiatives and ventures;

B.

whereas, although public-private partnerships (PPPs) are a long-term tool used in government policies at international, national, regional and local level, there is no internationally recognised definition and comprehensive regulatory framework for them; whereas in practice PPPs are understood to refer to a ‘broad and varied spectrum of cooperative relationships between public actors (governments, agencies, and international organisations, or a combination thereof) and private actors (companies or not-for-profit entities)’ and usually imply supply by the private sector of infrastructure or assets traditionally provided by governments;

C.

whereas PPPs are important as a vehicle for economic growth, innovation, competitiveness and job creation, both in the single market and abroad, and have a strategic role in modernising infrastructure, in particular energy, water, road and digital infrastructure; whereas EU companies are well equipped to compete for and operate such arrangements;

D.

whereas PPP arrangements may take various forms, and single market legislation sets high procedural standards; whereas this legislation was revised and consolidated in Directives 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU on public procurement, in Directive 2014/23/EU on concessions, and in guidance on institutionalised PPPs;

E.

whereas public-private partnerships for the provision of infrastructure, goods and basic services are technically complex;

F.

whereas the global economic crisis has severely affected all mature, emerging and developing countries since 2007, and has had an impact on budgetary policies and on the access of both institutional and private entities, especially SMEs, to the funds needed to carry out projects, affecting the development of infrastructure and other capital-intensive projects and the provision of basic services;

G.

whereas a growing number of governments, owing to public budgetary constraints exacerbated by the economic and public debt crisis, are adopting innovative solutions such as PPPs which, if implemented appropriately, can help improve the costs, effectiveness, efficiency and quality of public services and ensure the timely delivery of public infrastructure, by an appropriate involvement of public and private actors;

H.

whereas the positive impact of PPPs is derived from improved delivery of projects, a good benefit-cost ratio, the possibility for long-term financing of costs, the stimulus provided for innovation and research, and a more flexible and skilled management environment;

I.

whereas the liberalisation of trade and investment is not an end in itself but a tool which should create wealth and help improve the quality of life for the world’s population, and whereas there is, in this context, an opportunity to develop innovative policies — together with new instruments, such as the newly designed financial instruments, and a network of free trade agreements useful to third-country governments for guaranteeing the provision of infrastructures, goods and services of general interest — while providing or paving the way for further participation by EU companies in investment projects abroad that bring together private companies and public entities;

J.

whereas PPPs are characterised by a long life-cycle, sometimes extending from 10 to 30 years, and whereas the life-cycle of PPPs should be meaningful and consistent with the pursued objectives in terms of work, goods and services to be provided, without artificially distorting competition or creating higher costs and an unnecessary burden for public administrations and tax-payers;

K.

whereas EU trade policy should neither encourage nor discourage the sovereign decision on whether or not to use a PPP, but, once the decision has been taken, the EU has an obligation to ensure that our large, medium-sized and small enterprises and micro-enterprises have the best possible access to procurement markets in the partner country, bringing added value to the local community, in line with the principles of openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness and policy coherence;

L.

whereas the fact that the private sector may undervalue social infrastructure and the cover it provides, the considerable costs associated with providing infrastructure, the position of some sectors as natural monopolies or their strategic importance mean that in many cases open competition and privatisation are not the most suitable policy option where the public interest must prevail;

M.

whereas the purpose of PPPs is therefore to combine the best of both worlds — the provision of services and infrastructure of general interest, but through enhanced participation by the private sector rather than through privatisation processes;

N.

whereas many emerging and developing countries face a mismatch between the dynamism of private businesses and the lack of reliable public infrastructure; whereas such gaps (which are striking in India or Brazil) have undermined potential growth, limiting export/import capacities or disturbing production lines owing to the absence of sufficient port infrastructure, deficiencies in internal transport (railways, freight or highways) or dysfunctional power generation units and power distribution grids; whereas these gaps also have a negative impact on human welfare (owing to scarcity of sewage and water distribution networks); whereas PPPs allow integrated solutions whereby a partner or a consortium provides ‘building’ (construction, engineering and architecture services), ‘financing’ (injection of private funds, at least to pre-finance a project) and ‘exploitation’ (maintenance, surveillance and management services);

O.

whereas intergovernmental organisations have also used PPPs to devote aid to least-developed countries through partnerships operating in the field of development and cooperation: the World Bank, regional reconstruction banks, the Food and Agriculture Organisation, the World Health Organisation and the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), to name but a few, have used PPPs to implement actions; whereas, as regards geographical focus, the USA, Australia, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and other Asian and Latin American countries (led by Chile) have experience of PPPs; whereas OECD countries (Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain) also have relevant legislation; whereas the UK has the most developed programme in respect of PPPs (with the Private Finance Initiative accounting for around 20 % of public investment); whereas the EU leads the PPP infrastructure market, concentrating more than 45 % of the nominal value of PPPs;

P.

whereas PPPs have been used in the context of the Structural Funds, enlargement, the trans-European networks, Joint Technology Initiatives, Europe 2020, R&D (factories for the future, energy-efficient buildings, the green vehicles initiative, the sustainable process industry, photonics, robotics, high-performing computing, and 5G networks), e-learning, research projects with universities and other programmes in the health field (such as the innovative medicines initiative); whereas the European Investment Bank and the European PPP Expertise Centre have carried out projects in the EU, its neighbourhood and beyond; whereas the EU has also contributed through the Global Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fund; whereas the European Fund for Strategic Investments intends to support a number of PPPs in the EU, in which companies from trading partners may participate;

Q.

whereas the EU has hitherto kept its public procurement markets wide open to international competition and has put in place rules seeking to ensure genuine and fair competition on the single market and to enable international investors to compete on an equal footing; whereas inside the EU there is no discrimination on grounds of foreign ownership or control, and whereas companies from abroad may set up a local base in order to participate in PPPs;

R.

whereas EU free trade agreements include provisions which pave the way for companies to bid in PPPs via market access and pre-establishment; whereas the treatment and possibilities open in respect of Korea, Colombia/Peru, Central America, Singapore and Canada (and Vietnam and Japan) are defined differently and specifically; whereas there has to be a relatively flexible approach as regards negotiations with different partners; whereas, however, the aim must continue to be to help foster social and economic development, environmental sustainability, democracy and good governance, the observance of human rights and the promotion of internationally recognised standards of protection, as well as the creation of decent jobs; whereas, at the multilateral level, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) also establish a number of commitments, as may other plurilateral instruments such as the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA); whereas the environment in the EU is therefore becoming more competitive;

1.

Stresses the need to stimulate decent job creation, competitiveness and productivity inside the EU and in third countries through innovative policies and new instruments designed to encourage the activity of economic actors in order to re-launch sustainable growth, including through investments outside the Single Market; believes that PPPs could be — as one of several options — a potential source of growth for EU companies and, at the same time, be useful for our partner third countries, as these PPPs could provide infrastructures, goods and services of general interest;

2.

Recalls that PPPs should bring high added value to citizens and consumers, ensure quality services and/or goods, and provide concrete competitive and economic advantages for public administrations, both at government and local level, while avoiding creating additional burdens or losses for the public sector;

3.

Urges the Commission to promote a definition of PPPs that can gain international recognition as a long-term relationship between public entities and private investors geared to the provision of high-quality, accessible public services and infrastructures on the basis of terms and conditions clearly laid down in contracts, compliance with which may easily be assessed by means of indicators ensuring that such compliance is rewarded with fair and appropriate remuneration;

4.

Notes that both SMEs and larger companies alike can provide unique private-sector know-how, experience and good practices, as well as networks involving public authorities in non-EU countries, effectively helping to deliver on sustainable development policies; considers that SMEs can best achieve their potential if they create networks and perform at the global level, and enter markets outside Europe, inter alia through PPPs; calls, in this respect, on the Commission to promote and encourage the formation of consortia and other forms of cooperation between large companies and SMEs in order to facilitate access for the latter to PPP-projects;

5.

Stresses that the development of PPPs must take into account, in particular, the challenges for EU-based SMEs competing on international markets under a PPP, and the need to ensure that SMEs gain concrete, fair and reciprocal access, notably in the utilities sectors, as set out in Directive 2014/25/EU; highlights, in this respect, the importance of specific rules allowing for cluster or grouped tendering by SMEs and the use of open and transparent subcontracting chains;

6.

Considers it regrettable that, so far, the EU has kept its government procurement markets largely open to international competition, while EU companies still face substantial barriers abroad; calls on the Commission to guarantee that EU trade agreements contain instruments for our companies, especially SMEs, to compete abroad on equal terms with foreign national companies; demands as well clear regulation of, and easy access to information concerning, tenders and awarding criteria, and the lifting of discriminatory and unjustified trade barriers in the field of government procurement, services or investment (such as fiscal discrimination, regulatory barriers to the establishment of branches or subsidiaries, and restrictions on access to financing); calls on our partner countries to apply principles of open government in order to guarantee transparency and avoid conflicts of interest, and to use PPPs practice with caution, taking into account not only cost-benefit analyses and the viability of the projects, but also the financial and technical capacity of public authorities to supervise services or infrastructure delivery in line with general public interest;

7.

Acknowledges that PPP-related challenges can be overcome through principles of good governance, such as transparency and clarity of rules, where the following issues are key: the award, execution and evaluation of projects from the initial stages; the modelling and definition of risk-transfer (in particular, the evaluation of medium- and long-term cost-effectiveness); the participation of stakeholders and civil society organisations; the fight against corruption and fraud; the financial and technical capacity of the responsible administration to adequately plan and supervise the implementation of contracts; and the reinforcement of legal certainty, within a framework that guarantees exercise by the public authorities of their legitimate power; invites the Commission and the Member States (which are vital parties in this regard) to promote these principles and the related good practices beyond our borders;

8.

Recalls that PPPs are characterised by their high value and technical complexity, and by the parties’ long-term commitment; notes that they consequently require appropriate levels of both flexibility and procedural safeguards to ensure transparency, non-discrimination and equal treatment;

9.

Recalls that there are a number of inherent risks in infrastructure projects (in particular those relating to building, the environment, telecommunications and energy networks), and that the government, through PPPs, transfers part of the risk to the private contractor so that both can reap the benefits but also share the risks and responsibilities of such projects; stresses, furthermore, that adequate risk sharing is essential in order to reduce the costs of a project and ensure its successful implementation and viability;

10.

Recalls that the delivery of high-quality, accessible and cost-effective services to the public, both inside and outside the EU, is an essential condition to ensure successful implementation and viability of PPPs; recalls that the complex choice of models and contracts has an impact on a project’s evolution; warns that, at some stages, PPPs have been used merely to achieve the objective of complying formally with public-deficit objectives; highlights the need for an adequate institutional framework combining political commitment, good governance and adequate underlying legislation to guarantee that PPPs offer better quality and broad coverage of services to the citizens; stresses, in this regard, the importance of an adequate evaluation of the profile and past experiences of the companies involved to determine the quality of the services they have provided and whether their business conduct has been responsible;

11.

Stresses that EU trade, investment and development policies are interlinked and that Article 208 of the Lisbon Treaty establishes the principle of policy coherence for development, requiring that the objectives of development cooperation be taken into account in policies that are likely to affect developing countries; emphasises as well the importance of ensuring that EU investment policies are oriented to financial choices that include a real assessment of the social impact;

12.

Stresses the increasing potential of PPPs, as one option among others, to foster innovative solutions and mobilise long-term private finance and domestic resources for development objectives, given that massive investments are required in developing countries — in terms of infrastructure, water supply and energy — that the public sector will not be able to provide on its own, and the majority of which would profit from private sector involvement; believes that PPPs can also generate innovation in technologies and business models, and build mechanisms for holding the private sector accountable; points, however, to instances in which the participation of the private sector in PPPs in some developing countries has not delivered the expected results; notes that, in consequence, a contribution of technical assistance is needed to reinforce the legal and institutional frameworks in which PPPs are developed, in particular as regards the capacity to evaluate, plan and supervise the execution of such projects in a proper manner, and provide the option for public partners to claim compensation from private companies in case of contractual non-compliance;

13.

Notes that PPPs are high on the development agenda and are increasingly being promoted as a means of closing the infrastructure financing gap in developed and developing countries alike;

14.

Urges the Commission — as it has indicated its wish to extend considerably the use of blending in future years — to implement the recommendations made in the European Court of Auditors Special Report on the use of blending, and to evaluate the mechanism of blending loans and grants, particularly in terms of development and financial additionality, transparency and accountability;

15.

Calls on EU bodies to encourage EU companies participating in PPPs in third countries, in particular in less-developed countries, to work in accordance with the principle of policy coherence, in line with existing OECD Guidelines for multinationals, so that development cooperation objectives are taken into consideration; calls on the Commission to encourage sustainable investments, taking into account development objectives by prioritising the long-term development of domestic economies in particular, and to promote projects focused on environmental protection, poverty reduction, education, waste management or the use of renewable energies, for instance;

16.

Stresses that in the area of development aid, PPPs are an effective way to spend European funds while supporting EU priorities and coherence with other policies; calls for greater Commission involvement and investment in the development PPPs, and for PPPs to be used as a vehicle to allow the extension of the Union’s limited development budget;

17.

Underlines the fact that private investment and finance are likely to be the key engine for sustainable growth, which is projected to be approximately 5 % in developing countries in the coming years; recognises that such private funding can help support local economies and companies and provide decent jobs, and therefore lead to poverty eradication, provided that foreign direct investment is properly regulated and linked to concrete improvements in the partner countries’ economies, e.g. through technology transfers and training opportunities for the local labour force; considers, under these circumstances, that PPPs may benefit the LDCs, as the disproportionate investment risk does not sufficiently incentivise private investments; emphasises that future PPPs within the post-2015 development agenda should pursue poverty reduction and other sustainable development goals, and should be aligned with partner countries’ national development plans;

18.

Notes that properly structured and efficiently implemented, PPPs can bring many benefits, including innovation, greater efficiency in the use of resources, and quality assurance and scrutiny; notes as well that PPPs in developing countries need to be assessed on the basis of their capacity to deliver development outcomes, and that a fair distribution of the risk burden between public and private sectors is needed; stresses that PPPs in developing countries have until now mostly been concentrated in the energy and telecommunications sectors while private engagement in social infrastructure remains rare; encourages, therefore, those PPPs that have as their primary objective the achievement of sustainable development goals;

19.

Calls for increased technical assistance — including the training of local staff and sharing of technology — to the governments of the partner countries in order to boost their capacity to claim ownership of the PPPs and assume their share of responsibility for the management of PPP projects, i.a. by helping them set up banking systems and tax administrations capable of providing financial governance for, and managing, public and private funds; points out that past experience shows that poorly negotiated PPP contracts can, in some instances, add to state indebtedness, and calls for the regulatory framework on responsible financing to be set up; calls on the Commission to consider the possibility of providing developing countries with technical assistance and advice on how to prepare and implement EU standards on their markets;

20.

Strongly supports the effective and comprehensive dissemination and implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) within and outside the EU, and emphasises the need to take all necessary policy and legislative measures to address gaps in the effective implementation of the UNGPs, including in the area of access to justice;

21.

Stresses that development agencies must ensure that public development finance is used to support local economic networks in developing countries and is not diverted to promote private firms and multinationals from the donor countries; stresses, in particular, that PPPs should be aimed at building the capacity of domestic micro, small and medium-sized enterprises;

22.

Recalls that the European Union is committed to promoting gender equality and ensuring gender mainstreaming in all its actions; calls for the gender dimension be integrated into the planning and delivery of PPPs, e.g. by using gender-disaggregated data and analyses for targeted investments, and by establishing in contracts key performance indicators for benefits to women; calls, in this context, for increased support to local SMEs, and especially to female entrepreneurs, so as to enable them to gain from private, sector-led growth;

23.

Calls on the Commission to work towards gaining substantial market access commitments internationally in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and in ongoing bilateral negotiations with third countries, in a positive and reciprocal approach that allows for international competition, in order to redress asymmetries between the EU and other trading partners as regards the level of openness of government procurement markets; asks the Commission to work to eliminate administrative, procedural and technical barriers that prevent EU companies from taking part in foreign PPPs;

24.

Calls on the Commission, while negotiating trade and investment agreements with other countries, to support the dismantling of barriers for EU companies, in particular SMEs, so that they can enter PPPs in these countries and support the professional mobility of EU citizens in these states, and so that they can compete on equal footing with domestic companies and companies from third countries;

25.

Calls on the Commission to monitor EU businesses abroad, to draw conclusions on success stories, models and good practices, with a view to drawing up guidelines, and to consider creating virtual documentation centres or observatories to facilitate access for EU companies, especially SMEs, to information on PPP opportunities; calls on the Commission to encourage the creation of user-friendly platforms and networks so as to promote a structured dialogue between stakeholders, and to provide technical support as regards the legal framework and expected challenges; asks the Commission to undertake a study on the effects of the Union’s FTAs and their implementation on access to foreign PPPs by EU companies; believes that such a study could give insight into the concrete impacts of FTAs in the PPP field and, eventually, allow the identification of barriers that have not yet been addressed;

26.

Calls on the Commission to promote the use of clear and comprehensive accounting rules at international level in order to reduce the uncertainties associated with PPPs, while, at the same time, promoting sound budgetary policies and project sustainability;

27.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that EU-backed bodies such as the European Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) and the Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) can also access and share information with SMEs on how to enter PPPs in states outside the EU, and on how to promote small and medium-sized companies’ participation in PPPs in third countries;

28.

Underlines that to attract cross-border private-sector funds into PPPs, it is paramount to provide sufficient assurances that these long-term investments will benefit from a clear, stable and secure environment with good governance, legal certainty, transparency, equal treatment, non-discrimination and effective dispute settlement; calls on the Commission and the Council to work together to this end in the competent international fora, and in international financial institutions, so as to ensure that the necessary legal framework in this area exists and is transparent, democratic, inclusive, effective and cost-efficient;

29.

Is convinced that increased participation by EU companies in large-scale international PPPs could lead to substantial benefits in terms of the creation of decent jobs, productivity, competitiveness, technological capabilities and innovation development in the EU; recalls that the 2010 Commission study on the ‘Internationalisation of European SMEs’ highlights the positive link between internationalisation and innovation in terms of products, services and processes;

30.

Stresses that the work in this area must take into account, in particular, the challenges for EU-based SMEs in competing on international markets as parts of PPPs, and the need to ensure that SMEs gain concrete and fair access; highlights, in this regard, the importance of specific rules allowing for cluster or grouped tendering by SMEs and the use of open and transparent subcontracting chains; believes that SMEs should be encouraged to take part either as sub-contractors or as part of consortiums tendering for contracts;

31.

Recalls the achievements made in the EU through the use of PPPs, in infrastructure development as well as in vanguard fields of technology, research, e-learning and other high-added-value sectors, and encourages the Commission to identify those projects which have yielded the best results in the EU, and to promote participation by all types of EU companies, especially SMEs, in such initiatives abroad;

32.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European Investment Bank.

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/25

—

having regard to the Commission report on the implementation of the provisions concerning producer organisations, operational funds and operational programmes in the fruit and vegetables sector since the 2007 reform (COM(2014)0112),

—

having regard to the Council conclusions of 16 June 2014 on the aforementioned Commission report,

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 March 2014 on the future of Europe’s horticulture sector — strategies for growth (2),

—

having regard to the study entitled ‘The EU fruit and vegetables sector: Overview and post 2013 CAP perspective’, carried out under the auspices of the European Parliament in 2011,

—

having regard to the two studies entitled ‘Towards new rules for the EU’s fruit and vegetables sector’, which were carried out by the Assemblée des Régions Européennes Légumières et Horticoles (AREFLH) and the University of Wageningen respectively for a European Parliament workshop held on 22 January 2015,

—

having regard to the Commission communication on tackling unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food supply chain (COM(2014)0472),

—

having regard to the study entitled ‘Comparative analysis of risk management tools supported by 2014 (US) Farm Bill and the CAP 2014-2020’, which was carried out under the auspices of the European Parliament in 2014,

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the opinion of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0170/2015),

A.

whereas since the 1990s Union policy for the fruit and vegetable sector has been centred on strengthening the role of producer organisations (POs);

B.

whereas the 2007 reform aimed to strengthen the fruit and vegetable producer organisations (POs) by providing a wider range of tools to make it possible, among other measures, to prevent and manage market risks, as well as enhancing and concentrating supply, improving quality and competitiveness, adapting supply to match the market, and providing technical support for environment-friendly production;

C.

whereas producer organisations are subject to a number of restrictions compared to private commercial firms, such as restrictions on the use of investments relating to the revenue structure or the need to sell;

D.

whereas it is essential to support the fruit and vegetable sector throughout the entire territory of the Union, given its importance in terms of added value and employment, and given the health benefits that it presents through healthy and balanced diets;

E.

whereas Union support for POs and for associations of producer organisations (APOs) is aimed at strengthening the competitiveness of the sector, supporting innovation, increasing productivity, enhancing promotion, improving the bargaining position of farmers and restoring balance in the food supply chain, whilst also integrating environmental concerns in the production and marketing of fruit and vegetables and giving due consideration to the situation of individual producers;

F.

whereas incentives were created to encourage mergers between POs and between associations of producer organisations (APOs), as well as transnational cooperation, in order to develop the bargaining power of POs in the distribution chain;

G.

whereas, at EU-level, the majority of fruit and vegetable producers are small or medium-sized holdings;

H.

whereas, according to a 2011 study on the fruit and vegetable (F&V) regime carried out for the European Parliament, POs should be encouraged since ‘collective action at producer level and effective coordination within the chain appear to be pre-conditions for any successful strategy in coping with declining relative producer prices’;

I.

whereas POs and APOs in the fruit and vegetable sector may set up an operational fund to finance operational programmes approved by the Member States;

J.

whereas such funds are financed by contributions from the PO’s members or the PO itself and by EU financial assistance, and this cofinancing fosters commitment on the part of beneficiaries and helps ensure that they make good use of the assistance, as well as having a multiplier effect;

K.

whereas financial support under the old common agricultural policy (CAP) for the investments of newly established F&V POs, ceased by the reform of 2013, was of crucial importance, especially in the central, eastern and southern European Member States, overseas territories and islands;

L.

noting:

M.

whereas these figures for the Union as a whole are averages reflecting highly divergent situations between Member States — or even markedly different situations within individual Member States; whereas these situations, which reflect different starting points in the drive towards setting up POs, are attributable to historical factors based on the greater or lesser degree of willingness shown by farmers in setting up POs, to the structure of agricultural holdings, to different market conditions and administrative barriers, to the inadequacy of the support currently being provided and also to the fact that in many Member States this sector is dominated by small producers;

N.

whereas the public consultation on policy options and their impact assessment, carried out by the Commission between 4 June and 9 September 2012, concerning the review of the EU regime for the fruit and vegetable sector, reveals that the majority of respondents are in favour of the regime continuing, subject to some specific refinements;

O.

whereas the regions in which producers have achieved the highest levels of competitiveness, profitability, internationalisation, quality, and environmental sustainability are those in which the degree of organisation of production is the highest;

P.

whereas the organisation rate among producers remains low on average and considerably below the EU average in certain Member States, although this general assertion is subject to qualification depending on the degree of modernisation of the production and marketing of each area; whereas the suspension and de-recognition of POs, which causes uncertainty among producers, is a factor that contributes to the low average;

Q.

whereas, although national financial aid (Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013) has been an important financial instrument in terms of concentrating supply, there is a need to enhance its effectiveness;

R.

whereas the role played by POs in opening up new markets, promoting consumption or investing in innovation has a very positive impact on the F&V sector as a whole;

S.

whereas, in the EU, the F&V sector accounts for 18 % of the total value of agricultural production, uses only 3 % of the cultivated land and is worth more than EUR 50 billion;

T.

whereas the F&V supply chain has an estimated turnover of more than EUR 120 billion, with approximately 550 000 employees and acts as an economic multiplier at European level, stimulating both demand and the creation of added value in other economic sectors;

U.

whereas the total EU agricultural area cropped with F&V fell by 6 % between 2003 and 2010, indicating that farmers have switched to other crops or, in many cases, have given up farming; whereas, according to the 2015 AREFLH study, this decline was greater in southern Europe than in northern Europe;

V.

whereas the volume of fruit and vegetable production has also fallen in recent years, whilst its value has tended to remain stable in real terms, reaching EUR 48,25 billion in 2012, despite which it has not been able to offer farm gate prices in line with production costs and wages;

W.

whereas the deficit in consumption represents a major problem for the fruit and vegetable sectors, with the last few years having witnessed a loss of production; recalling the data from Freshfel Europe which indicate that consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables in the EU-28 stood at 387 g a day per capita in 2012, a decrease of 8,7 % as compared with the average for the 2007-11 period; whereas this decline seems to reflect long-term trends towards greater consumption of processed foods and the impact of the economic crisis;

X.

whereas there are 22 million overweight children within the European Union, while adolescents are consuming on average just 30 % to 50 % of the recommended daily allowance of fruit and vegetables;

Y.

whereas the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends a minimum daily intake of 400 g of fruit and vegetables for the prevention of chronic diseases such as heart diseases, cancer, diabetes and obesity, the latter in particular among children; whereas, to date, only four EU Member States have met this recommendation;

Z.

whereas in 2012 the EU had a trade deficit in F&V, largely due to the fact that it imports significantly more fruit than it exports, because of high production costs;

AA.

whereas the 2015 AREFLH study points out that the EU market is relatively open to imports, whilst European exports face considerable tariff and non-tariff barriers in trading partners, which prevents exports from diversifying; whereas, although imports from third countries compete directly with similar EU products, the same environmental, food safety and social standards are not, in some instances, applied in their cultivation;

AB.

whereas market crises occur frequently in the F&V sector since even small production surpluses can cause sharp falls in producer prices; whereas F&V are mostly perishable products and must therefore be sold quickly, leaving farmers in this sector in a structurally weak bargaining position vis-à-vis major retailers and processors;

AC.

whereas the crisis caused by the Russian ban has had, and will in future have, significant negative effects on the F&V sector, with producers in this sector sustaining some of the greatest losses; whereas the importance of the existence of strong POs organised in such a way as to be able to collectively deal with unexpected and adverse situations must be underlined, supported by adequate Community instruments adapted to the severity of each crisis or, if necessary, by activating the exceptional measures envisaged in Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013;

AD.

whereas the Commission’s report recognises that the F&V regime’s crisis prevention instruments have been little used since the 2007 reform and that they have proven insufficient to mitigate the consequences of serious crises such as that of E. coli or the current one resulting from the Russian ban; whereas, in the majority of cases, apart from withdrawals from the market, they are administratively difficult to apply due to the unclear regulations in that respect;

AE.

whereas the School Fruit Scheme, under which a number of local and seasonal fruits and vegetables are used, has attracted interest and been successful;

AF.

whereas the possibility of making the repayment of capital and interest on loans taken out to finance crisis prevention and management measures eligible for EU financial aid has, under the operational programmes, been an important instrument for managing market uncertainty;

AG.

whereas the Commission’s report identifies complexity of rules and lack of legal certainty as weaknesses of the current F&V regime; whereas Commissioner Hogan has committed himself to improving the regime in the first year of his term, taking into account cultural differences and contrasts in market realities between different Member States and the need to boost competitiveness and the innovative strength of the sector;

AH.

whereas the University of Wageningen study concludes that diverging interpretations of EU implementing legislation have created legal uncertainty for national administrations and POs, resulting in an increased administrative burden and fear of risk taking and creating disincentives for the setting up of POs;

AI.

whereas clear and predictable audit procedures are essential for the functioning of the F&V regime; whereas overlap in consecutive audits should be avoided and follow-up audits should not be carried out before clearance of accounts has given a definite decision on a previous audit, in order to ensure that Member States do not have to make larger corrections than are necessary;

AJ.

whereas Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products has already taken account of a number of elements featuring in the Commission communication, and whereas the rules currently in place in the European Union need to be stabilised;

AK.

whereas proportionality should play an essential part in reducing legal uncertainty within the F&V regime, ensuring that a PO as a whole is not prejudiced by the infringements of single offenders;

AL.

whereas POs frequently encounter difficulties in finding and training managers with the necessary skills for carrying out commercial activities in the competitive environment of the agribusiness sector; whereas the Commission’s report states that spending on training and advisory services by POs has been low;

AM.

whereas the farming population in the EU-28 is ageing rapidly and whereas, on average, there is only one farmer under 35 for every nine farmers over the age of 55;

1.

Welcomes the Commission’s report, which provides a balanced picture of the evolution of the F&V regime since the 2007 reform, confirms the validity of the basic organisational structure for this sector and identifies areas where progress has been achieved, such as the increased concentration of POs that is improving the sector’s positioning in the food supply chain, whilst also referring to problems that persist;

2.

Is of the opinion that support must compensate for the negative consequences — from the market point of view — of the restrictions imposed on producer organisations;

3.

Welcomes the measures in the EU F&V regime which are intended to increase market orientation among EU growers, encourage innovation, promote F&V, increase growers’ competitiveness and improve marketing, product quality and the environmental aspects of production, through the provision of support to POs, PO associations and the recognition of inter-branch organisations, also promoting the formation of clusters that will generate new income streams, to be channelled into new investments;

4.

Welcomes the fact that the new CAP retains the F&V regime, while acknowledging that existing instruments have not always been effective, as recognised by the Commission in its public consultation document entitled ‘A Review of the EU Regime for the Fruit and Vegetables Sector’, and therefore supports the work of the Newcastle Group aimed at improving the F&V regime, which should take account of the specific nature of the legal arrangements governing cooperatives in the Member States, so as not to limit the creation of new POs, while respecting the fact that growers may opt to remain outside the PO system;

5.

Calls on the Commission to intensify efforts to tackle unfair trading practices (UTPs) in the food supply chain which negatively impact producer returns, depress incomes and threaten the viability and sustainability of the sector; considers that unfair trading practices and the pressure exerted on producers, whether or not they are associated, by the large retail chains, are the main obstacle to F&V farmers earning a decent income; points out that the weakness of their position is compounded by the fact that their products are perishable; considers that the problems cited, such as the abandonment of land or the ageing of the population of active farmers, will only disappear when the profits from production are sufficient to guarantee the future of the profession and attract young labour;

6.

Invites the Commission to establish clear EU rules governing the principles of good practice in the food supply chain to ensure a common interpretation of the rules as regards unfair trading practices;

7.

Invites the Commission to promote measures to encourage direct marketing of PO products; believes that direct marketing is an alternative to the large retail sector and its underlying values regarding the relationship to food, agriculture and the environment; considers that direct marketing prices are kept lower than large retail sector prices precisely because of the elimination of intermediaries and of the costs linked to logistics; considers, in this connection, that a shortening of the chain guarantees farmers a fair return and makes it possible to combat unfair trading practices;

8.

Notes that many Member States have introduced measures to tackle UTPs and calls for an EU-coordinated response to strengthen the functioning of the internal market for agricultural produce;

9.

Stresses the importance of maintaining European quality standards for fresh fruit and vegetable products in order to guarantee consistently high quality in the supply chain for the benefit of the final consumer;

10.

Urges the Commission to clarify how it intends to apply Article 209(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products, so as to promote more legal certainty on how to achieve the objectives set out in Article 39 of the TFEU, in strict compliance with Article 101 of the TFEU as regards competition;

11.

Notes that the degree of organisation of the sector, as measured by the share of the total value of F&V production marketed by POs, has steadily increased in recent years in the Union as a whole, but that this increase can be attributed to only some of the Member States;

12.

Emphasises that, despite this increase, the degree of organisation among producers remains low on average, and considerably below the EU average in certain Member States, and that addressing this problem is crucial for the future of the F&V regime, not least by alleviating significant regional imbalances; further emphasises that this low level of organisation is not helped by the complexity of PO rules which has resulted in the suspension and de-recognition of POs in some Member States; therefore calls on the Commission to reverse this decline by simplifying the scheme’s rules to make POs more attractive to join;

13.

Points to the need to improve the organisation rate in the sector, bearing in mind that it is clearly higher in regions where production and marketing are more modernised and geared to export, while it is weakest in countries that have not had an opportunity to use operational funds for many years;

14.

Considers it vital to contemplate putting instruments in place for managing crises, and the successful initiatives launched by certain POs in that respect need to be clearly identifiable so that they can be replicated elsewhere whenever it is possible; to this end, calls on the Commission to facilitate the awareness and knowledge of such pioneering POs;

15.

Recalls that POs are tools that are made available to producers to help them collectively organise themselves on the market so that they can safeguard their income, and that POs are particularly useful in production areas that send their produce to consumer areas, but are not greatly used by certain producers or in certain local or niche markets;

16.

Stresses in this context that it is important to increase the overall level of support to POs and to provide stronger incentives both for the merging of existing POs in APOs and the creation of new ones in both a national and international context, while calling for the investment of the aid provided to set up new POs to be monitored to ensure that it is effectively invested in ways that will increase the income of the member producers;

17.

Considers it regrettable that, in certain Member States, the rate of organisation into POs is extremely low and recommends that Member States prioritise insisting on the promotion of the association of producers; calls on the Commission to analyse the particularities of those Member States where producer organisation is low;

18.

Calls on the Commission in this context to restore financial support for the investments of newly established F&V POs; considers that, without this support, it is extremely difficult for the established organisations to obtain the state recognition needed for their operation; considers, therefore, that support is one of the most efficient tools to develop organisations and increase the rate of organisation;

19.

Invites the Commission, as part of simplification of the CAP, to further strengthen the effectiveness of producer organisations in terms of concentrating supply, particularly as regards their central marketing role in the F&V supply chain;

20.

Considers it essential to provide benefits for POs that decide to take young members; stresses that POs may provide an opportunity for promoting generational renewal in the agricultural sector;

21.

Calls on the Commission to ensure the rapid and harmonised implementation of the provisions relating to fruit and vegetables on the one hand, and to producer organisations and interbranch organisations on the other, as defined in Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013;

22.

Reiterates its deep concern at the fact that currently only 7,5 % of EU farmers are under 35 years of age and believes that well-functioning POs attracting young people can play a part in reversing this unsustainable demographic trend;

23.

Notes the need to provide incentives to raise the level of research and innovation in POs; considers that more innovation will enable POs to become more competitive and able to deal with the killer diseases that are damaging European agriculture;

24.

Stresses the need to help POs increase their exports and be involved in researching new foreign markets;

25.

Considers it necessary to make producer organisations more attractive by reducing red tape and improving the support given to these groups by the European Union, as well as making improvements to crisis management mechanisms;

26.

Urges the Commission, in its upcoming review of implementing legislation and as part of its ‘simplification’ agenda, to increase legal certainty for national administrations, POs and APOs and to reduce the administrative burden imposed on them; stresses that this review should not change the basic architecture of the fruit and vegetables regime or be detrimental to the interests or earnings of producers in the sector;

27.

Notes with concern that PO rules are open to wide interpretation by the Commission’s auditors, which leads to a high degree of uncertainty and can leave Member States at risk of disallowance and judicial review; stresses, also, that audit procedures and financial corrections must be carried out in a more timely manner and within an agreed audit time period;

28.

Asks the Commission to considerably reduce the processing period during which the compliance checks are carried out;

29.

Asks the Commission, also with the aim of increasing the system’s legal certainty, to rationalise the controls and focus them on monitoring the actual execution of each action or measure that is approved as part of the operational programme as well as the cost allocated to them, clearly establishing what is being controlled and who is responsible for carrying out the control;

30.

Asks the Commission to apply the principle of proportionality in relation to penalties and to ensure that audits are concluded within a set time limit in order to increase legal certainty for POs and their members;

31.

Points out that the conditions for applying for the assistance regime and justifying applications are excessive and imprecise, and are subject to multiple checks by a range of administrative bodies that are often neither consistent nor precise, leading certain types of partners to abandon the regime and certain POs to decide not to submit operational programmes; considers it vital in this context to clarify the European legislation on the recognition of POs in order to guarantee the legal security of the regime and prevent uncertainty among producers;

32.

Urges the Commission to clarify the rules for the establishment of transnational (associations of) POs and in particular the rules regarding responsibility and liability, in order to create legal certainty for the national administrations and POs involved;

33.

Calls for the duties of interbranch organisations to be broadened, especially in the generic fields of communication and information and that of educating the citizen-consumer, in particular in relation to food;

34.

Emphasises the role of interbranch organisations in improving the internal dialogue within a sector;

35.

Is concerned that the largest POs (about 18 % of all POs with a turnover of more than EUR 20 million) receive about 70 % of EU financial assistance;

36.

Considers that reducing complexity, including in the rules for creating new POs in a national and international context, should be the first step in making them more attractive for farmers, without that signifying a devaluation of the PO structure to the detriment of their ability to act effectively in the market; requests that the Commission identify additional measures for increasing the attractiveness of POs, in particular in Member States with a low level of organisation;

37.

Calls on the Commission to apply the principle of proportionality with care, by ensuring that errors made by individuals are not recovered from all members of a PO;

38.

Considers that any simplification of the recognition procedure should not be to the detriment of national regulations certifying the conditions required of F&V POs, such as those applied to cooperatives;

39.

Calls on the Commission in its review of the fruit and vegetables regime to reduce the administrative burden for POs by abolishing mid-term evaluations carried out by national authorities; notes that these evaluations often duplicate the questions asked of national authorities in its annual reporting and provide no obvious benefit; further calls on the Commission, as part of its aim to cut red tape, to reduce the amount of information it requests from national authorities and POs in annual reports, and to ensure that only data which is actually used by the Commission to monitor the scheme’s effectiveness is collected;

40.

Urges the Commission to revisit Delegated Regulation (EU) No 499/2014 of 11 March 2014, which introduced more complex checks on POs, including disproportionate penalties for failing to meet complex recognition criteria; stresses the need for proportionality in relation to penalties if we are to encourage new growers to join the scheme and prevent existing members from rethinking their participation;

41.

Considers that the competitiveness of POs depends greatly on their management; urges the Commission to develop existing actions or set up new ones, including training measures and initiatives for the exchange of good practices, which can improve the management of POs and their competitive position in the food supply chain and to ensure an enhanced role for market oriented behaviour within POs; stresses that POs should be managed by people with marketing skills who are capable of dealing with crisis situations in the agricultural sector;

42.

Recommends that the Commission focus on PO-integrated production and distribution models, and calls on the local and regional authorities to make available logistics and outlet support for the products of POs in the regions;

43.

Calls on the Commission to take the necessary steps to enable producer organisations to fully play their part as instruments for increasing the income of producers;

44.

Invites the Commission to consider extending the provisions for funding crisis prevention and management measures (eligibility of the repayment of capital and interest on loans for financial aid) and also for achieving the other objectives pursued by the operational programmes of producer organisations and their associations;

45.

Urges the Commission to create actions for the transfer of administrative and structural ‘know-how’ concerning the way in which POs are organised, from Member States with a high level of POs to those with a low level of POs;

46.

Observes that environment-friendly practices must be continuously and rigorously pursued and that continuing to fund such practices from one operational programme to another must therefore be encouraged, and the scope of intervention expanded to include producers whose plots of land adjoin those farmed by members of a producer organisation;

47.

Considers that associations of producer organisations (AOPs) could play an important role in increasing the bargaining power of farmers, and urges the Commission to reinforce incentives for setting up APOs, at both national and European levels, strengthening their capacity to act from a legal perspective, and provide for the possibility of bringing producers who are not members of POs under their umbrella, in order to envisage a greater role for them in the future; stresses that APOs are in a position not only to bring about the effective concentration and enhancement of supply, but also to evince greater efficiency in the management of interventions because of the coordination role they are called to play on the operational level;

48.

Considers that interbranch organisations need to be encouraged in order to ensure better organisation of the fruit and vegetables sector; considers that such organisations can play an important role in creating added value and sharing it between the different parts of the sector, and also as regards quality, sustainable enhancement of production, and market and crisis management;

49.

Considers that associations of producer organisations (APOs) could play an important role in anticipating and managing short-term crises; stresses the benefits of being able to have producers who are not members of POs join such associations voluntarily, in order to make the collective actions of producers even more efficient;

50.

Stresses the importance of ensuring that the structure and functioning of POs and APOs are based on the principles of independence and democracy, in order to enhance mutual trust among producers and combat unfair trading practices and opportunistic behaviour;

51.

Is adamant that third-country production methods for exports to the EU must provide European consumers with the same guarantees in terms of health, food safety, animal welfare, sustainable development and minimum social standards as those required of EU producers; considers that this means that, in any agreements signed with third countries, the EU must abide by a criterion of genuine reciprocity as regards access to the market and compliance with the production regulations governing EU producers;

52.

Emphasises the need to make it easier for producers to gain access to third-country markets; calls on the Commission to increase its efforts to support exporters of fruit and vegetables to overcome the increasing number of non-tariff barriers, such as some third-country phytosanitary standards that make export from the EU difficult, if not impossible;

53.

Is of the opinion that, in order to achieve fairer competition with imports to the Community market, and with a view to reciprocity in plant health standards, the EU should strengthen the import control regime to put it on an equal footing with that applied by the large majority of its trading partners;

54.

Welcomes the new horizontal regulations for promoting agricultural products adopted recently and the objective of increasing the funds allocated to finding new markets mainly in third countries, and encourages the Commission to continue working to improve the promotion instrument in the coming years;

55.

Urges the Commission to intensify its efforts in trade negotiations with third countries for the removal of the tariff and plant health barriers imposed on European productions, thereby making it possible to open up new markets for Community fruit and vegetables;

56.

Urges the Commission to identify the reasons for the minimal take-up of crisis prevention and management (CPM) instruments (only 16 % of POs used this resource, which represented only 2,8 % of total aid), which are only adapted to coping with minor seasonal crises, and to consider how the situation can be improved, taking into account examples of best practice and experience among existing POs;

57.

Asks the Commission always to use preference for local products as the first crisis management measurement in order to promote and protect the single European market and the consumption of Europe’s own products; suggests that the Commission should be closely preoccupied with risk management tools, which are absolutely necessary for ensuring the agricultural production of POs;

58.

Urges the Commission to devise a better coordinated mechanism for market withdrawals in crisis situations, in order to prevent market crises from turning into serious and lengthy disturbances resulting in significant falls in income for F&V farmers;

59.

Stresses that the use of the withdrawal mechanism has proved to be limited and considers that crisis management measures should be reviewed including by: increasing the percentage of Union financial assistance, adjusting the withdrawal prices, taking into account the production costs, increasing the volumes that can be withdrawn, and improving the support, in terms of transportation and packaging, for the free distribution of fruits and vegetables with a view to providing the flexibility to adapt support to the form and severity of each crisis;

60.

Asks the Commission to consider making contributions to mutual funds eligible as CPM measures in order to provide better protection for farmers in case of market crises which cause substantial drops in income, but considers that these funds must never come from the budget item allocated to agriculture and rural development by the Commission when the crisis is caused by issues unconnected with the sector, such as the Russian ban; believes that, in such cases, the Commission should look for other budget items and allocate them to mitigating the negative effects on the F&V sector;

61.

Considers that producers should not have to bear the cost of crises caused by circumstances that are unconnected with the agricultural sector, such as the Russian ban on EU exports, which has seriously affected many European F&V producers and has even worsened market crisis situations such as that experienced by the stone fruits sector; asks that in such circumstances Community support measures be kept in place for as long as necessary until the normal market situation is fully re-established;

62.

Emphasises that, through their operational programmes, POs can make important contributions to achieving environmental goals and improving food safety standards; welcomes the scheme’s environmental objectives but calls on the Commission to allow POs to adapt their operational programmes to suit their level of maturity as well as to target their funds on a broader range of measures aimed at increasing the sector’s overall competitiveness; stresses that a greater focus on measures aimed at innovation and added value has the most potential to improve producer incomes and thereby make POs more attractive to join;

63.

Urges the Commission to reinforce the aid scheme in place for distributing fruit, vegetables and milk in schools, given the importance of promoting healthy and balanced diets from a very young age, and to bring young consumers closer to local producers;

64.

Considers it crucial to improve the effectiveness of the Community regulations currently in place for protecting plants against the introduction of harmful organisms originating from outside the EU; points out that such organisms are becoming increasingly common in the EU due to rising levels of trade and are very often having a detrimental effect on the fruit and vegetables sector;

65.

Considers that, as in other sectors (such as olive growing), producer organisations could be given a role in guaranteeing and coordinating the complementarity and coherence of the various EU support regimes, thus ensuring greater transparency of the system to prevent cases of double funding;

66.

Urges the Commission to establish guidelines or policy rules clarifying the conditions under which POs can be temporarily granted a derogation from Article 101(1) of the TFEU on the basis of Article 222 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 which provides POs with an opportunity to take measures in order to stabilise the sector during periods of severely imbalanced markets;

67.

Emphasises the importance of short supply chains and calls on the Commission and the Member States to encourage the development of local markets for the distribution of fruit and vegetables;

68.

Urges the Commission to intensify research and monitoring in relation to the threat posed to fruit and vegetable production in the EU by invasive species such as spotted-winged drosophilia;

69.

Deplores the following weaknesses identified in the setting-up of some national strategies: too large a number of objectives, lack of precise predefined targets for the different objectives, and in particular the very low operational effectiveness of crisis prevention and management instruments, in connection mainly with harvest insurance, promotion and communication and product withdrawal, chiefly because these must be financed to the detriment of other structural measures and aid for withdrawals is in many cases not sufficient, and also because of the considerable amount of red tape involved; deplores the fact that those instruments can cope only with individual market crises and are insufficient to manage large-scale crises such as the current one caused by the Russian embargo;

70.

Sees a need to establish preventive measures to help POs understand and correctly calculate and use predefined performance indicators, and stresses that in many cases there is an excessive number of performance indicators, which makes the procedure extremely difficult for both POs and the administration; believes that in this context it would be much more useful to have fewer but more significant indicators;

71.

Believes that encouraging healthier eating habits goes hand in hand with understanding more about farming and how food is produced and supports, in this context, the objective of strengthening the educational dimension of school vegetable, fruit and milk programmes and calls for the earliest possible adoption of the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 and Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 as regards the support programme for supplying fruits and vegetables, bananas and milk in educational institutions; stresses, in this connection, the importance of POs’ participation in the school fruit scheme as a way to encourage a short supply chain and the consumption by children of local and seasonal fruit and vegetables;

72.

Considers that the key to analysing the situation of the F&V production sector is the evolution of the income of the sector’s farmers and asks the Commission, therefore, to undertake a study focusing on this point in order to ascertain whether the measures adopted, such as the strengthening of POs, have really been effective;

73.

Calls on the Commission to draw up an urgent youth employment plan for the agricultural sector to prevent the ageing of the profession and the consequent abandonment of land and production;

74.

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

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/35

—

having regard to the EU directives for the negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US, unanimously adopted by the Council on 14 June 2013 (1) and declassified and made public by the Council on 9 October 2014,

—

having regard to Articles 168 to 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular to the precautionary principle enshrined in Article 191(2),

—

having regard to the Joint Statement of the EU-US Summit of 26 March 2014 (2),

—

having regard to the joint statement of 20 March 2015 by Commissioner Cecilia Malmström and US Trade Representative Michael Froman regarding the exclusion of public services in EU and US trade agreements,

—

having regard to the Council Conclusion on TTIP of 20 March 2015,

—

having regard to the Council conclusions on TTIP of 21 November 2014 (3),

—

having regard to the joint statement of 16 November 2014 by US President Barack Obama, Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, UK Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President François Hollande, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, following their meeting on the margins of the G20 Summit in Brisbane, Australia (4),

—

having regard to the European Council conclusions of 26-27 June 2014 (5),

—

having regard to President Juncker’s political guidelines of 15 July 2014 addressed to the next Commission and entitled ‘A New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change’ (6),

—

having regard to the Commission’s communication to the College of the Commission of 25 November 2014 on transparency in TTIP negotiations (C(2014)9052) (7), to the Commission decisions of 25 November 2014 on the publication of information on meetings held between Members of the Commission and organisations or self-employed individuals (C(2014)9051) and on the publication of information on meetings held between Directors-General of the Commission and organisations or self-employed individuals (C(2014)9048), to the judgments and opinions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (C-350/12 P, 2/13, 1/09) on access to documents of the institutions and the decision of the European Ombudsman of 6 January 2015 closing her own-initiative inquiry (OI/10/2014/RA) concerning the European Commission on dealing with requests for information and access to documents (Transparency),

—

having regard to the joint statement of 3 December 2014 by the EU-US Energy Council (8),

—

having regard to the EU integrated approach to food safety (‘farm to fork’) established in 2004 (9),

—

having regard to the Commission report of 13 January 2015 on the online public consultation on investment protection and investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the TTIP (SWD(2015)0003),

—

having regard to the EU’s textual proposals tabled for discussion with the US in the TTIP negotiating rounds, in particular those which have been declassified and made public by the Commission, inter alia the EU position papers entitled ‘TTIP regulatory issues — engineering industries’ (10), ‘Test–case on functional equivalence: proposed methodology for automotive regulatory equivalence’ (11), and ‘Trade and sustainable development chapter/labour and environment: EU paper outlining key issues and elements for provisions in the TTIP’ (12), and the textual proposals on technical barriers to trade (TBT) (13), sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) (14), customs and trade facilitation (15), small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (16), possible provisions on competition (17), possible provisions on state enterprises and enterprises granted special or exclusive rights or privileges (18), possible provisions on subsidies (19), and dispute settlement (20), initial provisions on regulatory cooperation (21),

—

having regard to the opinion on ‘The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)’ of the Committee of the Regions (ECOS-V-063) adopted during the 110th plenary session (11-13 February 2015), and to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 4 June 2014 on ‘Transatlantic trade relations and the EESC's views on an enhanced cooperation and eventual EU-USA FTA’,

—

having regard to the Final Inception Report of 28 April 2014 by ECORYS for the Commission entitled ‘Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (Trade SIA) in support of negotiations of a comprehensive trade and investment agreement between the European Union and the United States of America’ (22),

—

having regards to the Commission's 2015 report on Trade and Investment Barriers (COM(2015)0127) (23),

—

having regard to the ‘Detailed Appraisal of the European Commission’s Impact Assessment on EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership’ published on April 2014 by CEPS for the Parliament,

—

having regard to its earlier resolutions, in particular those of 23 October 2012 on trade and economic relations with the United States (24), 23 May 2013 on EU trade and investment negotiations with the United States of America (25), and 15 January 2015 on the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman 2013 (26),

—

having regard to Rules 108(4) and 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Culture and Education, the Committee on Legal Affairs, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, and the Committee on Petitions (A8-0175/2015),

A.

whereas exports through trade and growth through investments are key drivers of jobs and economic growth which do not require government investments;

B.

whereas the EU’s GDP is heavily dependent on trade and export and benefits from trade and investment based on rules and whereas an ambitious and balanced agreement with the US should support the reindustrialisation of Europe and help to achieve the 2020 target for an increase in the EU’s GDP generated by industry from 15 % to 20 % by strengthening trans-atlantic trade in both goods and services; whereas it has the potential to create opportunities especially for SMEs, micro enterprises (in accordance with the definition of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC), clusters and enterprise networks which suffer disproportionally more from non-tariff barriers (NTBs) than larger companies, as the latter have economies of scale that allow them easier access to markets on both sides of the Atlantic; whereas an agreement between the two biggest economic blocs in the world has the potential to create standards, norms and rules, which will be adopted at a global level, which would serve to the advantage of third countries as well and which would prevent a further fragmentation of world trade; whereas failure to negotiate an agreement will allow other third countries with different standards and values to assume this role instead;

C.

whereas nine Member States of the European Union have already signed a bilateral agreement with the USA, so allowing TTIP to take inspiration from good practice and better enable the obstacles encountered by these Member States to be overcome;

D.

whereas the recent crises on the EU's borders and developments around the world show the need to invest in global governance and a system based on rules and values;

E.

whereas, given the growing interconnectedness of global markets, it is crucial that policy makers shape and promote the interaction of markets; whereas proper trade rules and removing unnecessary barriers are fundamental to creating added value while maintaining and developing a strong, competitive and diversified industrial base in Europe;

F.

whereas EU's attempts to deal with the challenges of climate change, environmental protection and consumer safety have resulted in high regulatory costs for EU enterprises, coupled with high energy feedstock and electricity prices, which — if left unaddressed in TTIP — may accelerate the process of delocalization, deindustrialization and job losses thereby threatening EU reindustrialization and employment targets, that will also defeat the very policy targets that EU regulations seek to achieve;

G.

whereas a well-designed trade agreement could contribute to harnessing the opportunities of globalisation. Whereas a strong and ambitious trade agreement should not only focus on reducing tariffs and NTBs but should also be a tool to protect workers, consumers and the environment; whereas a strong and ambitious trade agreement is an opportunity to create a framework by strengthening regulation to the highest level, in line with our shared values, thereby preventing social and environmental dumping and ensuring a high level of consumer protection in light of the shared objective of open competition on a level-playing field;

H.

whereas even though, common high standards are in the interest of consumers, it should be recognised that convergence also makes sense for businesses, as the higher costs stemming from higher standards may be better compensated by increased economies of scale in a potential market of 850 million consumers;

I.

whereas previous trade agreements have shown significant benefits for the European economy, it is difficult to assess the real impact of TTIP on both the EU and US economies and to predict while negotiations are ongoing and studies show contradictory results; whereas TTIP alone will not resolve longstanding structural economic problems and their underlying causes in the EU but should be seen as an element in a broader European strategy to create jobs and growth, and expectations for TTIP should be commensurate with the level of ambition that will be reached in the negotiations;

J.

whereas the consequences of the Russian embargo have clearly demonstrated the continuous geopolitical relevance of agriculture, the importance of having access to a range of different agricultural markets and the need for strong and strategic trade partnerships with reliable trade partners;

K.

whereas it is important for European agriculture to secure a mutually beneficial trade deal with the US in order to advance Europe’s position as a key player on the global market without jeopardising the current quality standards of European agricultural products and future improvement of those standards, while preserving the European agricultural model and ensuring its economic and social viability;

L.

whereas trade and investment flows are not an end in themselves and the well-being of ordinary citizens, workers and consumers as well as increased opportunities for business as drivers of growth and jobs are the benchmarks for a trade agreement; whereas TTIP should be considered a model for a good trade agreement responding to these requirements in order to serve as an example for our future negotiations with other trade partners;

M.

whereas a certain degree of confidentiality is required in negotiations in order to achieve a high quality outcome, and the limited level of transparency in which the negotiations have been conducted in the past has led to deficiencies in terms of democratic control of the negotiation process;

N.

whereas President Juncker has clearly reiterated in his Political Guidelines that he wants a balanced and reasonable trade agreement with the United States and that — while the EU and the US can go a significant step further in recognising each other’s product standards and working towards transatlantic standards — the EU will not sacrifice its (food)-safety, health, animal health, social, environmental, and data protection standards and cultural diversity; recalling that the safety of the food we eat, the protection of Europeans’ personal data and its services of general interest are non-negotiable unless the aim is to achieve a higher level of protection;

O.

whereas it is important to ensure a satisfactory conclusion of the negotiations on the Safe Harbor and the Data Protection Umbrella Agreement;

P.

whereas President Juncker has also clearly stated in his political guidelines, that he will not accept that the jurisdiction of courts in the Member States is limited by special regimes for investment disputes; whereas now that the results of the public consultation on investment protection and ISDS in the TTIP are available, a reflection process — taking account of the contributions — is currently being undertaken within and between the three institutions, while exchanging with civil society and the business sector, on the best way to achieve investment protection and equal treatment of investors while ensuring states’ right to regulate;

Q.

whereas Parliament fully supports both the decision of the Council to declassify the negotiation directives and the Commission’s transparency initiative; whereas the lively public debate across Europe on TTIP has shown the need for the TTIP negotiations to be concluded in a more transparent and inclusive manner taking into account the concerns voiced by European citizens and communicating the negotiation results to the general public;

R.

whereas since July 2013 talks between the US and the EU have been going on, but up to now no common text has been agreed;

S.

whereas TTIP is expected to be a mixed agreement requiring ratification by the European Parliament and all 28 EU Member States;

1.

Believes that the EU and the US are key strategic partners; stresses that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is the most significant recent EU-US project and should reinvigorate the transatlantic partnership as a whole, beyond its trade aspects; emphasises that its successful conclusion is of high political importance;

2.

Addresses, in the context of the ongoing negotiations on TTIP, the following recommendations to the Commission:

3.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution containing the European Parliament’s recommendations to the Commission and, for information, to the Council, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and the US Administration and Congress.

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/48

—

having regard to the Commission communication ‘Green Employment Initiative: Tapping into the job creation potential of the green economy’ (COM(2014)0446),

—

having regard to the Commission communication ‘Green action plan for SMEs’ (COM(2014)0440),

—

having regard to the Commission communication ‘Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe’ (COM(2014)0398),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document ‘Exploiting the employment potential of green growth’ (SWD(2012)0092),

—

having regard to the Council Conclusions of 6 December 2010 on ‘Employment policies for a competitive, low-carbon, resource-efficient and green economy’,

—

having regard to the Council Decision 2010/707/EU of 21 October 2010 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States,

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions ‘Green action plan for SMEs and Green Employment Initiative’,

—

having regard to the OECD/European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training study of 2014 on ‘Greener Skills and Jobs, OECD Green Growth Studies’,

—

having regard to the European Employment Observatory Review of April 2013 on ‘Promoting green jobs throughout the crisis: a handbook of best practices in Europe 2013’,

—

having regard to the International Labour Organisation/European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training report of 2011 on ‘Skills for green jobs: a global view: synthesis report based on 21 country studies’,

—

having regard to the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training report of 2010 on ‘Skills for green jobs — European synthesis report’,

—

having regard to the Eurofound reports on Industrial Relations and Sustainability: the role of social partners in the transition towards a green economy (2011), Greening the European economy: responses and initiatives by Member States and social partners (2009), and Greening of Industries in the EU: anticipating and managing the effects on quantity and quality of jobs (2013),

—

having regard to the OECD, CFE-LEED working document of 8 February 2010 on ‘Green jobs and skills: the local labour market implications of addressing climate change’,

—

having regard to the ILO/UNEP definition of a green job as any decent job that contributes to preserving or restoring the quality of the environment whether it is in agriculture, industry, services or administration,

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2013 on Eco-innovation — jobs and growth through environmental policy (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 March 2012 on a roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050 (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 September 2010 on developing the job potential of a new sustainable economy (3),

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A8-0204/2015),

A.

whereas global trends such as the inefficient use of resources, the unsustainable pressure on the environment, and climate change are close to the limits beyond which irreversible impacts on our societies and the natural environment cannot be prevented and growing social exclusion and inequalities are a challenge to societies;

B.

whereas in its 2015 report the European Environment Agency has pointed out that current measures are insufficient to achieve aims related to biodiversity conservation, reduction in the use of fossil fuels, and combating climate change and averting its impact on human health and the environment;

C.

whereas the lack of a coherent policy response to tackle these common challenges risks leaving a significant part of the sustainable employment creation potential of a green and socially inclusive transition unused;

D.

whereas in response to these threats we are seeing the development of new sectors, changes within many others and the decline of some sectors such as those which are heavily polluting; whereas there is a need to focus on innovation and on ways to reduce pollution; whereas with regard to some declining sectors special attention needs to be paid to the workforce in terms of retraining and alternative employment; whereas investments in those areas prioritised under the Commission's Green Jobs agenda, including recycling, biodiversity, energy efficiency, air quality and all renewable energy technologies such as offshore renewable energy, have the potential to significantly boost job creation, including in sparsely populated areas;

E.

whereas, according to the European Environment Agency, the green goods and services sector grew by more than 50 % between 2000 and 2011, generating over 1,3 million jobs and whereas, according to the Commission’s calculations, the renewable energy economy will create 20 million new jobs in Europe by 2020; whereas an ambitious and coherent EU policy and investment in renewable energies, forest management, sustainable agriculture and soil protection (to prevent and counteract hydrological instability) have the potential to significantly boost job creation;

F.

whereas the objective of sustainable development is enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty, and enforcement of this implies that environmental issues are treated at the same level as economic and social ones;

G.

whereas the EU2020 strategy to promote smart, sustainable and inclusive economies recognises the pivotal role of a transition towards green and socially fair economies;

H.

whereas labour market rigidities are impeding job creation, while a competitive EU labour market can contribute to achieving the Europe 2020 employment targets;

I.

whereas the EU and its Member States made a commitment, at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference in Cancun in 2010, to ensure ‘a just transition of the workforce that creates decent work and quality jobs’; whereas a just transition for all towards an environmentally sustainable economy needs to be well managed to contribute to the objective of sustainable and long-term employment for all — including, but not limited to, highly skilled jobs –, social inclusion and the eradication of poverty;

J.

whereas the five pillars of a ‘Just transition’ include: consultation/union voice; investment in green and decent jobs; green skills; respect for labour and human rights; and social protection for workers and communities on the frontline of the transition from high to low carbon;

K.

whereas strong participation by workers in the transition is essential with a view to increasing environmental consciousness and an understanding of the need for resource efficiency and decreasing our impact on the environment;

L.

whereas the potential for expansion in green jobs is hampered by a skills deficiency and mismatch caused by a number of factors, including variability of curricula in relation to sustainability, identified shortcomings in particular sectors, the lack of students with the necessary STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) and IT skills, and gender concentration in some sectors rather than gender balance;

M.

whereas there is evidence that investing in energy and resource efficiency and developing the supply chain through a clear industrial strategy, as well as shifting tax from labour to other sources, has the potential to have a positive impact on job creation;

N.

whereas Europe is engaged in global competition, and affordable energy costs, the completion of the EU’s internal market and an improved investment climate for sustainable growth and the creation of jobs play a decisive role;

O.

whereas certain sectors, such as energy-efficient building renovation, are site-specific and cannot be offshored or relocated;

P.

whereas uncertainty and a lack of coherence in policy direction and an absence of clear goals hinders investment, skills development, R&D and thus frustrates the development of employment opportunities;

Q.

whereas a greater societal awareness of the importance of the need for a green economy would enhance employment possibilities;

R.

whereas clear, fixed, mid- to long-term targets, including the EU energy efficiency and pollution targets, can be important drivers of change, and whereas EU regulation also has an important role to play in this regard; whereas targeted investment, including in the development of supply chains within the EU, leading to job creation should stem from, and be consistent with, a clear policy framework;

S.

whereas the public sector and local and regional authorities can play a pivotal role in facilitating the transitions to a green economy and creating inclusive labour markets;

T.

whereas the Ecolabel, EMAS, GPP and similar schemes help to create green jobs;

U.

whereas micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises are one of the most important generators of employment in the EU, account for considerably more than 80 % of all jobs and have led the way in many ‘green’ sectors, but may face particular difficulties in anticipating the skills needed and in fulfilling the job potential;

V.

whereas the Integrated Guidelines are a key aspect of the coordination of Member States' economic and employment policies and form the basis of country-specific recommendations, and whereas they should underpin the Europe 2020 objectives, notably the employment target, inter alia by promoting quality job creation including through green employment;

W.

whereas women must benefit equally from the creation of suitable green jobs, and the ‘glass ceiling’ must be broken through;

X.

whereas women are disproportionately hit by the crisis and by austerity policies, and whereas green jobs have shown themselves to be more crisis-resistant than others;

Y.

whereas low-carbon sectors tend to have higher labour productivity, and wage shares have fallen less in these sectors than in the top 15 emitting industries;

Z.

whereas Eurobarometer data on green work in SMEs show that energy saving, waste reduction and lowering raw material consumption are measures which have come to be economically advantageous;

1.

Emphasises that a transition towards sustainable societies and economies, including sustainable patterns of consumption and production, can generate the potential both to create new quality jobs and to transform existing employment into green jobs in virtually all sectors and across the entire value chain: from research to production, distribution and servicing, and in new green high-tech sectors such as renewable energies, as well as in traditional industries like manufacturing and construction, or in agriculture and fisheries, or service sectors such as tourism, catering, transport and education; at the same time stresses that, in addition to creating a large number of jobs, investment in renewable energies and energy efficiency contributes to maintaining Europe’s economic and industrial competitiveness and to reducing Europe’s energy dependency;

2.

Stresses that two thirds of the services provided by nature, including fertile land and clean water and air, are in decline, and global warming and biodiversity loss are close to the limits beyond which irreversible impacts on our societies and the natural environment cannot be prevented;

3.

Points out that continuous economic growth is possible only if it takes into account the limitations of the environment; highlights, in this context, the fact that a green and circular economy can provide solutions for the environment as well as for the economy and for society in general;

4.

Highlights the fact that full implementation of environmental legislation, as well as the improvement of environmental integration and policy coherence across different sectorial polices in the EU, are essential for a full deployment of the potential linked to the green economy and therefore for the creation of green jobs;

5.

Notes that in its 2015 report the European Environment Agency points out that current measures are insufficient to achieve aims related to conserving biodiversity, reducing the use of fossil fuels, and combating climate change and averting its impact on human health and the quality of the environment;

6.

Notes that the transition bears significant potential to create local jobs which cannot be relocated, and in areas which cannot be offshored, and in sectors hit by the crisis such as the buildings sector; notes that there is strong evidence that the green transition will, on balance, have a positive impact on employment, reflecting the fact that sustainable economic activities like saving energy or farming organically are more labour-intensive than the activities they replace and could have the potential to enable regions to become more self-sufficient;

7.

Considers that an agreed definition of ‘green jobs’, based on that of the ILO and the International Conference of Statisticians, should be adopted;

8.

Welcomes the Commission’s statement that restructuring should be handled in a socially responsible way, while at the same time recognising the need for companies to innovate and restructure;

9.

Believes it is crucial, in order to maximise the net job potential of the green economy, that we provide our existing workforce with proper opportunities to acquire the new skills needed for the circular economy;

10.

Calls on the Member States to encourage policies aimed at protecting and upgrading public buildings in order to increase energy efficiency and reduce consumption;

11.

Calls on the Member States, and the Commission where appropriate, to commit to a ‘just transition roadmap’ to pursue ambitious environmental goals with the promotion of the following aspects: adequate social protection and remuneration, long-term jobs and healthy and safe working conditions, government-led investment in education, training and skills programmes, respect for labour rights and the strengthening of worker information, consultation and participation rights regarding matters concerning sustainable development, and effective workforce representation; calls on the Member States to pursue these goals;

12.

Recalls that the revised EU Health and Safety Strategy should take account of specific developments in new sectors where appropriate;

13.

Stresses that anticipating change in employment requires proactive transformation management and improved high-quality data collection on the current and future needs of the labour market, with the involvement of European higher-education institutions, and that long-term planning is essential for ensuring an effective transition and increased employment; stresses the important role played by local and regional authorities in the transition to the greener economy in education, infrastructure, supporting local businesses and creating stable employment with salaries governed by collective agreements or other permitted means in accordance with national legislation; whereas social dialogue is an essential element of transformation management; calls on the Commission, Member States, regional and local governments and social partners to assume their responsibility and tackle this challenge collectively, taking into account the principle of subsidiarity;

14.

Notes that the role of the social partners in the transition to green jobs has been gradually increasing in recent years, but recalls that more needs to be done to build a lasting and sustainable social dialogue that can help to meet the challenges posed by the move to a competitive, low-carbon, resource-efficient economy;

15.

Highlights the importance of national governments in promoting sectorial social dialogue, especially in newly emerging green industries, and also in ensuring the inclusion of SMEs;

16.

Notes that some regions are facing more challenges than others because of the geographical concentration of energy-, resource-intensive and polluting industries, or of higher levels of poverty or unemployment; calls on the Member States and local and regional governments supported by the European Union to collaborate with the social partners and collectively implement just transition roadmaps, including solidarity mechanisms for a socially fair, green transition of the local and regional economies, while supporting communities and workers affected by change and thereby reducing insecurity due to job displacement and ensuring that demands for new job skills are met;

17.

Highlights the fact that local authorities can play a key role in promoting job growth in the green economy and more decent and inclusive jobs by:

18.

Points to the evidence that emphasises the importance of management’s engagement with the workforce to ensure substantial participation by them in achieving these changes through social partnership; recommends the involvement of trade union ‘green representatives’ working with employers on strengthening the greening of the economy and increasing sustainability at their workplaces; calls on the Member States to provide targeted support for joint worker/employer initiatives for greening industries;

19.

Considers that pilot projects in support of certain of these objectives should be developed;

20.

Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to using the Targeted Mobility Schemes under the Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI) to promote labour mobility of jobseekers;

21.

Welcomes the tools for skills development and the forecasting of skill needs proposed by the Commission; highlights the fact that skills development should encourage the development of STEM skills, which are widely useful in an economy; stresses, however, that more ambitious action and investment is needed; believes that in order to anticipate future skills needs, all labour market stakeholders must be strongly involved at all levels;

22.

Calls on the Member States to work with the Commission to set up a data bank listing training courses and job offers related to green employment, with the aim of improving the quality of information, advice and guidance available on careers and the skills needed to capitalise on employment opportunities provided by the greening of the economy;

23.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that data collection is carried out in all green sectors, including those that are currently neglected, such as public transport and the retail sector; asks the Commission, while providing support to national statistical offices and Public Employment Services (PES), and while reinforcing the use of quantitative modelling tools, to incorporate a gender equality perspective in data collection on all green employment sectors;

24.

Asks the Commission to include a gender perspective in the development of new data collection, disaggregation and analysis, such as work carried out with the econometrical tool FIDELIO or with stakeholders such as the International Conference of Labour Statisticians;

25.

Stresses the need for a greater emphasis on bridging the skills gap through fostering skills development;

26.

Calls on the Commission to help foster skills development through the updating of qualifications and corresponding education and training curricula at EU level;

27.

Calls on the Commission to emphasise greater use of classification systems such as ESCO which can be used to identify skills gaps;

28.

Emphasises the importance of better synergies between education systems and emerging new green jobs through better coordination between educational institutions and employers' unions and other relevant organisations;

29.

Calls on the Member States, regional governments and local authorities to adopt and implement, together with the social partners and training providers, skill development and anticipation strategies with the objective of improving generic, sectoral and occupation-specific skills; further stresses the importance of partnerships and trust between educational institutions, businesses, the social partners and authorities;

30.

Notes that these strategies should include a thorough assessment of the type and level of green jobs to be created and the required skills and knowledge, leading to the anticipation and identification of skills gaps and targeted vocational and lifelong training programmes focusing on matching skills and jobs with the aim of increasing employment; stresses the need to actively include in the strategies both displaced workers and low-skilled workers at risk of being excluded from the labour market, by ensuring that skills training is targeted, accessible and free for these workers;

31.

Notes that CEDEFOP proposes that adapting curricula and including environmental awareness, with an understanding of sustainable development and business efficiency, is better than proposing new training programmes;

32.

Encourages the Member States and regional and local authorities to integrate sustainable development and environmental competences and skills into training and education systems, in particular by strengthening VET (vocational education and training) systems and by encouraging research centres to develop technologies, projects and patents for green products, in collaboration with new green companies; encourages exchanges of ideas between research centres and networks of companies and professionals; recalls the importance of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) skills and the need to ensure that more women study STEM subjects;

33.

Calls for an ambitious strategy for creating sustainable jobs, including by addressing the skills mismatch with a particular focus on meeting the skills needs of a greener economy;

34.

Urges the Member States to take advantage of the development of this sector, to create highly skilled apprenticeships to provide young people with specialised knowledge and training, and to help tackle the high levels of youth unemployment;

35.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take into account, when making the transition to the green economy, the needs of women and girls for better lifelong learning opportunities, especially in fields which have a high potential for providing a significant number of new green jobs, such as science, research, engineering, digital technology and new technologies, with the aim of strengthening women’s position in society, removing gender stereotypes and providing jobs which correspond fully to the particular needs and skills of women;

36.

Invites the Commission, the Member States the and regional and local authorities systematically to include a gender equality perspective in the definition, implementation and monitoring of green job creation policies at all levels, with a view to ensuring that equal opportunities are guaranteed, taking into account the challenges of green job creation in rural areas; encourages the Member States and regional and local authorities to make further efforts to enable women to participate fully in policy formulation, decision-making and the implementation of a green employment strategy that includes green skills;

37.

Asks the Commission to open a public debate on, and to promote the concept of, ‘education for sustainable development’, with special emphasis on the education of girls and women; calls on the Member States and the Commission to promote policies to encourage higher participation of women in education in STEM subjects and entrepreneurship, and to connect the green jobs agenda to the empowerment of women through education; calls for measures encouraging women’s participation in VET and life-long learning opportunities in green sectors;

38.

Calls on the Commission to adopt a Europe 2015-2020 strategy for gender equality that takes into account the Europe 2020 strategy’s employment rate targets for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;

39.

Stresses the need for targeted action by public authorities and services to involve all labour market stakeholders, including employers' and employees' organisations, to bridge the skills gap; calls on the Member States and regional and local authorities to have mechanisms in place to train staff in employment authorities and services to mainstream skills for green employment in labour market policies and to develop the means of assessing the impact of such training; stresses the importance of European education institutions aligning their programmes with the needs of the green economy and the labour market in general;

40.

Calls on the Member States to put in place a regulatory environment that encourages innovation in the green economy;

41.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt ambitious, long-term and integrated regulatory, fiscal and financial frameworks for sustainable investment and to encourage innovation, thereby fully unlocking the employment potential of these changes; emphasises that policies should be developed in a framework of long-term horizons that includes targets as well as indicators to measure progress towards their achievement;

42.

Stresses that coordination across the Commission and across relevant ministries at national level is important in order to create a comprehensive, whole-of-government framework for change that is capable of devoting the required attention to the distributional effects of the transition;

43.

Notes that the success or failure of the Green Employment Initiative is dependent on the level of ambition of the Commission's binding targets to renewable energy and energy efficiency, and on investment in renewable energy technology and energy efficiency programmes committed to by the Member States;

44.

Stresses that the Commission and the Member States are responsible for consistent policies that promote renewable energy production and increased energy efficiency with a view to triggering local and regional development and creating quality local jobs; stresses that investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency can become one of the main sources of job creation in Europe in the coming years;

45.

Points out that territorial self-sufficiency in energy remains one of the EU’s long-term economic and energy policy goals; maintains, moreover, that the territorial dimension of investment must, without fail, be taken into account, given that it helps to achieve the EU’s territorial cohesion policy aims to connect cities and the countryside;

46.

Welcomes the Commission's inclusion of decent jobs in the EU negotiating mandate for the COP 21 Paris talks, building on the Cancun agreement of 2010 and subsequent initiatives; calls on the Commission to ensure that the ‘just transition’ agenda remains part of its negotiating position;

47.

Calls on the EU and the Member States to set mandatory energy-saving and efficiency targets, and to support white certificates as an instrument to facilitate the achievement of EU energy-saving targets; calls on the Member States to implement fully, and to enforce, the Energy Efficiency Directive and to remain committed to achieving, as a minimum, the 2030 energy efficiency targets;

48.

Supports EU commitments to pushing for a just global transition to an inclusive green economy in collaboration with other international partners;

49.

Calls on the Member States to fully respect and implement the new provisions of the revised EU legislation on public procurement, and to consider examining whether the introduction of environmental and social criteria in public procurement policies could boost job creation in the greener economy; stresses that remaining legal uncertainties related to use of the social and environmental clauses in public procurement could be clarified;

50.

Calls on the Commission to help revive the repairs sector, which would lead to the creation of new jobs that are by their very nature environmentally friendly;

51.

Calls on the Member States to support the contribution of public services to the just transition towards a sustainable economy, notably by proactively ensuring that services such as communications, energy, transport, waste and water management are delivered in a sustainable way;

52.

Expresses strong disappointment at the withdrawal of the circular economy legislative package, the provisions of which would have been expected to create up to 180 000 jobs in the EU waste management sector alone; calls on the Commission, therefore, while respecting the responsibilities of the Member States, to honour its commitment to proposing, as soon as possible, ambitious waste legislation to cover upstream reduction, new recycling targets, and redefinition of the criteria for calculating the quantity of material actually recycled;

53.

Calls on the Commission, moreover, to consider introducing criteria to provide incentives for companies which have a virtuous and environmentally sustainable waste disposal cycle;

54.

Recognises that linking sustainable agricultural production with the monitoring and protection of on-farm biodiversity and, subsequently, the use of smart labelling for agricultural products to mark their environmental impact, in order to stimulate consumer demand for biodiversity-friendly produce, represents a significant potential for green employment in EU rural areas;

55.

Notes that sustainable forest management has real potential to create jobs while actively contributing to climate change mitigation and the protection of biodiversity;

56.

Calls on the Commission to use the EU Semester and the review of the Europe 2020 strategy to support green job creation; calls on the Commission to issue country-specific recommendations that can contribute to higher employment and smaller ecological footprints, and calls for detailed independent studies on the costs and benefits of a shift in tax burdens (e.g. from labour to environmental taxation), as well as the phasing-out of subsidies by 2020;

57.

Stresses that such recommendations could include a shift from labour to other sources, and that such a tax shift should aim to change polluting behaviour, but must not have unwanted repercussions on social security systems or impact disproportionately on those on low incomes;

58.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to phase out direct and indirect environmentally harmful subsidies including, but not limited to, those for fossil fuels; invites the Commission to develop models that can be implemented by Member States for shifting taxation from labour to environmental pollution, and to take into account the environmental impact of goods and services in the spirit of the polluter pays principle; calls on the Commission to issue country-specific recommendations to the Member States that can contribute to efforts to foster green employment and reduce ecological footprints; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to integrate in a proactive manner environmental and climate-related considerations into the European Semester in order to support green jobs creation;

59.

Invites the Member States to introduce targeted subsidies and/or tax exemptions for start-ups, and for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, that provide goods and services offering high environmental added value, including overall reduced carbon content;

60.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show greater coherence and cohesion in their policies and to make more substantial political commitments at the highest level in related areas such as tax on financial transactions and the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion;

61.

Calls on the Commission to renew its commitment to the Europe 2020 strategy and to issue its mid-term review without delay and at the latest by 2015; calls on the Commission to reconfirm the targets in the European Semester, taking into account the scoreboard for macroeconomic imbalances and the review of the Europe 2020 strategy; calls on the Commission to propose more ambitious social and environmental targets for 2030 and 2050; stresses that accurate, methodologically grounded and shared monitoring of green jobs could also help Member States in assessing the effectiveness of their environmental and labour policies, and strengthen the tools developed at European level to track the progress of, and monitor, the Employment Guidelines under Europe 2020;

62.

Stresses the opportunities that the 2030 Climate and Energy package provides in job creation and the future role that environmental legislation will play in achieving the EU’s long-term environmental goals and in creating jobs and green growth;

63.

Calls on the Commission to look upon innovation as the cornerstone of Europe's industry and to develop active strategies to ensure that social transitions are well managed and benefits are spread across all of Europe; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support the emergence of new supply chains and industry networks in resource efficiency, goods and services through a sustainable industrial policy and market transformation incentives;

64.

Underlines the need for the Member States to prepare their economies for a low-carbon, resource- and energy-efficient future, while taking account of the possible risk of job relocation and carbon leakage due to the impact of climate policies;

65.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up international efforts to create a global environmental policy that can limit the damage caused by offshoring of industrial production outside the EU and by carbon leakage;

66.

Calls on the Commission to present its proposal to reform the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) as soon as possible, taking into account the need to protect industries exposed to a significant risk of ‘carbon leakage’;

67.

Calls on the Commission to address green employment in the implementation of the Energy Union;

68.

Highlights the fact that there is a need to apply the right mix of supply- and demand-side interventions, which comes from combining job creation with matching active labour-market policies, specific to the needs of different local labour markets;

69.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote, including in the framework of the European Fund for Strategic Investments, quality investments geared towards generating societal and economic benefits such as sustainable quality jobs, gender equality, quality education and innovation to promote the green transition and to fight energy poverty; calls on the Commission and the Member States to focus investment in areas with positive labour market impact with the aims of creating sustainable jobs with full social protection and fighting unemployment; stresses that the projects financed shall contribute to the EU 2020 strategy in a measurable way; points out, in this context, that job creation in the green sectors has remained positive throughout the recession;

70.

Highlights the fact that investing in energy efficiency can promote local job creation and local economic development and reduce energy poverty, and that ensuring energy efficiency in buildings is the most cost-effective way of offering long-term solutions to energy poverty, which affects some 125 million people in Europe, and an important element in ensuring more efficient use of European energy and creating green jobs; reiterates that ensuring the safety of buildings is also crucial in this regard; invites the Commission to present its ‘Smart Financing for Smart Buildings’ initiative as soon as possible;

71.

Recommends that climate, renewable energy and energy efficiency targets should be considered investment targets and key principles for political action;

72.

Warns against supporting activities that carry adverse environmental and social impacts as they undermine the policy coherence necessary to maximise the employment potential of green jobs;

73.

Recommends that quality investment in key public services such as communications, energy, transport, waste and water management are targeted in order to support sustainable public-procurement procedures and the mainstreaming of green skills;

74.

Calls on the Member States to make full use of the possibilities under the legal framework for the European Structural and Investment Funds and other sources of EU funding to promote sustainable projects that foster green employment, and to make EU funding and financial instruments as easily accessible as possible for local authorities, with clear, straightforward rules and reachable minimum funding thresholds;

75.

Encourages the Commission and the Member States to use the 2016 post-electoral revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) as an opportunity to promote the greener transition of our economies;

76.

Notes that ESF support is available to help support green economic and employment growth and encourages national governments and the relevant national services to consider using this financing more actively in order to promote the creation of economically justified and economically sustainable green jobs;

77.

Notes that some Member States have made considerable progress in the greening of the economy, and encourages the Union and the Member States to foster the sharing of ideas, knowledge, experience, and best practices in this area so as to ensure a smooth transition;

78.

Urges the Member States and the private sector to use instruments such as Ecodesign, Ecolabel, EMAS and green public procurement (GPP), as they can support the green economy and thus contribute to the creation of green jobs; calls on the Commission to provide guidance tools to create favourable market conditions for the full adoption of these voluntary instruments;

79.

Calls on the Member States to focus greater attention on the implementation of environmental management and eco-auditing systems based on the European standard (ISO 14000);

80.

Supports the objectives of the Green Action Plan for SMEs and the SME-oriented actions, including the establishment of a European Resource Efficiency Excellence Centre to advise and assist SMEs seeking to improve their resource-efficiency performance, to support green entrepreneurship, to exploit opportunities for greener value chains and to facilitate market access for green SMEs and microenterprises; considers that awareness-raising activities and technical assistance are key to active participation by SMEs in the circular economy;

81.

Recalls that SMEs have enormous potential for creating employment, in particular youth employment, and promoting a dual system of vocational training and apprenticeship schemes;

82.

Recognises that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) could help micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises to engage in activities involving a high degree of environmental and social innovation;

83.

Notes that Eurobarometer data on green work in SMEs show that saving energy and reducing waste and the use of raw materials have become economically advantageous;

84.

Calls on the Commission to stimulate new business models, such as cooperative enterprises, for increasing the efficiency of production and distribution processes, adopting innovative solutions to save resources and offering more sustainable products and services;

85.

Points out that SMEs can only create growth and jobs if favourable incentivising opportunities are also available through the green economy;

86.

Calls on the Commission to ensure that green incentives for SMEs have a meaningful impact where they are most needed;

87.

Notes that SMEs and microenterprises are key drivers of job creation in Europe; stresses that SMEs and microenterprises face particular challenges when exploiting the job opportunities of a green transition, in particular regarding access to finance, training and bridging skills gaps; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take ambitious action to provide support to facilitate green job creation in SMEs and microenterprises, including targeted information, awareness raising, technical assistance and access to finance and training measures;

88.

Points out that a greener value chain, which involves re-manufacturing, repair, maintenance, recycling and eco-design, can provide considerable business opportunities for many SMEs;

89.

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

11.8.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/59

—

having regard to the Declaration of Monterrey (2002), the Conference on Financing for Development in Doha (2008), the Paris Declaration (2005) and the Accra Agenda for Action (2008),

—

having regard to UN General Assembly resolutions 68/204 and 68/279 on the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, to be held in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) from 13 to 16 July 2015,

—

having regard to the work of the UN Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters (1),

—

having regard to the UN Model Double Taxation Convention between developed and developing countries (2),

—

having regard to the Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (3),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 21 April 2010 entitled ‘Tax and Development, Cooperating with Developing Countries on Promoting Good Governance in Tax Matters’ (COM(2010)0163),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 5 February 2015 entitled ‘A Global Partnership for Poverty Eradication and Sustainable Development after 2015’ (COM(2015)0044),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 18 March 2015 on tax transparency to fight tax evasion and avoidance (COM(2015)0136),

—

having regard to its resolution of 21 May 2013 on the fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax havens (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2011 on tax and development — cooperating with developing countries on promoting good governance in tax matters (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 10 February 2010 on promoting good governance in tax matters (6),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 October 2013 on corruption in the public and private sectors: the impact on human rights in third countries (7),

—

having regard to its resolution of 26 February 2014 on promoting development through responsible business practices, including the role of extractive industries in developing countries (8),