51996AR0021(01)

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on:

- 'the communication from the Commission concerning the promotion of energy efficiency in the European Union (SAVE II programme)`, and - 'the proposal for a Council decision concerning a multi-annual programme for the promotion of energy efficiency in the Community (SAVE II)` (96/C 129/08)

On 18 July 1995, the Committee of the Regions decided, in accordance with Article 198c of the founding Treaty of the European Community, to draw up an Opinion on the above-mentioned communication and proposal.

At its meeting of 17 November 1995, Commission 5 for Energy, Regional Development, Environment unanimously adopted the following Opinion. The Rapporteur was Mr Palomba (I).

At its 11th Plenary Session on 17 and 18 January 1996 (meeting of 18 January), the COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS adopted the following Opinion:

Considering that the SAVE programme was initiated following decision 91/565/EEC of the European Council and was formally launched on 29 October 1991;

Considering that the SAVE programme will end on 31 December 1995;

Considering that an evaluation of this programme has been carried out by a group of independent experts, who also made a series of recommendations that could improve the contents and the functioning of the programme;

Considering the need to reinforce economic and social cohesion and the possibility of increasing income thanks to the saving of energy;

Considering that the objective of energy efficiency set by the Commission in 1986 has only partially been achieved;

Considering the importance of energy efficiency in Community strategy for the reduction of CO2 emissions,

the COR is pleased that the European Commission has decided to adopt a SAVE II programme that encompasses the Community initiative for the improvement of energy management at regional and local level, and has adopted the following Opinion.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and European Council, presented on 31 May 1995, proposes that SAVE II should:

- continue and expand on the previous programme;

- cover the five-year period 1996-2000;

- incorporate the interventions of the PACE programme (Community action for increasing the rationalized use of energy) and PERU (regional and urban energy management).

1.2. The Commission furthermore proposes that the new programme should be based on Article 130s, paragraph 1, of the Treaty and should be assigned a budget of ECU 150 million.

1.3. The interventions financed should comprise:

a) studies and other actions required to complete Community legislation on this matter;

b) sectoral pilot actions, implemented mainly through Community networks;

c) specially-targeted sectoral pilot actions;

d) information and experience exchanges to improve the coordination between Community, international, national and regional activities; (d1 = Commission initiative, d2 = third party initiatives);

e) monitoring of the progress made in energy efficiency in the Union and in individual states;

f) the creation of energy efficiency infrastructure in the Member States to promote greater cohesion in the Member States and within the Regions;

g) specific actions to promote energy management at regional and urban level;

h) studies and other actions aimed at inserting the criterion for energy efficiency into the programmes of the EU;

i) the evaluation and monitoring of the actions.

1.4. The cost of the actions mentioned under letters a), d1), e), h), and i) will be met entirely by the Union, while those mentioned under letters b), c), d2), f), and g) will only receive financing of up to 50 %. The difference can be made up by public or private funding.

1.5. The Commission is entrusted with the financial execution and the implementation of the programme, and this will be done in accordance with the following procedure:

- the Member States will periodically notify the Commission of national energy efficiency programmes;

- the Commission will draw up an annual list of priorities that will take into account the complementarity of SAVE II and the national programmes, and will favour complementarity;

- conditions and orientations relating to the implementation of the programme will be set each year;

- a consultative committee will express its opinion, within a time limit that may be set, on the draft measures to be adopted that have been presented by the Commission;

- at the end of the third year, the Commission will present the European Parliament and European Council with a report on the implementation of the programme and the results achieved. At the end of the programme, the Commission will present the European Parliament, Council, Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions with a report on the overall results obtained and on the coherence of the national and Community actions.

2. The Opinion of the Committee

The Committee of the Regions:

2.1. Agrees that there is a need to give continuity, and even to reinforce, Community interventions in the field of energy efficiency.

2.2. Underlines again that energy saving and energy efficiency policies should highlight not only objectives of a strictly economic nature and those relating to guaranteed supplies, but also those of greater social significance, concerning the safeguarding of the environment (and the reduction of CO2 emissions in particular), the fight against unemployment and economic and social cohesion.

2.3. Expresses its approval of the indication of Article 130s of the Treaty, which has a legal basis in and refers to Article 130a of the draft decision of the European Council.

2.4. Believes that particular attention should be devoted to the full implementation and completion of Community legislation on energy efficiency, considering it to be a priority question; it also considers necessary an action designed to stimulate the commitment of the Regions and local communities to the enactment of Community legislation and to the preparation, within the sphere of their competences, of instruments designed to lend greater efficiency to regional and local energy saving policies. It is often cheaper to reduce the demand for energy rather than supply more energy. The Community should stimulate least cost energy planning, to enable the cost of demand side reductions to be compared with the cost of addition supply measures, and so encourage investment in energy efficiency.

2.5. The broadening of the categories of action will enable the contents of the previous programme to be reinforced and developed upon. However, the risk of a dispersion of the interventions must be avoided, thus also enabling the efficient use of the financial resources available and their concentration on large-scale actions. In the light of this consideration, uncertainties arise over the distinction between actions undertaken via Community networks and the pilot schemes targeted. It would be preferable for the criteria for the implementation of the programme to respond to those which should, in the Committee's opinion, be priorities; the safeguarding of the environment, the creation of employment and economic and social cohesion.

2.6. The Committee also agrees with the orientation designed to bring about a more effective coordination of SAVE II and the other instruments for intervention in the energy sector, adopted either by the Community or by the Member States, within the framework of the directions indicated in the green paper. It seems evident that the objective of energy efficiency can be effectively pursued if there is coordination and integration, at the various levels, between the different programmes, and between these programmes and the policies that affect the energy sector (technological research and development, education and training, regional development, structural funding, industry, SMI, transport). The proposal to incorporate the PACE and PERU programmes is a step in this direction. The proposals of the Commission with regard to the insertion of a criterion for energy efficiency into the strategic programmes of the EU merits special attention. These should, however, be reinforced by the defining of a suitable procedure for the verification and guaranteeing of the insertion of this criterion. Experiences with PERU have so far proved to be very positive.

The Committee of the Regions would particularly point out that PERU both achieves the programme objective (energy saving and introduction of alternative energy sources) and is consistent with the 'European` dimension. This is why the PERU section of the SAVE programme is so important, especially for the new Member States.

Experience from some Member States has shown that SAVE resources were only allocated to state departments and other national authorities. It is therefore important to ensure that the incorporation of the PERU regional programme in SAVE II does not lead to a reduction of the resources available for energy projects carried out by local and regional authorities.

2.7. The Committee notes that the draft decision of the Council provides for the taking into account of the Opinion of the COR and views this as recognition of the importance of the regional and local dimension of the problem of energy efficiency. Indeed, the attainment, in this field, of objectives suited to the requirements and expectations depends, especially in the environmental field, on the degree of convergence and close connection that can be achieved between action at Community level and that at regional and local level. At Community level, the importance of the enactment and completion of the relevant legislation as well as of a non-dispersive implementation concentrated on the priorities of SAVE II and of effective coordination has already been underlined. It is impossible to deny that the importance of the regional and local dimension will become obvious with the implementation of those aspects on which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the Regions and local communities can operate most effectively: cogeneration, renewable and clean energy sources, energy services, building typology, urban transport, consumer information, actions on SMI. Moreover, optimal conditions for the integrated programming of resources are to be found precisely in the regional and local dimension, and the relation between efficiency and respect for the environment is better realized by local populations when it is testified to by concrete local action. It is for these reasons that the COR believes that, in the Council's proposal for a Decision, greater emphasis should be placed, both in terms of the considerations and in terms of mechanisms, on the role of regional and local authorities, on the involvement of private citizens and on the establishing of the energy agencies; it also believes that the appropriateness of the budgetary allocation of ECU 50 million (which are, moreover, to be concentrated in the last two years, 1999-2000) to specific actions to promote energy management at regional and local level should be verified.

2.8. The opening towards the countries of Central and Eastern Europe seems justified, but it should be pointed out that no relevant financial mechanism has been indicated. The COR believes that an opening of this kind should be accompanied by financing additional to that provided for under the programme. It also expresses its surprise that a similar opening has not been suggested with regard to the Mediterranean countries Malta and Cyprus, which are candidates for membership of the Union.

It believes that, in this perspective, an opening towards the non-member countries of the Mediterranean should also be considered, as part of the programme.

2.9. The COR is aware that in its proposals regarding the composition and role of the consultative committee, the European Commission had to take into account rules and agreements relating to so-called 'comitology`.

It has thus reproposed, almost word for word, Article 5 of the Council Decision of 29 October 1991 that instituted the SAVE programme (the committee, which was composed of representatives of the Member States should now be composed by representatives of the Member States). The COR considers that the opportunity to form opinions on SAVE II should be used to solicit a reflection on the matter that takes into account new events, including the institution of the Committee of the Regions.

The COR considers that, until such time as the reflection solicited bears positive results, the consultative committee mentioned in Article 6 should include, in whatever form possible, representatives from the COR and the ESC, and this for the reasons set out above and also because the PERU programme has been included in the SAVE II programme.

2.10. The Committee believes that the appropriateness of the financing and distribution of SAVE II over the five year period should be verified, to take into account the broadening of the field of action of the programme, the insertion of the PACE and PERU programmes and the expansion of the Union to include 15 Member States.

3. Conclusions

The COR agrees with the final proposal for the adoption of the SAVE II programme illustrated in the communication from the Commission and the indication of its juridical basis. It also gives a positive overall judgement on the value and the articulation of the programme, with these reservations and observations:

3.1. To prevent the broadening of the categories from resulting in a dispersion of the interventions it is essential to define the priorities that should govern the implementation of the programme: the safeguarding of the environment, employment, economic and social cohesion, the promotion of regional and local initiative.

3.2. The introduction of obligations for energy efficiency into the programmes and policies of the Union should be guaranteed by the adoption of a suitable procedure for this.

3.3. SAVE II should be open not only to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, but also to Malta and Cyprus. To this end measures of a financial nature need to be adopted in order to increase the budgetary allocations provided for. The possibility of extending SAVE II to the non-member countries of the Mediterranean should also be examined.

3.4. Until such time as the criteria for the formation of the consultative committee are modified, the COR asks that representatives of the Economic and Social Committee and of the Committee of the Regions be included provisionally in the committee mentioned in Article 6 of the Council's proposal for a Decision.

3.5. The appropriateness and the spread of financing over the five year period should be verified in the light of the broadening of the field of action of the programme, of the insertion of those interventions that until now have been included in the PACE and PERU programmes, and of the expansion of the European Union to include 15 Member States.

3.6. In the continuation of its work on Regional and Urban Energy Management (formerly PERU), it is the Committee of the Regions' wish that applications should be forwarded directly to the Commission, bypassing national coordination. Experience has shown that 'the European dimension` becomes less meaningful when the local and regional level has no direct contact with the EU. The Committee therefore recommends that the same application procedure be used as in 1995.

Done at Brussels, 18 January 1996.

The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions

Jacques BLANC