3.2.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/22

1.1

Contrary to what some might believe, the future of the construction industry will depend less on the public spending it receives (although greater continuity in programming would definitely not go amiss) than on the ability of the relevant authorities to work out a regulatory framework, applicable to all, that ensures maximum transparency in competition and the best use of the potential and know-how of businesses of every size.

1.2

In view of the above, the main recommendations of this opinion are as follows:

1.3

These are the only ways of preparing for the likely arrival in the near future of competitors from outside Europe.

2.1

In a letter dated 6 December 2007, European Commissioners Margot Wallström and Günter Verheugen requested the EESC to help advance the Lisbon Strategy by undertaking an exploratory opinion in order to examine whether legislation regulating the construction and the business services sector ‘form a coherent whole; whether they are geared towards change, both ongoing and forthcoming; and, finally, the extent to which it may be necessary to launch a process of simplification, streamlining and modernisation of the legislation in these areas. It should be clarified that the exercise could extend to any other legislation that has a bearing on the development of the sector (health and safety at work, environmental protection, etc.), and the legitimate interests at the heart of the sector should be integrated into the analysis’.

2.2

Consequently, all the points raised in the request for an opinion must be examined meticulously and systematically, since this is a vast topic and one which had earlier been the subject of several studies carried out by external consultants at the Commission's behest.

2.3

The present opinion, however, will confine itself to those aspects signalled by the requestor, namely changes or simplifications in legislation and rules governing the sector which should be made as part of an impartial and strategic inventory of the construction industry and serve to improve the conditions within which it operates and moves forward.

2.4

To this end, the opinion recaps a few useful facts about the sector to put the construction trades and constraints upon them into context.

3.1

Some figures for the construction industry, which comprises 2.7 million businesses, in the EU-27 in 2006:

3.2.1

Since the construction sector cannot be relocated, it is an integral part of Europe's future growth and its industrial fabric.

3.2.2

The very nature of what it produces and its need to have fixed bases — deeply rooted in local life — in every country means that it performs a social and civic role which should be kept in mind and fostered.

3.2.3

The construction sector must play an important role in all initiatives bearing on sustainable development:

3.2.4

No broad view of the sector as a whole would be complete without mentioning the sector's image, which is still to some extent poor despite the best efforts of the profession over more than thirty years. This is something the opinion should address, because it is reflected in:

3.2.5

The very nature of these trades, in terms of both the needs of clients and the diversity of skills involved, means that the market is extremely fragmented and will remain so for years to come. As a result, there will always be cohabitation between craftsmen, small, medium-sized and large companies.

The notion that this sector is all about big companies that only deal with large projects must be put into context: operations with a unit value over EUR 20 million account for no more than 2 % to 5 % of the total European construction market.

3.2.6

The large European groups that often feature prominently on the world stage are for the most part ‘federations’ of very locally based small and medium-sized organisations that operate in the same competitive environment as local independent SMEs.

3.2.7

Generally speaking, the large European players in this sector have not evolved on what might be termed the ‘American’ model, but have managed to sustain and develop their know-how by relying on their own acumen and participating in the conception of projects.

3.2.8

It is thanks to this approach that European businesses have carved out a place for themselves on the world markets. Nor is this model, based on integrating conception and execution, necessarily the prerogative of large groups: it can and must also be applied to companies of all sizes.

4.1

The challenge for this exploratory opinion requested by the European Commission must be to propose not only a streamlining of legislation, but also a course of action which:

4.2

Except in the case of fluctuations in the volume of markets (which is beyond the scope of this opinion), these various elements that should be incorporated into regulation should enable construction sector players to develop in an orthodox manner and so ensure that a coherent social policy (jobs — security — salaries) is followed and the sector is made more attractive for the various parties concerned (young parents, teachers, etc.).

5.1

The key areas where we think the relevant authorities should focus their efforts are these:

5.2.1

Action could be taken in the following areas:

With regard to this list, it should be made clear that the response to calls for regulatory change should not be to impose ready-made solutions but to provide contracting entities with a complete toolbox which they can use in line with their needs.

5.2.2

Taken as a whole, these modifications or adaptations should encourage transparency and a level playing field between private, public and quasi-public entities and make it quite clear that any funding is conditional on a tender and a formal contract.

5.3.1

What sets the construction sector apart is that everything it produces is a ‘one-off’. This is why we should have European legislation that protects intellectual property and recognises the special nature of the ideas to be protected, namely that they are conceived for a particular tender and will not necessarily be systematically reproduced. Specific legislation should be put in place at European level to protect technical ideas in the competition process and establish rights to protect tenderers.

5.4.1

A point commonly made by construction professionals in most Member States is that in general the needs of the sector are only very poorly met by most national educational systems, at all levels of training. In view of this, while relations need to be improved between the trades and education systems at national level, there should also be an impetus at European level, for instance by:

5.5.1

Current regulations have had a very beneficial and very profound influence on working methods in the construction sector. Nevertheless, it would be good to:

5.6.1

As suggested above, those in the construction sector have a very considerable role to play in meeting the challenges that face the world today, including climate change. They are ready, within an appropriate framework of regulations and incentives, to assume this responsibility and bring their added value to the European market. They are also prepared to pass on their know-how in the field to other corners of the world where, as we know, the efforts that need to be made are both enormous and crucial if all their benefits are to be felt by everyone.

5.6.2

To achieve this, it would be good to:

5.6.3

In both the construction and the transport sectors, if construction businesses are given a chance to participate throughout the ‘concept-implementation-maintenance’ process, they can make a decisive contribution, particularly in terms of ensuring financing for the requisite activities, in their capacity to manage overall costs and finance investments for future energy-saving measures.

5.7.1

The problem of SMEs in the construction sector — unlike in others (see point 3.2.5 above) — is not really one of access to this or that kind of market.

5.7.2

This is why those in the sector quite rightly see no justification in the quota approach thought up by some and rejected by the European authorities. Moreover, the figures mentioned by the various parties are in reality far exceeded in all European countries.

5.7.3

The issue of SMEs, other than matters covered by the Small Business Act, should, rather, be regulated with: