26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/1

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/2

—

having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘The EU’s External Aviation Policy — Addressing Future Challenges’ (COM(2012)0556),

—

having regard to its resolution of 7 June 2011 on international air agreements under the Treaty of Lisbon (1),

—

having regard to its decision of 20 October 2010 on the revision of the framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission (‘the Framework Agreement’) (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 June 2010 on the EU-US air agreement (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 25 April 2007 on establishing a European common aviation area (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2006 on developing the agenda for the Community’s external aviation policy (5),

—

having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in particular Articles 90, 100(2) and 218,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinions of the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0172/2013),

A.

whereas aviation is a rapidly growing area of the economy, both within the Union and outside, especially in Asia and the Middle East,

B.

whereas aviation has an important role to play in connecting people and business, both inside the Union and globally, especially with developing markets,

C.

whereas the number of job cuts implemented and scheduled by European airlines since 2012 amounts to more than 20 000,

D.

whereas the European social partners in aviation, agreed that coordinated and comprehensive action is necessary at international level in the context of a dialogue on the impact of the global crisis in civil aviation held on 29 January 2013,

E.

whereas the Commission’s 2005 Communication played an important role in developing the Union’s External Aviation Policy,

F.

whereas developments over the past seven years make a further review appropriate,

1.

Emphasises the progress made in creating a single and open Union regional market and, at the same time, in building a common Union approach to its External Aviation Policy;

2.

Welcomes the Commission Communication, which provides a timely analysis of the current situation and the progress achieved in external aviation policy since 2005, as well as of the challenges facing the Union’s aviation sector in an extremely competitive global aviation market;

3.

Underlines the vital role of the aviation sector to the Union’s economy, especially in terms of growth and jobs, since this industry supports over 5 million European jobs and accounts for 2,4 % of the Union’s GDP, contributing as well to the Union’s connectivity with the rest of the world; stresses the need to maintain a strong and competitive Union aviation sector;

4.

Considers that there has been important progress in defining and implementing Union mechanisms and systems, such as the Single European Sky (SES), the SES Air Traffic Management Research (SESAR), the clean sky initiative, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), to enhance safety and meet passenger requirements; considers that further progress must be made in these areas;

5.

Is concerned, nevertheless, about delays in implementing the SES and SESAR, given the unnecessary costs these delays impose on airlines and their customers; supports the Commission in taking punitive action against those Member States who have not complied with the December 2012 deadline and who have failed to make any progress regarding the Functional Airspace Blocks;

6.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to press ahead with the implementation of the SES and SESAR; notes that the development of the SES, when fully implemented, will create significant direct and indirect employment opportunities;

7.

Stresses that these Union programmes are important not only for the internal market but also for external policy; believes that the completion and implementation of these instruments will help to consolidate the position of the Union’s industry in the competitive global market;

8.

Emphasises the importance of the current revision of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation and supports strong and profoundly consumer-friendly European legislation;

9.

Is aware that the impact of the financial crisis varies between regions of the world; considers that this has led to Union airlines facing competitive challenges and that bilateral air service agreements are not always the most appropriate solution to combat market restrictions or unfair subsidies;

10.

Considers that, as a comprehensive External Aviation Policy has not been achieved despite effort over the past seven years, a more coordinated Union approach, involving greater ambition, should be applied as soon as possible to establish fair and open competition;

11.

Takes the view that European regulatory convergence is a key element for a strong European position on the global market and for interactions with third countries;

12.

Welcomes the progress made concerning the three pillars of the 2005 policy; the principle of the Union designation is now recognised in more than 100 third countries; almost 1 000 bilateral air services agreements have been brought into conformity with Union law, thereby ensuring legal certainly; regrets that important partners, including China, India and South Africa, have yet to accept these principles;

13.

Points out that the implementation of the Union’s External Aviation Policy has helped to maximise the potential of the single market insofar as it facilitates the consolidation of the Union’s aviation industry at a time when globalisation calls for stronger economic actors to resist foreign competition;

14.

Underlines that a growing Common Aviation Area has been developed with neighbouring countries; considers that these agreements have created important economic benefits; welcomes the substantial efforts that have been undertaken to align different regulatory frameworks with Union legislation in areas such as safety, security, air traffic management, the environment, passenger rights, economic regulation and social aspects;

15.

Welcomes the comprehensive EU-US Air Transport Agreement, and the positive impact it has had on both economies, as well as the estimated 80 000 new jobs which were created in the first five years;

16.

Believes that a strong Union External Aviation Policy focusing on the most significant growth markets in the long-haul sector would open up new economic opportunities for Union airlines, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region;

17.

Stresses that negotiations with some key partners, including Brazil, are still to be concluded, and that wide-ranging air service agreements with such countries could produce substantial economic benefits;

18.

Emphasises that some of the requests in Parliament’s 2006 resolution are still to be met; stresses, in particular, the need to promote appropriate international safety and security standards, to ensure the equal treatment of Union and non-Union air carriers and to mitigate negative effects on the environment;

19.

Emphasises the importance of tools such as the Joint Committee system for creating common approaches to aviation-specific issues;

20.

Welcome the achievement of other points raised in the 2006 resolution, such as the extension of EASA’s responsibilities;

21.

Notes an important increase in traffic to, from and within the Asia-Pacific region, reflecting its trend economic growth; is worried about the possibility that, if nothing is done, Union airlines and businesses may both miss out on great opportunities from this part of the world and lose the capacity to generate profits;

22.

Notes also that the global position of non-Union carriers has been reinforced through subsidies and through major public investments in aircraft and infrastructure undertaken in various parts of the Middle East, the Far East and South America;

23.

Stresses the significant changes in the Union’s internal market as a result of the increased share of low-cost carriers; believes that, competition notwithstanding, the two business models could find ways to complement each other when facing external market challenges;

24.

Notes that extremely low ticket prices offered by some European low-cost carriers are compensated by the companies via unfair practices regarding working conditions, such as poor social and labour law standards for staff; notes also that minimal investments in safety standards and unjustified regional subsidies seem to play a role in this ticket pricing;

25.

Points out that there is a great deal of competition between carriers as a result of low-cost airlines, which make up 40 % of the Union aviation market; stresses that, where a Member State has ratified ILO Conventions 87 and 98, airline companies must comply with their fundamental rights provisions regarding freedom of assembly, as well as the recognition of employee representatives and wage agreements, in which connection compliance must be monitored and infringements penalised;

26.

Emphasises the importance of airport hubs, including the development of secondary hubs, specialised hubs and multi-hubbing, as well as the urgent need for both public and private long-term investments in airport infrastructure to increase capacity, for example by building new runways, as well as for more efficient use of existing infrastructure — including regional airports, for example in the Mediterranean and at the Union’s eastern borders — through better allocation of airport slots;

27.

Underlines that the competitiveness of Union carriers is hampered at global level by factors such as the lack of a level playing field owing to, for example, different national taxes, congested airports, high ATM and airport charges, State aid received by competitors, the cost of carbon emissions, the application of lower social standards and different rules on State aid outside the Union;

28.

Considers that these factors represent potential obstacles to growth and employment.

29.

Calls on the Commission to conduct a study on the Members States’ disparate air travel fees, duties, levies and taxes and the impact of these on ticket prices and airlines’ profits, as well as a study on possible State aid received by competitors at global level and its impact on the Union’s airlines;

30.

Welcomes the new Union rules regarding social security for mobile workers;

31.

Takes the view that the External Aviation Policy should fully respect the principle of reciprocity, including market access, openness and fair competition, with a level playing field, and should have two main objectives: to benefit consumers and businesses, and to support Union airlines and airports in their efforts to preserve their position as world leaders;

32.

Stresses, therefore, that air transport agreements with neighbouring countries and like-minded partners must contain a regulatory framework for fair competition;

33.

Calls for the continued use of procedures to negotiate comprehensive aviation agreements at the Union level, based on European unity and authorised by the Council;

34.

Calls on the Commission to promote and defend Union interests within the agreements and to put forward and share Union standards, values and best practices;

35.

Calls for increased cooperation and coordination between the Commission and the Member States, when negotiating air services agreements with key partners, in order to increase the Union’s leverage and its chances of accessing new markets;

36.

Calls on the Commission to include the regulatory conditions for safety, security, passenger rights, staff training and certification in comprehensive agreements;

37.

Calls on the Commission to complete ongoing negotiations with neighbourhood countries such as Ukraine, Lebanon, Tunisia, Azerbaijan and Algeria; points out that the proximity of these countries and their markets, and the economic growth that has occurred in some of them in recent times, may be seen as a growth opportunity for regional and secondary airports in the Union; takes the view that, given the large amount of capacity at regional airports, such airports can play a part in reducing congestion at the main European hubs, thus making them more competitive at global level;

38.

Calls on the Council to grant the Commission, on a case-by-case basis, mandates for negotiation with other neighbourhood countries such as Turkey, Armenia and Libya;

39.

Considers that the Union should take a case-by-case approach to it relations with key partners, and calls on the Commission to complete, as soon as possible, the negotiations of comprehensive air agreements, including with Australia and Brazil, and on the Council to grant the Commission a mandate to negotiate such agreements with fast-growing economies such as China, India and ASEAN and Gulf countries;

40.

Takes the view that a possible future Trade and Investment Agreement between the Union and the US would also affect the aviation sector; considers, therefore, that the Commission should provide sufficient information so that the upcoming negotiations can be closely monitored by Parliament;

41.

Underlines the need fully to achieve the objectives set out in air transport agreements with key partners, in particular the US and Canada, including the removal of restrictions on foreign ownership and control of airlines; calls for action to overcome the ongoing imbalance between Union airlines’ ability to undertake cabotage in the US market and US airlines’ ability to do so in Europe; points out that international cross-investment helps boost the economic vitality of the aviation sector, and urges the Commission to foster an international legal environment that is conducive to expansion in, and support for, such investment, and that serves to promote an active policy aimed at establishing standards and best practices for international investment;

42.

Takes the view that bilateral agreements can make an important contribution to the development of an External Aviation Policy, but emphasises, at the same time, the importance of a common Union approach;

43.

Stresses the importance of fair and open competition in all activities connected with air services; calls for the inclusion of standard ‘fair competition’ clauses in bilateral air services agreements;

44.

Calls on the Commission to define, and on the Member States to apply, a minimum set of standard Union legal requirements, notably with regard to regulatory cooperation, labour and environmental standards and passenger rights, to be included in bilateral agreements, with a clear aim of creating opportunities and removing barriers for Union airlines;

45.

Calls on the Commission to propose an urgent revision or replacement of Regulation (EC) No 868/2004 concerning protection against subsidisation and unfair pricing practices causing injury to Community air carriers (6);

46.

Supports the Commission’s proposals for safeguarding free and fair competition in relations and agreements with third countries and for developing more effective new trade defence instruments that are better suited to dealing with unfair practices such as discrimination, inconsistent application of the regulatory framework, and lack of transparency in financial reporting by companies, which can lead to market distortions;

47.

Calls on the Commission to engage in a dialogue with Gulf countries with a view to enhancing transparency and safeguarding fair competition;

48.

Notes that the Russian Federation refuses to respect the agreement on the phasing-out of Siberian overflight royalties reached in the framework of the Russian Federation’s WTO accession in 2011; considers that, as the Union carriers are placed under long-term discriminatory conditions by these illegal transit charges, the Union should be able to take reciprocal measures — by denying or limiting transit over its territory or, more generally, by taking any measure related to the use of Union airspace for air carriers of the Russian Federation — in order to motivate the Russian Federation to remove the above-mentioned charges, which are illegal as they contravene international agreements (the Chicago Convention); calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Council to examine possible measures to ensure reciprocity in relation to the use of air space between the Russian Federation and the Union;

49.

Stresses that an ambitious Union policy on protecting air passengers’ rights can give Union airlines a quality advantage in global competition; calls on the Commission to take further steps to promote the high Union standards in the field of air passengers’ rights and to monitor their transposition and application;

50.

Calls on the Commission to elaborate, as soon as possible, a new regulatory framework regarding implementation of SES, based on a top-down approach, including a better cooperation mechanism between European air navigation service providers, and to provide the necessary conditions to start SESAR deployment;

51.

Calls on the Council finally to adopt a position on Parliament’s position of 5 May 2010 on the proposal for a directive on aviation security charges (7), which though adopted in Parliament by an overwhelming majority of 96 % is still blocked by the Council;

52.

Considers that the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has an important role to play in developing regulatory frameworks for the global aviation sector, for example in the liberalisation of ownership and control of airlines and in ensuring global interoperability in air traffic management; encourages the ICAO to continue to develop global, market-based measures to reduce noise at airports and to limit all relevant greenhouse gas emissions; considers it to be essential that an agreement on a global approach is reached within the ICAO as soon as possible;

53.

Calls for negotiating mandates to be given to the Commission to clarify and strengthen the Union’s representation within the ICAO;

54.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/7

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the application of certain guidelines in the field of officially supported export credits and repealing Council Decisions 2001/76/EC and 2001/77/EC (1),

—

having regard to the Commission delegated Regulation of 14 March 2013 amending Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the application of certain guidelines in the field of officially supported export credits (C(2013)1378),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 December 2012 on financing EU SMEs’ trade and investment: facilitated access to credit in support of internationalisation (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2011 on a new trade policy for Europe under the Europe 2020 Strategy (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2011 on European international investment policy (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2010 on trade policy in the context of climate change imperatives (5),

—

having regard its resolution of 25 November 2010 on human rights and social and environmental standards in international trade agreements (6),

—

having regard its resolution of 25 November 2010 on corporate social responsibility in international trade agreements (7),

—

having regard to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (2010/C 83/02),

—

having regard to the Communication of the European Commission and the High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy of 12 December 2011 (COM(2011)0886),

—

having regard to the Commission’s communication of 19 October 2010 entitled ‘Strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights’ (COM(2010)0573),

—

having regard to the European Council’s statement of 26 June 2012 entitled ‘EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy’ (11855/2012),

—

having regard to its Policy Department’s briefing paper entitled ‘Human Rights Benchmarks for EU’s external policy’ (EXPO/B/DROI/2011/15),

—

having regard to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights of 16 June 2011, (HR/PUB/11/04, 2011 United Nations),

—

having regard to the Commission’s proposal of 16 April 2013 for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large companies and groups (COM(2013)0207),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0193/2013),

A.

whereas export credit programmes of the Member States constitute an important instrument to enhance trade and business opportunities for European companies;

B.

whereas Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council on the ‘Application of certain guidelines in the field of officially supported export credits’ specifies annual reporting requirements for the Member States vis-à-vis the Commission and, at the same time, provides for delegating powers to the Commission, achieving the swiftest possible transposition of changes in respective OECD Arrangements into EU law;

C.

whereas, under Article 207 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU), ‘the common commercial policy shall be conducted in the context of the principles and objectives of the Union’s external action’;

D.

whereas the principles guiding how the Union is to organise its relations with the wider world, and the guiding principles of the Union’s action on the international scene, are contained in Articles 3 and 21 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), which is a binding agreement between the Member States;

E.

whereas the communication of December 2011 of the Commission and the High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy affirms that ‘European businesses should be encouraged to undertake adequate due diligence to ensure that their operations respect human rights, wherever they are performed’;

F.

whereas the ‘EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy’ of the European Council affirms that ‘the EU will promote human rights in all areas of its external action without exception’;

G.

whereas the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is legally binding on the EU institutions and Member States, with the exception of those Member States that have an opt-out when implementing EU law, and whereas the Commission’s strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter explicitly acknowledges that the Charter applies to the EU’s external action;

H.

whereas the Union and its Member States welcomed the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Principle 4 of which, on state-business relations, explicitly refers to export credit agencies;

I.

whereas export credit support is often granted to large projects experiencing difficulties in accessing commercial credit resulting from high commercial, political, economic or environmental risks, which export credit agencies (ECAs) need to assess and price accordingly;

J.

whereas on 14 March 2013 the Commission proposed a Delegated Regulation amending Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011;

1.

Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to establish a framework for annual reporting by Member States on their export credit activities in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011, in order to step up transparency at EU level; stresses that the key objective of this reporting is to monitor the compliance of Member State’s ECAs with the international disciplines applicable to export credits and with EU Treaty obligations;

2.

Acknowledges informal receipt on 14 December 2012 of the Commission’s first annual report on the export credit activities of Member States, evaluating the responses of 20 out of 27 Member States maintaining active export credit programmes, as well as receipt of these Member States’ reports in the form of annexes; the Commission has since approved these documents for public release in order to fulfil the goal of the basic regulation to increase transparency;

3.

Commends the fact that the Commission report clearly indicates the scale and importance of the Member States’ export credit activities during 2011, which amount to a total exposure of more than EUR 250 billion — including 260 transactions with reported high environmental implications — and which translate into significant trade and business opportunities for European companies;

4.

Recognises that the Member States, in their Annual Activity Reports, have made available to the Commission the financial and operational information on export credits requested in the first paragraph of Annexe I of Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011;

5.

Underlines the importance — in the context of the scale of Member States’ export credit activities — of Recital 4 of Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011, calling for compliance with the Union’s general provisions on external action, such as consolidating democracy, respect for human rights and policy coherence for development, and the fight against climate change; recalls, in this sense, the importance of the specific reporting requirements formulated in Annex I of the regulation to ensure that the Commission and Parliament are able to make an assessment of this compliance;

6.

Stresses that the annual reports of the Member States, and the Commission’s evaluation of these reports, do not yet satisfy Parliament’s intention to be able to make an assessment as to whether the Member States’ export credit activities’ are in compliance with the Union’s foreign policy goals, as enshrined in Articles 3 and 21 TEU, and the treatment of environmental risks in the calculation of ECA premiums;

7.

Welcomes the ‘clear general willingness’ on the part of the Member States — cited by the Commission in the current annual report — to ‘apply policies to their export credit programmes whose objectives are in line with the general language of Articles 3 and 21’; commends the efforts of some Member States, including Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands, to provide more meaningful reporting on compliance with some of the Union’s external action goals;

8.

Acknowledges that the Commission needs to be able to assess whether the export credit activities of the Member States are in compliance with the external action goals of the Union, and recommends, therefore, that the test of compliance should be on whether or not officially supported ECAs have policies in place that are effective in ensuring that their activities are in accordance with the foreign policy objectives of the Union;

9.

Shares the Commission’s observation in the annual report that ‘it is difficult to define a precise benchmark for measuring compliance in EU law’; reiterates that Article 21 provisions remain the key benchmark against which the policies applied to export credit transactions are to be evaluated;

10.

Stresses that the Union will only be a trustworthy and strong global actor if the Member States and the European institutions pursue a consistent external policy;

11.

Recommends that the Council Working Group on Export Credits and the Commission consult with the European External Action Service (EEAS) on developing a methodology for meaningful reporting on Article 21 compliance, and on the application in the EU of certain OECD guidelines in the field of officially supported export credits, before the next annual report is due; insists that public consultation be part of this process;

12.

Considers it of prime importance to call on the Member States to monitor and report on the existence, outcome and effectiveness of due diligence procedures in the screening of projects officially supported by export credits with regard to their potential impact on human rights;

13.

Is aware of the fact that ECAs rely on the information provided by their project partners; is convinced that if a structured approach to due diligence procedures is required of ECAs in order for them to be eligible to receive project finance, project partners would appreciate carrying them out themselves, thereby mitigating additional administrative costs for the ECAs;

14.

Considers progress in reporting on human rights compliance by ECAs to be a front-runner for better reporting on other European external action goals enshrined in Article 21, such as the eradication of poverty, and on the treatment of environmental risks;

15.

Suggests to Member State ECAs to continue to report on their evaluation of environmental risks, and considers such reporting by all OECD and non-OECD ECAs to be essential for ensuring a level playing field;

16.

Notes that Member State ECAs currently report on exposure to contingent liabilities in different modes; asks the Commission to provide for a common definition which reflects the wish of Parliament to be informed about off-balance sheet exposures;

17.

Calls on the Commission to provide guidance to the Member States for the next reporting period, inter alia on how to report on the existence and effectiveness of due diligence procedures with regard to their human rights policies, and on how to report on the treatment of environmental risks;

18.

Expects the next Annual Report of the Commission to contain a statement on whether it has been able to evaluate Member State compliance with Union objectives and obligations and, if the answer is negative, recommendations on how to improve reporting to this end;

19.

Applauds the efforts undertaken in 2012 by the Commission, together with the USA, to engage China, Brazil, Russia and other major emerging economies in the setting up of the International Working Group of Major Providers of Export Finance (IWG);

20.

Suggests that the relevance of a sectoral approach in developing the IWG be explored in order to build the base for horizontal provisions in a second phase that will ensure the common adoption of effective and high standards, and of new international rules on ECAs, by all OECD and non-OECD countries, with a view to ensuring a level playing field;

21.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/11

—

having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation (COM(2012)0035),

—

having regard to the Commission’s impact assessment accompanying its proposal for a Council regulation on the Statute for a European Foundation (FE),

—

having regard to the Declaration of the European Parliament of 10 March 2011 on establishing European statutes for mutual societies, associations and foundations (1),

—

having regard to the feasibility study on the introduction of a Statute for a European Foundation carried out in 2008 by the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law and the University of Heidelberg,

—

having regard to the judgments of the European Court of Justice in Cases C-386/04, Centro di Musicologia Walter Stauffer v Finanzamt München für Körperschaften  (2), C-318/07, Hein Persche v Finanzamt Lüdenscheid  (3) and C-25/10, Missionswerk Werner Heukelbach eV v Belgian State  (4),

—

having regard to Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States (European Citizenship) (5),

—

having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee of 18 September 2012 (6),

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 29 November 2012 (7),

—

having regard to Rule 81(3) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the interim report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Culture and Education (A7-0223/2013),

A.

whereas there are more than 110 000 foundations with a public benefit purpose in the Union, with estimated combined assets of approximately EUR 350 billion, spending a total of approximately EUR 83 billion and employing between 750 000 and 1 000 000 European citizens;

B.

whereas, however, a proportion of the staff of foundations are volunteers who are not paid for their time;

C.

whereas the existence and activities of foundations operating in the Union for the public good are crucial in the fields of education, training, research, social and health provision, historical memory and reconciliation between peoples, protection of the environment, youth and sport, as well as arts and culture, and whereas many of their projects have an impact far beyond national borders;

D.

whereas, in civil law and tax law throughout the Union, there are more than 50 different pieces of legislation applicable to foundations, as well as a host of complicated administrative procedures, which give rise annually to advisory costs estimated to amount to as much as EUR 100 million — money that thus becomes unavailable for public benefit purposes;

E.

whereas legal, tax-related and administrative barriers, which give rise to expensive and lengthy procedures, as well as a lack of appropriate legal instruments, mean that foundations refuse, or find it difficult, to embark on or develop activities in another Member State;

F.

whereas, in a time of tight national budgets, particularly for cultural and artistic activities, education and sport, the financial and social commitment of foundations is essential, although they can only complement, and cannot replace, the state in the pursuit of public benefit purposes;

G.

whereas, with regard to taxation, it is not tax-law harmonisation that is being proposed, but rather application of the rule of non-discrimination, under which, automatically and as a matter of principle, European foundations and their donors are subject to tax provisions and advantages that are identical to those that apply to national entities with a public benefit purpose;

H.

whereas the introduction of a common Statute for a European Foundation could make it much easier for foundations to package and transfer resources, expertise and donations and to pursue their activities throughout the EU;

I.

whereas the European Parliament welcomes the Commission’s proposal as a major step towards making it easier for foundations to support public benefit purposes across the EU;

J.

whereas the proposed statute is an optional European legal form which will be available for foundations and funders with activities in more than one Member State, but will neither replace nor harmonise existing foundation laws;

K.

whereas in times of economic difficulty it is increasingly important that foundations have the right tools to enable them to pursue public benefit purposes at European level and to pool resources, while also reducing costs and legal uncertainties;

L.

whereas it is crucial that European Foundations (FEs) operate on a sustainable and long-term basis and are truly active in at least two Member States, as otherwise their specific status would not be justified;

M.

whereas some of the terminology and definitions in the Commission proposal require clarification;

N.

whereas some additions and adaptations to the Commission proposal appear necessary in order to enhance the trustworthiness and credibility of an FE, for instance as regards compliance with legal and ethical rules, the exclusiveness of the public benefit purpose, the cross-border component, the minimum assets and the need to maintain these in principle throughout the lifetime of the FE, a rule on timely disbursement, the minimum duration, and the payment of remuneration to Members of the governing board or bodies of the FE;

O.

whereas creditor protection and employee protection are crucial and need to be maintained throughout the lifetime of an FE;

P.

whereas, as regards representation of employees, the reference to Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (Recast) (8) should be strengthened in order to make clear that the procedural rules under that Directive apply; whereas, furthermore, there should be greater sanctions on infringements, for instance by making the registration of an FE conditional on fulfilment of the requirements under Directive 2009/38/EC, in line with Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1435/2003 of 22 July 2003 on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society (SCE) (9); whereas, beyond this, provisions are necessary regarding the involvement of employees in the bodies of an FE, in line with Council Directive 2001/86/EC of 8 October 2001 supplementing the Statute for a European company with regard to the involvement of employees (10), so that the form of an FE cannot be misused for the purpose of depriving employees of rights to employee involvement or withholding such rights;

Q.

whereas a provision regarding the representation of volunteers in the FE is to be welcomed, given that 2,5 million volunteers are active in the sector;

R.

whereas the increasing representation and valuable contribution of volunteers in the work of foundations contribute to the objectives of general interest pursued by them; since, especially, more and more young people have to volunteer in order to collect their first work experience, it may be worthwhile for foundations to consider forms and instruments that will allow them to access the information needed to work in a more effective way, for example through the European Workers Council;

S.

whereas it is necessary to clarify that the registered seat and the central administration of an FE shall be in the same Member State, in order to prevent the dissociation of the registered seat and central administration or principal place of activities, and also in order to facilitate supervision, given that an FE will be supervised by the supervisory authority of the Member State in which it has its registered office;

T.

whereas it should not be the purpose of the FE to finance European political parties;

U.

whereas, concerning taxation, the application of the non-discrimination principle as developed by the European Court of Justice needs to be the starting point; whereas it has been acknowledged by the sector that the proposed approach of granting automatic application of equal tax treatment would increase the attractiveness of the FE statute by considerably reducing the fiscal and administrative burden, making it more than a mere civil law instrument; whereas, however, the approach appears to be very contentious in Council, with Member States being reluctant to allow interference with their domestic tax laws; whereas it therefore appears appropriate not to discard possible alternative scenarios;

V.

whereas it is important that negotiations on this important piece of legislation move forward quickly in order to provide the foundation sector with this new instrument that it is obviously urgently awaited;

1.

Encourages the Member States to use the existing momentum to work for the swift introduction of the Statute on a comprehensive basis, with all guarantees of transparency, so that barriers to foundations’ cross-border work can be dismantled, and new foundations can be set up to meet the needs of the people living in the EU or to work in the public good or further the interests of society; stresses that establishing the Statute would contribute to the implementation of genuine EU citizenship and pave the way for a statute for a European organisation;

2.

Emphasises that the FE should contribute to the development of a truly European culture and identity;

3.

Points out that, while the legal form of the FE would be new, the proposal is that it should be applied through structures that already exist in the Member States;

4.

Welcomes the fact that the Statute lays down minimum standards in terms of transparency, accountability, supervision and use of funds, which can, in turn, serve both citizens and donors as a form of quality label and thereby secure confidence in FEs and prompt the development of their EU activities for the benefit of all citizens;

5.

Highlights the potential offered by foundations in providing jobs for young people, among whom unemployment is reaching alarming levels;

6.

Calls for the regulation to stipulate that the Member State with financial authority over the foundation shall be responsible for ensuring that it is, in practice, managed strictly in accordance with its statute;

7.

Notes that the possibility of merging existing FEs has not yet been established;

8.

Notes that, in order to underpin confidence in FEs, the sustainability, seriousness and viability of foundations, as well as the effectiveness of their supervision, must be core criteria and, with this in mind, requests the Council to take into account the following recommendations and modifications:

Modification 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15 a (new)

Modification 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Modification 3

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 — point 1

Modification 4

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 — point 2

Modification 5

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 — point 5

Modification 6

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 — paragraph 2 — point b a (new)

Modification 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 — paragraph 2 — subparagraph 2 — introductory wording

Modification 7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 — paragraph 2 — subparagraph 2 — point s a (new)

Modification 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 — paragraph 2 — subparagraph 2 — point s b (new)

Modification 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 — paragraph 2 a (new)

Modification 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6

Modification 12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 — paragraph 2

Modification 13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — subparagraph 1 a (new)

Modification 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 — paragraph 2

Modification 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 — paragraph 2 — point d a (new)

Modification 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 — paragraph 3

Modification 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 — paragraph 1

Modification 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 — paragraph 3

Modification 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 — paragraph 1

Modification 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 — paragraph 1 — subparagraph 1 — point g

Modification 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 — paragraph 2 a (new)

Modification 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 — paragraph 1

Modification 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 — paragraph 3

Modification 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 — paragraph 2

Modification 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 — paragraph 4

Modification 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 — paragraph 5

Modification 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35

Modification 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 — paragraph 2 — point e a (new)

Modification 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 — paragraph 5 — subparagraph 2

Modification 30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 — paragraph 2 — subparagraphs 1 and 2

Modification 31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 — paragraph 2 — subparagraph 3

Modification 32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 — paragraph 3

Modification 33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 — paragraph 2

Modification 34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45

9.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/24

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 13 September 2012 on ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth’ (COM(2012)0494),

—

having regard to the Commission report of 11 September 2012 on ‘Progress of the EU’s Integrated Maritime Policy’ (COM(2012)0491) and the accompanying Commission staff working document (SWD(2012)0255),

—

having regard to the Limassol Declaration of 8 October 2012 on a Marine and Maritime Agenda for growth and jobs,

—

having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), which entered into force on 16 November 1994,

—

having regard to the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for marine spatial planning and integrated coastal management (COM(2013)0133),

—

having regard to the Commission staff working document of 31 October 2012 entitled ‘Overview of EU policies, legislation and initiatives related to marine litter’ (SWD(2012)0365),

—

having regard to the Commission Green Paper of 29 August 2012 entitled ‘Marine Knowledge 2020 — from seabed mapping to ocean forecasting’ (COM(2012)0473),

—

having regard to the Commission White Paper of 28 March 2011 entitled ‘Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area — Towards a competitive and resource-efficient transport system’ (COM(2011)0144),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 30 June 2010 entitled ‘Europe, the world’s No 1 tourist destination — a new political framework for tourism in Europe’ (COM(2010)0352),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 21 January 2009 entitled ‘Communication and action plan with a view to establishing a European maritime transport space without barriers’ (COM(2009)0010),

—

having regard to the Commission communication of 10 October 2007 entitled ‘An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union’ (COM(2007)0575),

—

having regard to the Commission Green Paper of 7 June 2006 entitled ‘Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union: a European vision for the oceans and seas’ (COM(2006)0275),

—

having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2011 on ‘Europe, the world’s No 1 tourist destination — a new political framework for tourism in Europe’ (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 21 October 2010 on ‘Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) — Evaluation of progress made and new challenges’ (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 May 2010 on strategic goals and recommendations for the EU’s maritime transport policy until 2018 (3),

—

having regard to its resolution of 16 December 2008 on the regional development aspects of the impact of tourism on coastal regions (4),

—

having regard to its resolution of 20 May 2008 on an integrated maritime policy for the European Union (5),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 July 2007 on ‘A future maritime policy for the European Union: a European vision for the oceans and seas’ (6),

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 20 March 2013 on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth’,

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 31 January 2013 on ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth’,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinions of the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0209/2013),

A.

whereas over 70 % of the earth's surface is covered by oceans and seas which can play a crucial role in addressing the long-term challenges facing the EU, such as climate change and global competitiveness;

B.

whereas there are six major coastal zones in the EU (the Atlantic, the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean and the outermost regions), which differ in their territorial resources and the type of activities pursued there;

C.

whereas approximately half of Europe’s population lives along the 89 000 kilometres of Europe’s coastline, and it is therefore important that regional and local authorities take this demographic pressure into account when implementing public policies;

D.

whereas technological progress and the search for new sources of sustainable growth are expected to increase the size of the maritime economy to EUR 590 billion by 2020, providing a total of 7 million jobs;

E.

whereas the expected increase in human activity will be taking place in a fragile marine environment in which only 10 % of marine habitats and 2 % of marine species are healthy, which demonstrates that maritime economic activities should not undermine marine sustainability;

F.

whereas investment in natural and human capital is essential in order to meet the current challenges, most notably that of making human activity economically and socially sustainable, ensuring environmentally sound conditions, and adapting to climate change so as to combat coastal erosion and marine acidification and preserve biodiversity, taking into account that healthy, productive ecosystems are vital for the development of a sustainable, competitive blue economy;

G.

whereas the size and scope of the environmental impacts of the Blue Growth focus areas are highly uncertain and potentially harmful, given our limited knowledge about the intricate complexity of the marine ecosystems, and related decision-making must therefore be guided by the precautionary principle enshrined in Article 191(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU);

H.

whereas the coastal and maritime policy should be included in the general framework of the 2014-2020 programming period, also with a view to achieving the objectives set out in the Europe 2020 strategy;

I.

whereas the objective of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth for coastal and island areas must be backed up by a rigorous analysis of the systemic and structural handicaps that characterise these areas;

J.

whereas the EU’s island system, as far as maritime transport is concerned, has to bear significantly higher costs than the other coastal areas of the EU;

K.

whereas the seasonal nature of tourism strongly compromises the development of coastal and island areas and an ad hoc strategy should be developed to counter this problem;

L.

whereas there is a need for coordination between the macro-regional strategies and the respective action plans for the Union’s sea basins;

M.

whereas this report is Parliament’s roadmap for the further advancement of blue growth;

1.

Welcomes the Commission’s communication on Blue Growth, which forms the maritime dimension of the Europe 2020 strategy and gives a clear indication of the potential of the maritime economy to create smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and generate employment opportunities;

2.

Welcomes the Commission’s report on the progress of the EU’s Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP); reiterates its support for the IMP and stresses that the promotion of this policy remains the primary means for enhancing blue growth;

3.

Acknowledges that the seas and oceans will increasingly play a key role in global economic growth in the future; considers that the Blue Growth Strategy, as part of the Integrated Maritime Policy, will encourage the development of synergies and coordinated policies, thus generating European added value and contributing to job creation in maritime sectors;

4.

Considers that, in order to boost the competitiveness of the Union's maritime economic sectors in the global market, local, regional, national and European authorities must create the necessary conditions for sustainable growth, namely by establishing maritime spatial planning systems, upgrading infrastructure, creating access to professional skills and securing funding; stresses the importance of sharing information and best practices between the different levels of public authorities through the creation of a specific EU platform;

5.

Notes that securing adequate funding will be a challenge for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operating in blue growth sectors, and therefore welcomes initiatives such as new EU rules for venture capital funds, which will facilitate the access of SMEs to funding;

6.

Considers that at a time when Member States are cutting public investment, it is urgently necessary that development policies and above all high-cost projects, such as transport, energy and telecommunications infrastructure projects, receive adequate funding during the 2014-2020 programming period and beyond; calls on the Member States to channel available financial instruments and European funding towards blue economy projects;

7.

Stresses the importance of taking into account, in particular in the next multiannual financial framework 2014-2020, the specific needs of the bailed-out Member States that are facing increased difficulty in undertaking high-cost projects, as well as those of the outermost and island regions, which present structural constraints due to their remoteness and natural characteristics;

8.

Notes the conditions of economic crisis and the social problems that are affecting many areas, particularly islands, above all in the Mediterranean and especially those which are very distant from the mainland; underscores that the remoteness of the islands in relation to the single market exposes them to industrial and economic stagnation and depopulation, which must be the target of specific measures on the part of the EU institutions; urges the Commission, therefore, to consider establishing free zones as a tool which, by reducing the tax burden and attracting foreign direct investment, could halt the downward spiral that is affecting island areas by driving growth and development;

9.

Highlights the role of sea-basin strategies in fostering regional development and economic, territorial and social cohesion, revitalising the European economy, encouraging inclusive blue growth, creating jobs and protecting marine and coastal biodiversity; calls for such strategies, linked to current and future macro-regional strategies, to be effectively rolled out for all European maritime basins and for appropriate EU and other financial and administrative resources to be dedicated to their implementation; considers that the role played by the regions in drawing up sea-basin strategies needs to be strengthened; acknowledges, in this regard, the contribution of territorial and crossborder cooperation to addressing the problems faced by coastal and maritime regions;

10.

Welcomes the progress made regarding implementation of the EU strategies for the Baltic Sea and the Atlantic regions, and reiterates its request to the Commission for the formulation of an EU strategy for the Black Sea region;

11.

Calls on the Union and the Member States to give strong support to the creation of regional and crossborder maritime clusters; underscores the strategic importance of such clusters as centres of excellence for economic activity related to blue growth; believes that developing them will promote the sharing of knowledge and good practice, generate synergies between the various sectors of the blue economy, and help to attract investment;

12.

Stresses the inherent linkages between economic growth and climate change, and emphasises that all maritime activities must be aligned with the EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change with the view to contributing to a more climate-resilient Europe;

13.

Stresses, in particular, that the increased economic activity associated with blue growth must not come at the expense of marine and coastal ecosystems, which are extremely sensitive and are among the first to suffer from the impacts of climate change; emphasises that blue growth must be compatible with the environmental objectives and the ecosystem approach of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), as well as the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive, recalling that in cases of uncertainty the precautionary principle must be observed; stresses that all economic activities associated with blue growth should ensure maritime safety and security;

14.

Notes with concern the environmental impact of marine litter in all European sea basins, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to focus on the full implementation and enforcement of the relevant EU directives, such as those on waste management, port reception facilities for ship-generated waste, water quality and marine strategy;

15.

Stresses that all maritime activities, including those that take place within the framework of the IMP, should be conducted in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); underscores the need for a common EU approach to the exploration, exploitation, conservation and management of the sea’s natural resources, which ensures the efficient and secure delimitation of exclusive economic zones (EEZs) between EU Member States and third countries in accordance with international law;

16.

Stresses, in that regard, the need for legal certainty for all stakeholders investing in maritime areas, and supports fresh incentives to boost the exploitation of Member States’ exclusive economic zones;

17.

Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) and Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) as measures necessary for managing the increasing number of maritime and coastal activities and protecting the marine environment, ensuring that various activities can coexist harmoniously and avoiding conflict over the use of coastal and sea areas; considers it necessary in this regard to opt for an ecosystems-based approach to the management of human activity on the coast and at sea;

18.

Notes that MSP is expected to bring business costs down and improve the investment climate, while ICM will facilitate the coordination of activities in the coastal zone and will bring about an overall improvement in the governance of this zone;

19.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that best practices are disseminated and that lessons are learned from preparatory actions in this area, since there are significant differences between Member States in the development of management systems for maritime and coastal areas; considers, nonetheless, that a tailored approach is needed, so as to leave the Member States scope, when implementing EU maritime and coastal planning guidelines, for taking account of local specificities and needs in liaison with local authorities;

20.

Believes that the land-sea interface needs to be strengthened in the context of spatial planning in order to safeguard continuity of human activities and of the supply chain and ensure that coastal areas are properly connected with their hinterland; believes that this could help avoid the phenomenon of coasts being treated as borders;

21.

Stresses that the gaps in scientific knowledge on maritime activities and their environment constitute obstacles for spatial planning, and highlights the importance of the initiative ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’ and its specific objectives, such as the mapping of the seabed of European waters by 2020; considers that the seabed should be uniformly mapped so that the information can be accessed by interested European bodies, specifically research centres, universities, and public institutions;

22.

Urges the Commission to help Member States launch plans to map and survey wrecked ships and submerged archaeological sites, which form an important part of the Union's historical and cultural heritage; stresses the need to facilitate the understanding and study of such sites and help prevent the despoliation to which they are being subjected, thus enabling them to be properly preserved;

23.

Considers that overall employment in the blue economy may exceed the estimated number of 7 million jobs by 2020, if it is supported by training policies aimed at ensuring the presence of a mobile workforce with sufficient skills and experience;

24.

Reiterates its call for a significant improvement in working, health and safety conditions in the maritime professions; encourages the Commission and the Member States to step up their efforts in this field in order to improve career security and make jobs in the blue economy and related sectors more attractive;

25.

Stresses the need to improve the working conditions of seafarers by appropriate means, to incorporate the ILO Maritime Labour Convention into Union law, and to propose a programme for the qualification and training of seafarers, in particular the recruitment of young people, including those from third countries;

26.

Calls on the Commission to monitor closely and to support efforts at regional level to assess the skills and professions which will be in demand in blue economic sectors, and to ensure that initiatives such as the ‘EU Skills Panorama’ reflect the needs of the blue economy;

27.

Considers that the Commission should, together with the Member States, draw up an action plan to promote professions that are directly or indirectly linked to the blue economy, in order to attract people into them;

28.

Calls on the Commission to promote initiatives to encourage the mobility of workers between economic sectors and Member States, such as a multiannual action for exchanges of students, teachers and young professionals, on the Erasmus model; supports cooperation between enterprises and training providers with the aim of preparing graduates for jobs in new areas;

29.

Calls on the Commission to cooperate with the representatives of the maritime economic sector and training providers with a view to establishing and funding European Sector Councils on Employment and Skills, in order to register jobs, changes in skills required and related training needs;

30.

Calls on the Commission to develop an initiative to encourage the mobility of research staff, especially in coastal areas, with specific reference to the areas of tourism, energy and biotechnology, along the lines of Erasmus, to be implemented as a priority during low tourist seasons in order to balance, in a sustainable manner, the flows of people in increasingly sensitive ecosystems, whilst at the same time optimising the use of the infrastructure of coastal areas and islands;

31.

Notes the EU’s world-class research capacity in maritime fields and its importance for substantiated policy-making and innovation-driven business, but also the difficulty experienced by business in commercialising research output;

32.

Underlines that the Horizon 2020 programme, with simpler procedures and better support for innovation, could provide significant aid for marine and maritime research with a view to enhancing market uptake, building on the experience of the ‘Ocean of Tomorrow’ projects;

33.

Calls on the Commission to update its European Strategy for Marine and Maritime Research by 2014, proposing concrete measures to improve synergies and knowledge dissemination among researchers in the EU;

34.

Notes that only healthy marine ecosystems can be a basis for a sound and sustainable blue economy; calls on the Commission to continue researching the cumulative impacts of human uses of the marine environment and of maritime activities in all sectors;

35.

Calls on the Commission to provide adequate long-term environmental monitoring and conduct research on early warning systems;

36.

Emphasises the importance of projects like the European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODNET) for facilitating the exchange and availability of research data;

37.

Notes with concern that shipping within the EU continues to be hampered by administrative and customs red tape that compromises the vision of a European maritime transport area and prevents growth in the industry, especially in maritime cabotage and motorways of the sea; believes that a uniform set of rules for intra-Union shipping needs to be developed as it is crucial to ensuring the free movement of goods and persons in EU waters;

38.

Is satisfied at the success of the ‘Blue Belt’ pilot programme, and calls on the Commission to make the necessary legislative proposals for the creation of the Blue Belt, including the necessary revision of the EU Customs Code, before the end of 2013;

39.

Points out that the promotion of maritime transport will contribute not only to economic growth and employment, but also to attaining the target set in the White Paper ‘Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area’ of shifting 50 % of road freight to the railways and waterborne transport by 2050;

40.

Stresses the need to broaden the role of the motorways of the sea as main European corridors, and underscores that, in order to ensure the long-term competitiveness of European maritime transport, it is essential to create seamless transport chains for passengers and cargo across transport modes; calls on the Commission to issue a communication on the progress, development and future of the motorways of the sea; takes the view that major islands should be fully integrated into the motorways of the sea in order to improve their accessibility and increase their economic competitiveness;

41.

Stresses that maritime safety is crucial for the sustainable promotion of maritime transport, sustainable economic growth, maritime employment and sustainable environmental standards in this sector; stresses that the principle of prevention should be applied to anticipate new risks and prevent all types of maritime transport disasters; notes that action in that matter must be taken within the EU, but also at international level, and notably within the International Maritime Organisation;

42.

Stresses that implementation of the Third Maritime Safety Package is improving the quality of European flags, the activity of classification societies, port control, vessel traffic monitoring, accident investigation and victim protection; calls on the Member States to speed up the efficient implementation of this legislative package;

43.

Stresses that maritime transport policy should take into account all relevant economic, environmental and public health concerns; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the impact of the EU shipping sector’s compliance with environmental and public health requirements and, where appropriate, propose specific measures to counteract negative effects on its competitiveness; notes that legislation requirements relating to the scrapping of ships and the sulphur content of marine fuels should ensure a high level of environmental protection, while safeguarding effectively the objective of shifting transport from road to sea, in line with the Union’s climate change targets;

44.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to significantly step up their efforts to reach an international agreement on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from maritime transport, taking into account the growing impact of greenhouse gas emissions from ships;

45.

Points out that eco-friendly fuels such as LNG can play an important role in achieving the target of reducing the EU’s CO2 emissions from maritime bunker fuels by at least 40 % by 2050;

46.

Emphasises the need to support the development of effective and sustainable port services and infrastructure that can cope with the challenges of the expected increase in shipping traffic, and of reducing environmental and noise pollution, shifting traffic from land to sea and ensuring the smooth switching of passengers and goods from one mode of transport to another; advocates the parallel development in European ports of ship repair and scrapping;

47.

Draws attention to the possibility of setting up logistics platforms to facilitate the transport of goods between Europe and the other global economies; highlights the strategic importance of maritime transport and links between the outermost regions and other areas on the mainland;

48.

Stresses that the EU shipbuilding industry has the potential to increase its contribution to growth and employment by exploiting the opportunities arising from demand for ‘clean ships’ (increased energy efficiency and reduced SOx and NOx emissions) as well as vessels and structures suitable for the construction, installation and operation of offshore wind farms; calls on the EU shipbuilding industry to take up this opportunity, especially given the expected increase in short sea shipping along the EU coastline;

49.

Urges the Council to reach an agreement with Parliament to adopt a regulation providing for vessels to be dismantled in a way that respects the environment and the workers’ working conditions, thereby enabling the EU’s shipbuilding industry to recycle materials more competitively;

50.

Calls on the Commission to facilitate the implementation of the LeaderSHIP 2020 strategy, by supporting the actions identified to address the challenges faced by the European shipbuilding industry, such as access to finance, skills and international competitiveness;

51.

Calls on the Member States, with the direct involvement of local and regional authorities, as well as civil society organisations, to support initiatives to develop and upgrade sustainable tourism infrastructure, with particular emphasis on the needs of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility, and to make every effort to eliminate bureaucracy and lack of transparency in the sector while respecting environmental legislation;

52.

Calls for tourism to be promoted and sustained as a driver for growth and jobs in coastal areas; takes the view that a healthy environment is fundamental to any form of tourism in coastal regions and that every effort must therefore be made to protect it; highlights the need to provide sustainable infrastructure for the development of new forms of tourism, in particular tourism sectors with high growth potential, such as eco-agro-fishing tourism and sustainable water sports; welcomes initiatives to promote crossborder tourism strategies on a sea-basin basis;

53.

Emphasises that the erosion of the European coastline, the safeguarding of Europe’s environmental and animal heritage, and the improvement of water quality remain important issues to be tackled; stresses, therefore, the need to properly invest in these areas in order to develop sustainable and good-quality beach and underwater tourism;

54.

Stresses that measures for exploiting and developing the coastal, maritime and marine heritage must be planned in parallel with measures for its conservation and restoration;

55.

Notes the importance of creating or upgrading specialised high-level schools (for the administration and economy of tourism enterprises, for tourism professions, maritime colleges, cookery schools, etc) and of improving training provision with a view to boosting the quality of tourist services and products, the use of new technologies and the process of adapting to climate change;

56.

Stresses the need to simplify visa procedures, to reduce the costs involved and to issue multiple-entry visas to visitors from third countries, in particular from the BRIC countries; calls on the Commission to investigate and immediately implement new, ‘smart’ ways of issuing tourist visas in order to maximise incoming tourist flows;

57.

Stresses that the cruise industry is an important economic resource for European ports and neighbouring local communities, which is also vital in the development and use of more energy-efficient ships with lower emissions; encourages the planning of attractive tourist programmes designed to enhance the visitor’s experience by highlighting the maritime, cultural and historical importance of port destinations;

58.

Calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to boost the competitiveness of European ports by supporting and coordinating port infrastructure capacities and upgrading the services provided (e.g. by bringing them into line with the Schengen requirements) in order to make European ports more attractive for cruise ships and more beneficial for local and fishing communities, thereby enabling them to diversify their activities; calls on the Commission to take into account the particular features of ports in island and outermost regions;

59.

Requests that it be made obligatory in port modernisation and expansion projects to equip passenger terminals and new passenger ships with facilities for people with reduced mobility;

60.

Reiterates the importance of coastal and seagoing passenger transport, especially via ferries and cruise ships, and notes the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No 1177/2010 on the rights of passengers travelling by sea, which should help enhance quality maritime tourism; calls on the Commission, in this connection, to set a campaign in motion to improve the quality of passenger and cruise ships with regard to passengers’ rights, on the basis of operators’ best practices;

61.

Underscores the importance of yachting and sailing for maritime tourism; calls on the Commission to examine, in the context of its forthcoming communication on maritime tourism, the social and economic impact of this sector, the scope for harmonisation and simplification at EU level of the rules governing the issuing of operating licences, navigating and operating conditions, safety requirements, yacht maintenance and repair work, and the mutual recognition of professional qualifications in this sector;

62.

Reasserts the importance of beach tourism as a feature of some European coastal regions; calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment to verify whether Directive 2006/123/EC could have a negative impact on SMEs in this sector, and, if deemed necessary, to propose measures to alleviate this impact and to ensure that the specific characteristics of this professional activity are taken into account in the application of the Directive;

63.

Calls on the Commission to encourage the Member States, regions, autonomous communities and other stakeholders in coastal and island areas to develop and implement, in a systemic manner, the ‘ancient trade routes’ initiative approved by Parliament in the 2013 budget, both in the Mediterranean and in other European basins, especially in order to diversify tourism products and reduce the seasonal nature of tourism;

64.

Calls on the Commission to include sustainable maritime, island and coastal tourism in related actions and programmes, such as the ‘EDEN — European Destinations of Excellence’ and the Calypso programmes, and to support initiatives that encourage the diversification of coastal, maritime and marine tourism, help make tourist activities and employment less seasonal and stimulate adaptation to climate change; considers, in this regard, that the diversification of tourism can help to increase the attractiveness of maritime regions and enable them to move beyond the traditional ‘sun, sea and sand’ model;

65.

Calls for the promotion of maritime resorts, as these can reduce seasonal variations and create a multiplier effect for local and regional economies, by integrating fishing communities and striking a balance between economic growth and sustainability;

66.

Calls on the Commission to take account of the contribution and role of local culture and artisanal gastronomy in the development of European coastal tourism; considers it necessary to use and coordinate existing policies and tools and to draw up new programmes and actions in order to encourage synergies among, in particular, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the primary and tertiary sectors in coastal areas of the EU;

67.

Urges the Commission to include in the Virtual Tourism Observatory a section dedicated to maritime and coastal tourism, ensuring links between research institutes, enterprises and public authorities with the aim of driving forward market research, providing enterprises and public authorities with forward-looking information on the development of supply and demand and creating more favourable business conditions, whilst also providing information on the links between biodiversity, climate protection and sustainable tourism initiatives;

68.

Notes that climate change is one of the main threats to marine biodiversity worldwide, and that the energy aspects of a blue growth strategy must be based on renewable energies and energy efficiency;

69.

Acknowledges, in that regard, the importance of Europe’s seas and oceans for the EU’s energy security and the diversification of its energy sources and supply routes;

70.

Notes the potential of offshore wind, tidal, wave and ocean thermal energy, as well as of the conventional offshore energy sector, to generate sustainable jobs in coastal regions, reduce emissions and contribute to the EU’s medium and long-term energy targets; highlights the fact that significant investment in redeveloping grid connections and in transmission capacity will be required to exploit this potential;

71.

Emphasises that blue energy is an asset for the European maritime economy; urges the Commission and the Member States to contribute to realising the potential of blue energy by making use of sea-basin strategies, paying special attention to the possibilities offered by the outermost regions owing to their location and natural characteristics;

72.

Calls on the Commission actively to support the EU’s global leadership in this area by developing a European industrial strategy for blue energy, as it has done in the past for other sectors;

73.

Calls on the Commission to adopt, in its forthcoming communication in this area, an integrated approach to the development of marine energy resources, by exploiting synergies between offshore wind energy and other forms of renewable marine energy; emphasises that such an approach must allow energy to be supplied from a full and sustainable range of sources, in line with the precautionary principle and ensuring maritime security and safety, and that it must also include plans for adequate infrastructure to transport sea-generated energy to land and ensure interconnection with the conventional electricity grid;

74.

Calls on the Member States to work together to facilitate the sustainable construction of the North Sea Offshore Grid for renewable energy; calls on the Commission to make a proposal for a corresponding regulatory framework;

75.

Emphasises that aquaculture and fisheries should contribute to food production on a sustainable basis throughout the Union and to long-term food security and consumer protection; considers that the development and innovation of a sustainable aquaculture and fish processing industry should be encouraged, by cutting down bureaucracy and promoting employment opportunities in these sectors and improving the quality of life in both coastal and rural areas;

76.

Emphasises the importance of developing sustainable aquaculture in order to reduce overfishing of European fish stocks and dependence on imports of fish from third countries, which account for over 60 % of the fish consumed within the EU;

77.

Points out that aquaculture in the EU already provides 80 000 jobs and has the potential significantly to improve the economies of coastal communities, bearing in mind UN estimates that production of farmed fish will exceed that of conventional fisheries by 2019;

78.

Calls on the Commission, in its forthcoming strategic guidelines for aquaculture in the EU, to promote offshore aquaculture, which can be combined with blue energy facilities so as to reduce pressure from over-intensive aquaculture on coastal ecosystems and on other activities; highlights the need for the Member States’ respective integrated management plans to simplify the administrative burden and ensure the allocation of suitable space for the development of these activities;

79.

Stresses the importance of the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), which for the first time combines Integrated Maritime Policy and fisheries funding, as well as that of the European Investment Bank (EIB), in supporting the sustainable and environment-friendly development of fisheries, aquaculture and fish processing, as well as revenue diversification in fishing communities dependent on those sectors, in particular in respect of small-scale coastal fisheries, vocational training for women and young people, and attracting new entrepreneurs to the sector;

80.

Acknowledges that protecting Europe’s maritime borders is a challenge for Member States; considers that a successful blue economy requires secure EU maritime borders, with a view to ensuring the protection of the marine environment, fisheries controls, the fight against illegal fishing and law enforcement; points, therefore, to the importance of setting up a European coastguard to coordinate operations and surveillance at sea; stresses, furthermore, the importance of stepping up regional cooperation initiatives relating to the fisheries sector;

81.

Recognises the existence of favourable conditions for marine mineral extraction; stresses, however, that the seabed environment is linked to the rest of the planet through interchanges of matter, energy and biodiversity, which, if disrupted, may cause unpredictable changes in fish stocks and a loss of biodiversity;

82.

Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to the environmental consequences of mining the seabed, especially in highly sensitive marine environments, to support relevant research projects, to apply the precautionary principle, and to cooperate with the authorities of third countries involved in the sector in the attempt to fill existing gaps in scientific knowledge more rapidly;

83.

Recognises that a more efficient use of resources, combined with enhanced recycling policies, offer a more cost-effective and sustainable approach to meeting our mineral needs than the intensive exploitation of underwater resources; deplores the fact that shortcomings in the recycling of raw and rare earth materials are contributing to an increase in waste, and calls, therefore, for measures to boost recycling industries so as to offer an alternative to sea mining; notes the long-term employment opportunities offered by this alternative approach;

84.

Recognises that blue biotechnology has the potential to create high-skilled employment and has much to offer in critical areas such as health, nutrition and innovation; welcomes the Commission’s intention to support the research and innovation needed to promote this activity in the field of entrepreneurship;

85.

Emphasises the potential of marine biodiversity, in particular in the still widely undiscovered deep sea, for the blue biotechnology sector, but stresses the need for a cautious exploration of this highly sensitive ecosystem;

86.

Calls on the Commission to clearly define the issues and challenges related to blue biotechnology (for example bio-nanotechnology, biomaterials and the introduction of genetically modified fish, shellfish and micro-organisms), and to employ a scientifically sound approach based on the precautionary principle in order to identify, assess and manage the associated environmental and health risks;

87.

Calls on the Commission to promote partnerships between the private sector and research institutes, as well as crossborder partnerships such as the European Marine Biological Resource Centre, since marine biotechnology and access to marine biodiversity require scientific knowhow and sophisticated and expensive equipment;

88.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/34

—

having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Article 54 thereof,

—

having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Article 3(3) thereof,

—

having regard to its resolution of 19 February 2009 on Social Economy (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 March 2012 on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society with regard to the involvement of employees (2),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on information and consultation of workers, anticipation and management of restructuring (3),

—

having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1435/2003 of 22 July 2003 on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society (SCE) (4),

—

having regard to Commission Recommendation 94/1069/EC of 7 December 1994 on the transfer of small and medium-sized enterprises (5),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on the transfer of small and medium-sized enterprises (6),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on the promotion of co-operative societies in Europe (COM(2004)0018),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on the Social Business Initiative (COM(2011)0682),

—

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Cooperatives and Restructuring (7),

—

having regard to ILO Recommendation 193 on the Promotion of Cooperatives, which was approved by the governments of all 27 current Member States, to the UN General Assembly Resolution of 2001 ‘Cooperatives in Human Development’ and to the fact that the United Nations proclaimed 2012 the International Year of Cooperatives,

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A7-0222/2013),

1.

Points out that cooperatives, along with other social economy enterprises, play an essential role in the European economy, especially in time of crisis, by combining profitability with solidarity, creating high-quality jobs, strengthening social, economic and regional cohesion and generating social capital; recognises, furthermore, that social economy enterprises should benefit from a clearer and more coherent legislative framework, taking due account of the wealth of diversity among social economy institutions and the specific features thereof;

2.

Notes that, in the EU, cooperatives are becoming increasingly important and that there are about 160 000 cooperative enterprises owned by 123 million members and providing jobs for 5,4 million people — including around 50 000 cooperative enterprises in industry and services providing jobs for 1,4 million persons — and that cooperatives contribute, on average, around 5 % to the GDP of each Member State; notes that, over the past few years, several hundred industrial and service cooperative enterprises have been established as the result of the restructuring of businesses in crisis or without successors, thereby saving and re-developing local economic activities and jobs; notes that industrial and service cooperative groups have had a key impact on regional development in some of the most industrialised regions of the EU; notes that ‘social’ cooperatives specialised in labour integration provide jobs to over 30 000 disabled and disadvantaged persons in the industrial and service sectors; points out that cooperatives have become a model for the self-employed and the liberal professions, and that this model has grown significantly in new sectors, such as social and health care services, digital and business support services and services of general interest previously provided by the public sector (e.g. environmental services and management of natural spaces, education and culture, and production of energy from renewable sources); notes that cooperatives therefore play a very important role in the EU in economic, social, sustainable development, and employment terms, in addition to being a springboard for social innovation, which is a very important topic in both the EU 2020 strategy and Horizon 2020, and help to serve the objective of the sustainable economic and social development of regional and local communities;

3.

Reiterates that the cooperative business model contributes to real economic pluralism, is a vital part of the ‘social market economy’ and is fully in keeping with the values of the EU Treaty and the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy;

4.

Points out that many cooperatives have proved themselves to be even more resilient in times of crisis than many conventional enterprises, both in terms of employment rates and business closures; notes that despite the crisis, cooperatives have been created in new and innovative sectors and that there is considerable evidence of this resilience, particularly in relation to cooperative banks and industrial and service cooperatives (worker cooperatives, social cooperatives and cooperatives formed by SMEs); points out that, as a model, the development of cooperatives has proven to be able to respond to new needs and to stimulate job creation better than other models owing to the great ability of cooperatives to adapt to change, and to keep their businesses going, when at risk, by continuing to pursue their mission; highlights, furthermore, the strategic role of cooperatives formed by SMEs, which can provide collective solutions to shared problems and allow economies of scale to be developed; notes, moreover, the growing importance of ‘community cooperatives’, which enable — especially in remote and disadvantaged areas — the direct participation of citizens in order to meet various needs, such as health and social services, school services, commercial services, communications, etc.;

5.

Takes the view that cooperatives can effectively promote entrepreneurship on a micro-economic scale, at times of recession, as they allow small business owners — often groups of citizens — to take on business responsibilities; supports, in this regard, the development of cooperatives in the social and welfare sectors to ensure greater social participation for vulnerable groups;

6.

Argues that, thanks to its decentralised nature, the cooperative model contributes significantly to the implementation of the priorities for 2020 set out in the Renewable Energy Sources Directive (2009/28/EC) and to the transition from fossil towards renewable energy; points, in this connection, to the fact that more than 1000 renewable energy cooperatives have been created by citizens; believes that cooperatives active in the field of renewable energy allow citizens to become cooperative members of local projects, and encourage investment in renewable energy projects, which in turn enhances the social acceptance of new renewable energy installations; considers that citizens’ participation in energy production can increase both their awareness of the need for sustainable and efficient energy consumption and their control over energy prices; asks the Commission to pay special attention to the role energy cooperatives can play in increasing the use of renewable energy sources and improving energy efficiency;

7.

Expresses the view that this greater resilience is in large part due to the cooperative model of governance, which is based on joint ownership, democratic economic participation and control, organisation and management by member-stakeholders, and commitment to the community; stresses that the resilience of cooperatives is also due to their characteristic method of capital accumulation, which is less dependent on the development of financial markets and is linked both to the allocation of surpluses to reserve funds, if possible partly indivisible (in particular in the form of assets that reinforce the cooperative movement in general, after payment of any outstanding debts in liquidation cases), and to the implementation of the enterprise’s objectives, demonstrating balanced social and economic objectives and the goal of improving their operation and activity; considers that this model helps to ensure that cooperatives take a long-term approach across generations and anchors them in the local economy, contributing to local sustainable development and ensuring that they do not delocalise, even when they internationalise;

8.

Notes that cooperative enterprises are able to meet existing and new needs effectively and efficiently, in areas such as the management of cultural resources and creativity, and environmental sustainability relating to new lifestyles and modes of consumption; stresses that cooperatives have also cultivated values such as the protection of legality — one example of this is Italy, where cooperatives are entrusted with the management of assets confiscated from the mafia;

9.

Takes the view that cooperatives should be fully included in the objectives pursued by the EU’s industrial policy and in the measures taken by the EU, also in view of their fundamental contribution to industrial restructuring, a key chapter of the new EU industrial policy;

10.

Notes also that, by cooperating, cooperatives can take advantage of economies of scale and share experience and best practice, as well as pool or transfer human and financial resources, where necessary; contends that this inherent flexibility allows cooperatives to sustain themselves even in the most trying times;

11.

Notes that numerous good practices can be found in the various Member States, demonstrating the excellent results achieved by cooperative enterprises in terms of growth, employment, survival rates and business start-ups, such as the single payment system (‘pago único’) in Spain and the Marcora Law in Italy — which help finance the establishment of new cooperatives through unemployment benefits — and the ‘employment and business cooperatives’ created in France, Sweden and Belgium; points, moreover, to groups of individual cooperatives that can voluntarily form large business groups covering sectors such as industry, agriculture, distribution, finance, R & D and high-level education; observes that the cooperative society, modelled, for example, on the British trust company, can also be an efficient model for good governance of professional or semi-professional sports organisations, which at the same time facilitates close involvement of the principal stakeholders — the supporters — in the management of a club (whether professional or not); calls on the Commission to look at these good practices in depth and consider including them in the framing of business-friendly EU policies;

12.

Considers the contribution of cooperatives to the EU economy and to employment stability to be significant, especially in times of crisis;

13.

Emphasises the need to develop, inter alia, the business and employment cooperative (BEC) model, allowing enterprises to build up gradually to meet the needs of their entrepreneurs and evolve as their business activities develop;

14.

Notes, however, that cooperatives are not immune to failure;

15.

Notes that in the various Member States a diversity of situations can be found, reflecting legal and conceptual differences; calls on the Commission, therefore, to conduct a review of existing legislation in order to find common ground and to harmonise, in compliance with the subsidiarity principle, the key elements with a view to lifting the barriers to the development of cooperatives;

16.

Stresses that employees incur a substantial financial risk when setting up a cooperative or when ownership of a business is transferred to its employees; observes that good governance, particularly in a workers’ cooperative, is heavily dependent on support for and supervision of the employees’ business management;

17.

Takes the view that this in-built capacity for resilience should be strengthened by paying proper attention to cooperatives in all relevant EU policies designed to contribute to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, also through a different model of economic development which respects the European social model, and by streamlining existing EU legislation concerning cooperatives; considers, in particular, that a reference to the important role of cooperatives should be made in the Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan; believes that the necessary steps should be taken to ensure a level playing field between cooperatives and other forms of enterprises, whilst preserving cooperatives’ aims and working methods as well as their social character;

18.

Recalls the need for the European Union to recognise and treat equally, through legislation, the various forms of entrepreneurship in order to ensure that the principle of entrepreneurial freedom is respected, whatever the status of the enterprise; regrets the fact that the Commission, in its Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan, fails to focus on the role of social-economy enterprises and merely recalls their contribution to job creation and social innovation, and the greater funding difficulties they face as compared to SMEs;

19.

Calls, therefore, on the Commission to bolster its services, creating a unit responsible for cooperatives and other social-economy organisations (such as mutuals, foundations and associations engaged in economic and financial activities), aiming at paying greater attention to measures geared to ensure an adequate level of resources and to monitoring and addressing policy development on social-economy organisations; urges the Commission to focus proper attention to the restructuring of industrial and service enterprises that are in crisis, or without a successor, into cooperatives through the creation of services dedicated to this task;

20.

Calls on the Commission to provide more flexibility on the public procurement rules for employee-led enterprises, for example by including a time-limited reservation;

21.

Calls also on the Commission to ensure that measures under the Social Business Initiative are coordinated and that administrative barriers between the two initiatives are reduced;

22.

Urges the Member States, in keeping with ILO Recommendation 193/2002, to review their legislation applying to cooperatives in general and, in particular, to specific cooperative typologies such as worker cooperatives, social cooperatives, artisans’ cooperatives and cooperative banks, with a view to adopting a comprehensive policy to support the cooperative business model and creating a regulatory environment favourable to the recognition of the role of cooperatives and their management organisations and to the development of cooperatives, especially in fields and sectors where this model has proven to have a social, economic and environmental added-value; calls on the Member States, acting in cooperation with the social partners and other stakeholders at regional and local level, to identify strategic sectors suitable for cooperative projects; stresses that this should include the introduction of appropriate financial instruments and the recognition of cooperatives’ role in the national social dialogue, in addition to the role of cooperative credit banks, which have always attached particular importance to sustainable and socially responsible financing and are well-established locally; calls for this recommendation to be borne in mind in the context of the review of the Regulation on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society (SCE);

23.

Emphasises the importance of drawing up regulatory measures, within a robust legal framework and in line with international standards, in order to avoid disparate national interpretations and any risk of competitive advantages or disadvantages emerging at regional, national or macro-regional level;

24.

Stresses the importance of including the cooperatives at all stages of the process in future initiatives and undertakings by the Union relating to cooperatives;

25.

Considers that the transfer of a business to the employees through the creation of a cooperative and other forms of employee ownership could be the best way of ensuring the continuity of an enterprise; stresses that this kind of transfer of businesses to employees, in particular with regard to worker cooperatives and worker buy-outs, should be supported by a specific EU budget line that also includes financial instruments; calls urgently for the creation, with the participation of the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the social partners, and with stakeholders from the cooperative movement, of a European mechanism designed to promote the development of cooperatives and, in particular, business transfers under the cooperative form, also through, for example, the instrument of mutualisation funds;

26.

Points out that the use of worker buy-outs is becoming an increasingly common practice in the Member States in response to the economic crisis; calls on the Commission, therefore, to identify financial instruments or to extend existing ones to encourage this practice;

27.

Emphasises the active role of social cooperatives in the restructuring of SMEs, in particular through ‘social spin-offs’, which promote the integration of workers who can be defined as disadvantaged and who are in a critical employment situation, by strengthening — through solidarity — a growing capacity to meet social demand;

28.

Notes that, very often, the problem encountered in business transfers to employees is not only a question of the length of the relevant procedures but also, and even more importantly, of lack of knowledge about this business scenario amongst relevant professionals (e.g. lawyers and accountants) and within the legal and education system; stresses that the training and awareness-raising of all players involved in the creation or transfer of ownership of enterprises would greatly contribute to promoting this practice; recommends, therefore, that the cooperative form of enterprise be assigned a permanent place in the relevant curricula of universities and management schools; believes, furthermore, that better knowledge about cooperatives should also be promoted and business transfers to employees under the cooperative form should be supported financially, also through a targeted, intelligent use of the Structural Funds, amongst trade unions and bodies tasked with providing information on the creation or transfer of businesses; underlines the expertise acquired in creating and transferring enterprises in the form of cooperatives by cooperative federations in some Member States and calls on the Commission to put in place mechanisms to facilitate cooperation and exchanges of best practices and methods in this field between enterprises and to report to the Council and Parliament on the outcome;

29.

Urges the Member States to develop a framework to facilitate business transfers to employees, including financial mechanisms designed to help employees invest in enterprises in crisis or without a successor, as well as preferential rights for employees, in order to create the best conditions for a takeover bid for an enterprise facing closure;

30.

Believes also that the Member States should adopt policies to facilitate action by employees to take part in the capital and results of their enterprises, through concrete fiscal mechanisms in other forms of industrial and service enterprises as well, and with the necessary legal protection, and corresponding ratio of participation, in the governance, oversight, decision-making and responsibility of the enterprise; recalls that such activities might increase the competitiveness of the respective sector as a whole;

31.

Emphasises the positive aspects of mechanisms that are typical of the cooperative model, such as the indivisibility of reserves, i.e. reserves that cannot be distributed among members even in the event of liquidation, but which must be used for the development of the cooperative movement, and legal provisions to allow third parties to provide cooperatives with venture capital, with or without voting rights, such as mutualisation funds and Cooperazione Finanza Impresa (CFI) in Italy, the Institut de Développement de l’Economie Sociale (ESFIN-IDES) in France and the investment structure of the Mondragon Corporation in Spain;

32.

Calls on the Commission to promote policies and measures in favour of maintaining existing jobs and not only the creation of new jobs in start-ups; asks the Commission to create new start-up services to support the cooperative form of enterprise through raising awareness and training initiatives;

33.

Stresses that the conversion of enterprises in crisis into economically sustainable cooperatives requires a precise and early diagnosis; calls on the authorities at all levels to cooperate with the social partners and the cooperative movement in making such early diagnoses, and in assessing the feasibility and worthwhileness of transforming the enterprises into cooperatives; believes that trade unions and cooperative federations should also be associated in this process;

34.

Calls on the Commission to draw up a comprehensive survey comparing the best practices implemented in the Member States and the national laws which promote the conversion of businesses into cooperatives, in particular provisions concerning takeovers, bankruptcies, financing arrangements, business support bodies and the setting up of clusters of cooperatives; stresses the importance of involving cooperatives in such a survey in order to set the priorities; calls, to that end, on the Commission to consider developing a database that systematically collects cases and information on restructuring into cooperatives, with a view to circulating good practices and collecting consistent data;

35.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to facilitate and promote the emergence of clusters of cooperatives and social enterprises in order to help them find the resources they need to occupy a more prominent role in the production and distribution chain and support the economies of scale necessary to fund research, development and innovation;

36.

Emphasises that cooperative enterprises in industry and services, and particularly SMEs, cannot — for a variety of reasons, including the nature of their entrepreneurship — gain access to venture capital and credit on the capital markets; notes also that workers’ cooperatives in capital-intensive sectors normally find it difficult to obtain large quantities of capital from their members, and that appropriate financial instruments should therefore be created to ensure that their forms of entrepreneurship are respected;

37.

Points out that the issue of access to credit for cooperatives is of particular importance given the specific nature of their structure; calls, therefore, on the Commission, the Basel Committee and the EIB to develop and use quality parameters, also in terms of providing credit and financing, in order to differentiate the role of cooperatives, including social cooperatives, from other types of business;

38.

Considers it necessary to strengthen the capitalisation of cooperatives by making better use of the resources that can be provided by their social structure; calls on the Commission to promote measures in support of capitalisation, including tax benefits — even if they are limited in time — once buy-outs have been established or implemented, without them being regarded as state aid;

39.

Points out that in some Member States, outside parties may provide venture capital to cooperatives while gaining only limited or no voting rights — in order that member-ownership and control structures are respected — and that this has enabled cooperatives to improve their dialogue with other financial institutions; expresses its approval of such policies and encourages all Member States to facilitate cooperatives’ access to credit;

40.

Considers that the Commission, together with the EIB and the European Investment Fund (EIF), should ensure that cooperatives have access to EU-level financial mechanisms — including, where appropriate, the SME financing action plan suggested in the Single Market Act — and that they should make a special effort, together with the cooperative banking sector, to ensure that this happens; stresses that such actions could improve the functioning of the Single Market;

41.

Considers that the specific characteristics of cooperative banks must be taken into account in the regulation of financial markets and in the implementing laws that follow;

42.

Emphasises that the programmes and funds being established under the Multi-annual Financial Framework (2014-2020) should be important instruments for supporting cooperatives; contends that, when operational programmes are established, there should be a focus on facilitating the establishment of new cooperatives, providing support for sustainable business development and responsible restructuring, including measures concerning, in particular, business transfers to employees and social cooperatives, in local development and social, technological and process innovation, using global grants and other financial instruments, including the Globalisation Adjustment Fund;

43.

Takes the view that, in EU and national financial programming, particular attention should be paid to (or a certain percentage set aside for) cooperatives that aim to facilitate access to employment for disadvantaged people, as also defined in Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002, in order to consolidate and develop more and better levels of social protection;

44.

Calls on the Commission to support, in the next financial year, a pilot project to assist in the transfer of enterprises in crisis to workers, so they can continue working, thereby creating new cooperatives that can revive enterprises that are in crisis or bankrupt;

45.

Calls on the Commission to develop measures to support youth employment in the cooperative sector; calls as well on the Commission to encourage the dissemination in the Member States of the cooperative model as a key instrument for creating fresh employment;

46.

Believes that the Member States should also take steps to make it easier for cooperatives to gain access to the whole range of business support services, as this will help them contribute further to a sustainable development of their activities; urges, in this regard, the Member States to introduce measures to facilitate the access of cooperatives to credit, particularly with regards to worker cooperatives, social cooperatives, artisans’ cooperatives and cooperatives formed of micro-enterprises;

47.

Considers that the Member States should adopt appropriate measures for the removal of any legal, administrative or bureaucratic obstacles preventing or restricting the growth of cooperatives;

48.

Believes that small cooperative credit associations’ access to markets should be facilitated throughout Europe;

49.

Considers, furthermore, that inter-SME collaborative networks, such as those that already exist in the EU under the cooperative form (artisans’ cooperatives, SME cooperatives, activity and employment cooperatives, etc.), should be encouraged, since such networks reinforce considerably the establishment and sustainability of micro and small enterprises, through shared marketing, purchases or other services, and help them become sources of innovation;

50.

Believes that in order to support the creation of new cooperatives, services for start-up cooperatives should be developed; believes, moreover, that initiatives promoting the cooperative model among new potential entrepreneurs (i.e. in university curricula) should be encouraged, both at national and European level;

51.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/41

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Innovating for Sustainable Growth: a Bioeconomy for Europe’ (COM(2012)0060),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘EU 2020: a European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ (COM(2010)2020),

—

having regard to its resolution of 24 May 2012 on a resource-efficient Europe (1),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Tackling the challenges in commodity markets and on raw materials’ (COM(2011)0025) and its resolution of 13 September 2011 concerning this communication (2),

—

having regard to the Council Conclusions from the United Kingdom Presidency in 2005 (‘The Knowledge-Based Bio-Economy in Europe’), from the German Presidency in 2007 (‘En route to the Knowledge Based Bio-Economy’) and from the Belgian Presidency in 2010 (‘The Knowledge Based Economy in Europe: achievements and challenges’),

—

having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinions of the Committee on Development, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Regional Development (A7-0201/2013),

A.

whereas the world population is projected to increase from 7 billion to more than 9 billion in 2050, resulting in an estimated 70 % increase in the demand for food and putting strong pressure on water reserves;

B.

whereas the scarcity of natural reserves worldwide, the increasing pressure on renewable raw materials and the global effects of climate change require us to use resources efficiently;

C.

whereas a long-term, innovative and efficient approach will ensure not only greater sustainability but also support for rural and regional development, a potential reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, greater sustainability of the production cycle in addition to the spread of industrial innovation along the entire value chain;

D.

whereas the transition to a sustainable economy will strengthen the competitiveness of European industry and the agricultural sector, increase economic growth and thus promote a significant increase in European employment levels;

E.

whereas a successful bioeconomy for Europe depends on the availability of sustainably managed and sourced food stocks (from agriculture, forestry and biodegradable waste);

F.

whereas the EU bioeconomy has already a turnover of nearly EUR 2 trillion, and significant growth is expected from sustainable primary production, food processing, industrial biotechnology and biorefineries;

1.

Welcomes the Commission communication entitled ‘Innovating for Sustainable Growth: a Bioeconomy for Europe’ and the action plan for implementing the bioeconomy strategy set out therein;

2.

Considers that the bioeconomy makes it possible to produce industrial and consumer commodities at lower costs, using less energy and creating less environmental pollution;

3.

Shares the view that the transition to a smart, sustainable and inclusive bioeconomy should be based not only on the production of renewable natural resources with a low environmental impact, but also on a sustainable use of those resources from an environmental, economic and social point of view, maintaining the use of biotic resources within the boundaries of ecosystem renewal;

4.

Underlines the urgency of taking action now to support innovation and investment in new techniques and business models and to create the incentives that will bring long-term benefits for the economy; emphasises the key role of the private sector in delivering sustainable economic growth;

5.

Is of the view that the bioeconomy is a prerequisite for achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy and, more specifically, of the initiatives ‘The Innovation Union’ and ‘A resource-efficient Europe’;

6.

Welcomes the Commission’s support for a radical change in the EU’s approach to the production, consumption, processing, storage, recycling and disposal of biological resources;

7.

Points out that while 22 million people are already employed in the bioeconomy, accounting for 9 % of total employment in the EU, it has a strong potential to employ millions more;

8.

Supports the Commission’s proposal to create a task force and roadmap on bioindustries, in which to highlight the contribution made by renewable resources and biotechnology to sustainable development and to encourage regions and operators to develop new innovations for the bioeconomy sector;

9.

Calls on the Member States to develop national and regional bioeconomy action plans, and requests the Commission to present a bi-annual report to Parliament with regard to the implementation of a bioeconomy;

10.

Emphasises that the EU is a global leader in various fields of bioscience and biotechnologies; takes the view that the transition to a bioeconomy will enable Europe to take some major steps forward in terms of the low-carbon economy, innovation and competitiveness and will enhance its role on the international scene;

11.

Underlines the importance and huge potential of resource and energy efficiency; stresses the need to ‘produce more with less’ so that the bioeconomy remains sustainable;

12.

Takes the view that a bioeconomy for Europe should not merely substitute the current fossil-based economy or repeat current wasteful behaviour and consumption patterns but should evolve into a more efficient and sustainable model taking into account social and environmental stewardship throughout all bioeconomy-based value chains;

13.

Welcomes the on-going revision of the Union’s biofuel legislation in order to mitigate the negative effects of indirect land-use change (ILUC), and to promote the market for, and development of, more advanced biofuels that should allow greater use to be made of non-food raw materials such as waste, residues and ligno-cellulosic and cellulosic materials;

14.

Recalls that ILUC factors for biofuels and bioliquids, as well as binding sustainability criteria for the use of solid and gaseous biomass, should be included in the Renewable Energy Directive and the Fuel Quality Directive; calls on the Commission to propose a Biomass Framework Directive covering all applications of biomass (energy, fuels, materials and chemicals) and introducing a biomass hierarchy;

15.

Encourages the Commission to continue its research and development coordination efforts across the borders of the Member States and across the various sectors, and highlights in particular the need for research into the assessment of sustainability boundaries of biotic resources, taking into account ecosystem functions and natural food chains as well as human food demand;

16.

Calls for more detailed research to establish the social and environmental opportunities, as well as the potential costs of the bioeconomy, given the diverse potential impacts and possible wrong methods of exploiting the bioeconomy, in terms of the use of scarce natural resources, the risk of damage to the environment and of biodiversity loss and the opportunity for conservation;

17.

Supports the establishment of a Bioeconomy Panel of experts to help enhance synergies and coherence between policies and initiatives, and a Bioeconomy Observatory, in order to promote mutual learning, by securing a continuous exchange of knowledge and information between research institutes, companies, institutions, universities, regional operators, farmers and citizens in rural areas, and hasten the development of a legal framework to increase and facilitate research, its applications and the commercialisation of innovations;

18.

Recalls the importance of the application of the precautionary principal in the use of biotechnologies, especially in the areas of genetically manipulated organisms and synthetic biology;

19.

Believes that multidisciplinary and cross-sectoral information and training programmes need to be established so that the findings of research are made accessible to stakeholders, including consumers, creating opportunities to increase awareness and involvement;

20.

Calls for the elimination of existing obstacles to innovation along the value chain, notably by rapid and science-based EU approval procedures for biotechnological products and much faster market access;

21.

Calls on the Commission to propose practical measures of regionally comprehensive scope to promote the production and consumption of bioeconomy products at regional level;

22.

Stresses that the bioeconomy requires that new skills, new knowledge and new disciplines be developed and/or integrated further in order to tackle bioeconomy-related societal changes, promote competitiveness, growth and job creation, meet the needs of industry and ensure that skills and jobs are better matched;

23.

Stresses that the bioeconomy needs first-rate know-how and a skilled workforce; maintains that it is necessary to provide for vocational training and higher education needs in the regions of the European Union, taking into account the regions’ specific characteristics; points out that wide-ranging education and training systems in the regions also foster business expansion;

24.

Welcomes the EUR 4,5 billion budget proposed by the Commission in its Framework Programme for Research (Horizon 2020) and hopes that this budget will be made available to all sectors and instruments of the bioeconomy and for the purpose of further refining innovations, including research on the ecosystem boundaries, reuse and recycling of biomaterials;

25.

Is of the view that biorefineries based on local sustainable biomaterial that does not displace food or other more valuable uses are a key tool for implementing virtuous processes of conversion of disused plants and for revitalising crisis-stricken areas through innovative processes and investment towards a circular economy, and hopes that this role will continue to be encouraged;

26.

Emphasises that sufficient quantities of sustainable raw materials are needed for the successful operation of biorefineries in Europe; points out that this will also require improving infrastructures for storage and transport and developing the necessary logistics;

27.

Points out that there are only a limited number of demonstration facilities in Europe and that increased investments are needed in order to maintain the leading role of European industries in the sector of biorefineries; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support pilot and demonstration activities for the up-scaling of products and processes;

28.

Emphasises that bioeconomy policies must be better designed to ensure a cascading use of biomass; calls, in this respect, for the development of a legal instrument that will pave the way for a more efficient and sustainable use of this precious resource; stresses that such an instrument should establish a cascading use principle in the ‘pyramid of biomass’, taking into account its different segments and strengthening it at its highest levels; points out that such an approach would lead to a hierarchical, smart and efficient use of biomass, to value-adding applications and to supporting measures such as coordination of research along the whole value chain;

29.

Considers it necessary to ensure an integrated, coherent, cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary approach to bioeconomy, and calls for the harmonisation of the different EU policies involved and the related guiding principles — such as the precautionary principle — in the various sectors (the Resource Efficiency roadmap; the Innovation Union; the Raw Materials Initiative; Horizon 2020; the Environment Action Programme 2020; the Cohesion, Common Agricultural and Common Fisheries policies; the Renewable Energies, Water Framework, Waste Framework and Packaging directives; and specific measures on biowaste); considers it necessary, as well, to establish a uniform, long-term, stable, regulatory environment, both at EU-level and nationally, aiming at promoting and increasing investments for the bioeconomy in Europe;

30.

Calls on the Commission to make provisions for financial instruments to support pre-commercial investments, turn research findings into commercial successes and enable innovative companies, especially SMEs, to find financial and other support instruments encouraging the development of the bioeconomy, for example through the use of Regional and Structural Funds and European Investment Bank risk sharing facilities, through increased coherence between different EU research and innovation funds, and through the establishment of a one-stop shop for information about all bio-based economy related initiatives, with a view to achieving the greatest possible impact; acknowledges the difficulty, and the financial risks, associated with commercialising bioeconomy innovations and placing them on the market;

31.

Calls for the development of industrial infrastructure and optimised supply chains for bio-based products in rural and coastal areas with a view to creating new jobs in agriculture, forestry and aquaculture; calls for EU rural development funding to be made available for this purpose, and for this to be done in such a way as to reduce, rather than increase, damage to the environment and biodiversity loss;

32.

Calls for targeted and specific action to reduce the complexity and duration of the bureaucratic authorisation procedures that complicate biorefinery development processes and are likely to encourage the transfer of innovative, cutting-edge technologies outside the EU;

33.

Approves the use of the public-private partnership (PPP) formula, drawing adequate lessons from the problems that emerged in previous applications of the same formula to other sectors; calls on the Commission to allocate adequate resources for development and growth of such partnerships, in the belief that this is a key method for enabling new value chains to be created, enhancing existing chains and facilitating investment in technologies and prototypes that can transfer research findings to the market;

34.

Agrees with the need for a multi-level approach, and calls for increasing attention to be paid to the regional and local dimension of the bioeconomy and to bottom-up initiatives; welcomes the establishment, at regional, national and EU levels, of bioeconomy platforms that are able to measure the progress made in a given sector and enable an exchange of know-how and best practices to take place, with a view to ensuring that the bioeconomy develops evenly throughout the EU; calls on the Commission also to involve experts in the sector and in all the subject areas concerned, in addition to representatives of consumers and citizens; points out that regional economies have a central role to play in achieving smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;

35.

Believes that bottom-up initiatives are important in creating a bio-based society and that a business- and demand-driven approach, combined with a government-driven approach, is crucial; considers that adequate possibilities should be provided for regional initiatives; calls on the Commission to support such networks and clusters with a view to promoting the exchange of experiences.

36.

Calls on the Commission to focus financial support on innovation in line with the Innovation Union, including the Horizon 2020 priorities, stimulating research findings to prepare for marketing, bridging the so-called ‘valley of death’ of research in Europe;

37.

Takes the view that there are a number of excellent tools (public procurement, standardisation, tax incentives, certification systems and specific labelling) that could secure a sufficient supply of sustainable and high-quality bio-based products as well as provide resource-efficient production systems; believes that reform of the current legislation is required; calls on the Commission to develop sustainability criteria for the use of biomass on which also market-creating tools should be based;

38.

Stresses that a bio-based economy that relies on exploitation of biological resources instead of fossil energy must be guided by a sound political framework that takes into account not only economic viability but also social and ecological sustainability factors;

39.

Is of the opinion that it is vital to involve and inform consumers on the choice of bio-based products and services; hopes, in this regard that such products will become standardised based on sufficient sustainability criteria in the EU, considering that this would be a tool for promoting a profitable European market in these products;

40.

Believes that the lifespan of the bio-based product may not be artificially shortened; the product should be constructed for the longest possible life-time;

41.

Underlines that the bioeconomy will make a significant contribution to the development of rural and coastal areas; takes the view that synergy and close cooperation along the value chain, including local producers of agricultural and forestry raw materials and biorefineries, would help strengthen the competitiveness and increase the profitability of rural regions; stresses the need to develop a long-term bioeconomy strategy, taking due account of the need to ensure food security;

42.

Requires that the biological and biotechnological processes that are developed can be used in bio-based renewable resources from waste and non-food crops and also as components in existing agricultural and forest-based businesses;

43.

Maintains that one of the bioeconomy’s guiding principles is to enhance resource efficiency and reduce dependence on imported raw materials, energy and non-renewable natural resources; points to the importance of the forest sector and other bio-based industries, and maintains that carbon-neutral renewable natural resources and raw materials, such as wood and wood fibre, can replace non-renewable fossil raw materials; points out that the bioeconomy industry produces many high added-value products, such as chemicals, medicines, plastics and other innovative new materials and that it creates jobs; highlights the potential of biotechnologies based on marine resources;

44.

Calls on the Commission to promote measures to increase feedstock potentials in a sustainable manner, better mobilise such feedstocks, collect biodegradable waste — avoiding extensive transportation — and ensure that biomass use remains within ecological boundaries and does not reduce the carbon sink function; considers it urgent, in this context, to establish sustainability criteria for biomass energy use in order to ensure the availability of biomass for more resource-efficient purposes, preventing incentives for the transformation of biomass into energy from creating market distortions and reducing its availability for producers;

45.

Considers it important to invest in bioeconomy supply chains so as to guarantee the availability of raw materials; maintains that bioeconomy strategies should encourage not only more efficient use of household and municipal waste, but also the recovery of agricultural and forestry by-product streams and residues; calls for better and enabling legislation providing legal certainty and strong support for sustainable use of bioeconomy resources and exploitation of raw materials, and for policy to be based, in every respect, on a flexible, long-term approach that promotes investments;

46.

Considers that, in keeping with the guidelines of the new European industrial policy strategy, the bioeconomy can make an important contribution to combating the process of de-industrialisation that is currently afflicting Europe, and can help reverse it by means of new strategies to stimulate the market and restore the competitiveness of the regional system;

47.

Strongly urges the Commission to define environmentally harmful subsidies as ‘a result of a government action that confers an advantage on consumers or producers, in order to supplement their income or lower their costs, but in doing so, discriminates against sound environmental practices’ (3); calls on the Commission and Member States to adopt, without delay and by 2014, concrete plans, based on this definition, for progressively phasing out all environmentally harmful subsidies by 2020, including subsidies which incentivise inefficient use of renewable resources and subsidies on fossil fuels, and to report on progress through the National Reform Programmes; in this context, is concerned that subsidies for the use of biomaterials for energy are already undermining resource efficiency objectives;

48.

Notes with concern that rising demand for biomass, particularly wood, may spark widespread deforestation in developing countries, where greenhouse gas emissions are not accounted for under the Kyoto Protocol; points out that while this can impact on soil quality, water cycles and biodiversity, it increases strain on global agreements such as the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) and the UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD); fears equally that, considering that land governance systems are weak in many developing countries, rising demand for wood products may trigger off illegal logging and in return weaken voluntary partnership agreements under the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan;

49.

Underlines that the transition to a bioeconomy will contribute to further integration of the Rio+20 outcomes into EU policies; believes that the EU should further intensify its contribution to initiatives that facilitate the transition towards an inclusive green economy at international level;

50.

Calls for the EU to become an international research and innovation powerhouse in the area of bio-economy research; states that new products, processes and services based on renewable resources will enhance the competitiveness of European industry and make it an international front runner;

51.

Deems it crucial to develop international legally binding sustainability standards for all sectors of biomass usage, as well as binding sustainable forest management criteria; urges the EU to pursue the adoption of multilateral agreements and provide, especially for LDCs, related institutional and technical support for ensuring the sustainable use of biomass.

52.

Takes the view that the bioeconomy model that is developed within this strategy will solve the contingent critical issues and, in the longer term, may initiate patterns of production, consumption, development and lifestyles that are more sustainable and effective, by reactivating the process of European growth as a result of a new synthesis between the economy, the environment and social quality;

53.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/47

—

having regard to Articles 310, 311, 312 and 323 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

—

having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2012 in the interests of achieving a positive outcome of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 approval procedure (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 March 2013 on the European Council conclusions of 7—8 February 2013 concerning the Multiannual Financial Framework (2),

—

having regard to the conclusions of the European Council adopted on 8 February 2013,

—

having regard to the conclusions of the European Council adopted on 28 June 2013,

—

having regard to Rule 110(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

1.

Welcomes the political agreement reached on 27 June 2013 at the highest political level between Parliament, the Council Presidency and the Commission on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2014-2020, following long and strenuous negotiations; acknowledges the significant efforts of the Irish Presidency in reaching this agreement;

2.

Stresses that — thanks to Parliament’s persistence in the negotiations — a number of provisions have been adopted for the first time which will be instrumental in making the new financial framework operational, consistent, transparent and more responsive to the needs of EU citizens; highlights, in particular, the new arrangements relating to revision of the MFF, flexibility, own resources and the unity and transparency of the budget, which were key priorities for Parliament in the negotiations;

3.

Is ready to put the MFF Regulation and the new Interinstitutional Agreement to the vote in the early autumn, as soon as the necessary technical and legal conditions for the finalisation of the relevant texts are fulfilled, so that the latter reflect the overall agreement reached between the Council and Parliament;

4.

Reiterates, however, its position, as set out in its aforementioned resolution on the MFF of 13 March 2013, that the consent vote on the MFF Regulation cannot be granted unless there is an absolute guarantee that the outstanding payment claims for 2013 will be covered in full; expects the Council, therefore, to take a formal decision on Draft Amending Budget 2/2013 for an amount of EUR 7,3 billion, no later than the Ecofin Council to be held on 9 July 2013; insists that the Council stick to its political commitment to adopt without delay a further amending budget to avoid any shortfall in payment appropriations that could lead to a structural deficit in the EU budget at the end of 2013; states that Parliament will not give its consent to the MFF Regulation or will not adopt the Budget 2014 until this new amending budget, covering the remaining deficit as identified by the Commission, has been adopted by the Council;

5.

Stresses, moreover, that the MFF Regulation cannot be legally adopted unless there is a political agreement on the relevant legal bases, especially on points that are also reflected in the MFF Regulation; expresses its willingness to conclude the negotiations on the legal bases for all multiannual programmes as soon as possible and reconfirms its adherence to the principle that ‘nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’; insists on full respect for Parliament’s legislative powers, as granted by the Treaty of Lisbon, and calls on the Council to negotiate properly all the so-called ‘MFF-related’ parts of the legal bases; welcomes the political agreements reached so far on several new EU multiannual programmes;

6.

Acknowledges the fiscal consolidation that Member States are facing; considers, however, that the overall level of the next MFF, as decided by the European Council, falls short of EU political goals and the need to ensure the successful implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy; is concerned that this level of resources might not be sufficient to endow the EU with the necessary means to recover from the current crisis in a coordinated way and to come out stronger; regrets the fact that Member States continue to underestimate the role of the EU budget in, and its contribution to, strengthening economic governance and fiscal coordination across the EU; fears, moreover, that such low MFF ceilings will significantly reduce any room for manoeuvre for Parliament in the annual budgetary procedures;

7.

Stresses the importance of a compulsory review and subsequent revision of the next MFF by the end of 2016, in order to allow the next Commission and Parliament to reassess the EU’s political priorities, to adapt the MFF to new challenges and needs and to take full account of the latest macroeconomic projections; insists that the compulsory review to be conducted by the Commission of both the expenditure and the revenue sides of the EU budget be accompanied by a legislative proposal for a revision of the MFF Regulation, as stated in the Commission declaration annexed to that regulation; intends to make this compulsory MFF revision a key demand in the investiture of the new Commission President;

8.

Reiterates the crucial importance of the enhanced flexibility in the MFF 2014-2020 with a view to making full use of the respective MFF ceilings for commitments (EUR 960 billion) and payments (EUR 908,4 billion), as imposed by the European Council; welcomes, therefore, the Council’s approval of two key proposals put forward by Parliament, namely the creation of a Global Margin in Payments and a Global Margin in Commitments, which will allow the automatic carry-over of unused appropriations from one financial year to the next; views as regrettable, however, the limitations imposed by the Council (in terms of time or amount) which may prevent the full use of these instruments; considers that improving these mechanisms should be an integral part of the post-electoral revision of the MFF to be proposed by the Commission;

9.

Emphasises that the new flexibility rules on commitments should lead, in the course of the MFF 2014-2020, to additional appropriations for programmes linked to growth and employment, and in particular the Youth Employment Initiative, in order to ensure continuous funding and maximise the efficient use of the agreed ceilings;

10.

Welcomes the 2014 and 2015 frontloading of appropriations for the Youth Employment Initiative and insists that extra appropriations will be needed as of 2016 to ensure the sustainability and effectiveness of this programme;

11.

Stresses that, as a result of Parliament’s insistence, funding for Horizon 2020, Erasmus and COSME will also be frontloaded in 2014 and 2015 in order to decrease the funding gap between the relevant appropriations in the 2013 and 2014 Budgets; insists, in addition, that it is essential that further funding also be made available for the Digital Agenda;

12.

Welcomes the fact that provision has been made for an additional increase of up to EUR 1 billion for the food distribution scheme for those Member States wishing to use this increase to assist the most deprived persons in the Union; expects the Council and Parliament to agree as soon as possible on the concrete modalities for the implementation of this commitment in the context of the current negotiations on the legal basis for the scheme in question;

13.

Deplores the fact that the Council has not been able to make any progress on the reform of the own-resources system on the basis of the legislative proposals put forward by the Commission; emphasises that the EU budget should be financed by genuine own resources, as provided for in the Treaty, and states its commitment to a reform that reduces the share of GNI-based contributions to the EU budget to a maximum of 40 %; expects, therefore, the Joint Declaration on Own Resources agreed between the three EU institutions to allow tangible progress to be achieved, especially in view of the mid-term review/revision of the MFF; calls, therefore, for the high-level group on own resources to be convened at the time of the formal adoption of the MFF Regulation with a mandate to examine all aspects of the reform of the own-resources system;

14.

Welcomes the outcome of the negotiations on the unity and transparency of the EU budget; considers that any possible ‘eurozone budget’ that may be envisaged in the future should be either integrated into, or annexed to, the EU budget;

15.

Views as deeply regrettable the procedure that led to this agreement on the MFF 2014-2020, which in reality has had the effect of depriving Parliament of its true budgetary powers as provided for in the TFEU; considers that the numerous meetings held over the past few years between its delegation and the successive Council presidencies on the margins of the relevant General Affairs Council meetings, as well as its participation in informal Council meetings dealing with the MFF, served no clear purpose, as they had no impact on the spirit, calendar or content of the negotiations or on the Council’s position, including the need to distinguish the legislative from the budgetary aspects of the MFF agreement;

16.

Calls, therefore, on its Committee on Budgets, in cooperation with its Committee on Constitutional Affairs, to draw the necessary conclusions and to come forward with new proposals on the modalities of such negotiations, in order to ensure the democratic and transparent nature of the whole budgetary procedure;

17.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and the other institutions and bodies concerned.

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/49

—

having regard to its resolution on European road safety 2011-2020 of 27 September 2011 (1),

—

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 (2),

—

having regard to the Commission Communication ‘Towards a European road safety area: policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020’ (COM(2010)0389),

—

having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document ‘On the Implementation of objective 6 of the European Commission’s policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020 — First milestone towards an injury strategy’ (SWD(2013)0094),

—

having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020’ (3),

—

having regard to the ‘World report on road traffic injury prevention’, published jointly in 2004 by the World Bank and the WHO,

—

having regard to its report of 3 July 2012 on eCall: a new 112 service for citizens (4),

—

having regard to the question to the Commission on ‘Road safety 2011-2020 — First milestones towards an injury strategy’ (O-000061/2013 — B7-0211/2013),

—

having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas in 2011 more than 30 000 people were killed and almost 1 500 000 were reported injured (more than 250 000 of them seriously injured) in road accidents in the European Union;

B.

whereas for every fatal accident, a further four accidents lead to permanent disabilities, 40 cause slight injuries and 10 cause serious injuries;

C.

whereas more than half of all serious injuries occur inside urban areas, especially affecting pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists (including pedelec users) and other vulnerable road users;

D.

whereas the major causes of road casualties and serious injuries are equipment failure, road design, poor road maintenance and driver behaviour including speed skills; whereas speed is directly related to the seriousness of injury, and whereas some Member States are considering raising their motorway speed limits;

E.

whereas involvement in road accidents is one of the leading causes of hospital admission for EU citizens aged under 45, and many serious injuries result in lifelong suffering or permanent disabilities;

F.

whereas emergency services’ response time (the ‘golden hour’ principle), including providing life-saving first aid, as well as quality of care, play an important role in surviving accidents;

G.

whereas the socio-economic cost of road traffic injuries is estimated at 2 % of GDP, or approximately EUR 250 billion for 2012 (5);

H.

whereas European actions in this regard are showing positive results;

1.

Supports the Commission’s initiative to give high priority to serious injury in road safety work;

2.

Welcomes the adoption by the Commission of a common EU definition of serious injuries, based on the globally accepted trauma classification known as the Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale;

3.

Calls on the Member States to rapidly implement the common EU definition of serious road traffic injury and, on that basis, to collect and report statistics per transport mode, including vulnerable road users, as well as per type of road infrastructure for 2014;

4.

Urges the Commission, on the basis of the data collected, to set an ambitious target of reducing road injuries by 40 % over the period 2014-2020, and to keep the global idea of ‘Vision Zero’ as a long-term goal;

5.

Believes that the development of a common mechanism for data gathering and reporting should not prevent urgent actions being taken at EU level to reduce the number of people seriously injured on the roads;

6.

Welcomes the priorities set by the Commission for developing its global strategy, i.e. to address collision impact, accident management strategy, first aid and emergency services and long-term rehabilitation processes, and calls for the swift implementation of these priorities;

7.

Stresses that a whole range of existing legislation and measures must be better implemented without delay in order to reduce collision impacts, increase safety for road users and reduce serious injuries;

8.

Calls on the Commission to review its legislation on passive and active vehicle safety so as to adapt it to the most recent technical progress, and to support the implementation of in-car enforcement technologies;

9.

Asks the Commission to support the development of safe and intelligent road infrastructure;

10.

Calls on the Commission to provide detailed information on how Member States are transposing Directive 2011/82/EU on facilitating the cross-border exchange of information on road safety related traffic offences;

11.

Urges the Member States to continue their efforts in fighting drink- and drug-driving and exchanging best practice for the assessment and rehabilitation of traffic offenders;

12.

Notes that pedestrians and cyclists together account for 50 % of all urban road fatalities and a large share of serious injuries;

13.

Supports the monitoring and further development of technical standards and policies for the protection of the most vulnerable road users — the elderly, young children, disabled persons and cyclists, as part of a concerted effort to promote the ‘rights of vulnerable road users’ in EU legislation and transport policy;

14.

Calls on the Commission to provide an overview of urban areas with a 30 km/h speed limit and the effects of that limit on reducing fatalities and serious injuries;

15.

Calls on the Member States to stress the importance of information and training campaigns related to safer cycling and walking and of policies aimed at promoting cycling and walking, as the safety of cyclists and pedestrians in urban areas is strongly correlated with the prevalence of cycling and walking as transport modes, where appropriate in combination with public and collective mobility;

16.

Calls on the Commission to develop urban road safety guidelines that could be included in Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs), and to consider linking EU cofinancing of urban transport projects to SUMPs that include EU reduction targets for road fatalities and serious injuries;

17.

Urges the Member States to support the European Emergency Number 112 and to comply with the requirements of making the Public Safety Answering Points fully operational by 2015 and implementing, as quickly as possible, an awareness campaign for their introduction;

18.

Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to ensure the mandatory deployment by 2015, in all Member States, of a public 112-based eCall system in all new type-approved cars, whilst observing data protection rules;

19.

Calls on the Commission, via the consideration of best practice in the Member States, to consider the introduction of ‘accompanied driving’ for older minors;

20.

Calls on the Member States systematically to promote first aid training as a way of increasing the reactivity of bystanders to an accident helping victims prior to the arrival of the emergency services;

21.

Calls on the Member States to encourage collaboration between emergency services and vehicle designers and manufacturers in order to ensure effective intervention and safety for the rescuer and the injured;

22.

Calls on the Member States to encourage the implementation of the e-Health systems, and especially the use of Intelligent Transport Communication systems by emergency teams, including in emergency vehicles;

23.

Encourages the Member States to emphasise the importance of post-accident care in their health sector policies and to further improve longer-term hospital care, post-hospital care and rehabilitation, including trauma and psychological care for the survivors and witnesses of a road accident by, for example, providing assistance points to help them improve their quality of life;

24.

Calls on the Member States to improve awareness of the impact of serious injuries by developing closer links with other measures having a social impact, such as levels of impairment, disability and functional incapacity, and to develop educational programmes on road safety;

25.

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

26.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 75/52