EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52017AR4309
Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Proposal for a European Defence Fund
Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Proposal for a European Defence Fund
Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Proposal for a European Defence Fund
COR 2017/04309
IO C 247, 13.7.2018, p. 43–53
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
13.7.2018 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 247/43 |
Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Proposal for a European Defence Fund
(2018/C 247/08)
|
I. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS
Amendment 1
New citation after last citation
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
|
Having regard to the Permanent Structured Cooperation in Security and Defence (PESCO) agreed by 23 Member States of the European Union on 13 November 2017, as outlined in the Treaty of the EU, Articles 42(6) and 46, as well as Protocol 10 of the said Treaty; |
Amendment 2
Recital 2
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Amendment 3
Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Amendment 4
Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Reason
Self-evident.
Amendment 5
Recital 5
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Reason
N/A
Amendment 6
Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Amendment 7
Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Amendment 8
Recital 21
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
|
|
Amendment 9
New recital after recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||
|
|
Amendment 10
Article 2
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
Article 2 |
Article 2 |
||||
Objectives |
Objectives |
||||
The Programme shall have the following objectives: |
The Programme shall have the following objectives: |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
Reason
The programme has to be inclusive and open to beneficiaries from all Member States, breaking geographical silos. In order to implement liabilities in controlling and defending EU external borders, respective Member States should have the possibility to develop smart specialisation in the context of the defence industry.
Amendment 11
Article 3
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
Article 3 |
Article 3 |
Budget |
Budget |
The amount for the implementation of the Programme for the period 2019-2020 is set at EUR 500 million in current prices. |
The amount for the implementation of the Programme for the period 2019-2020 is set at EUR 500 million in current prices , to be drawn exclusively from unallocated margins and not from budget reallocations. |
Reason
It is not conceivable that the budget for this programme, which was not anticipated at the moment of establishing the multi-annual financial framework, would be drawn from means already allocated to current EU programmes.
Amendment 12
Article 4(1)
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||||
General financing provisions |
General financing provisions |
||||||
The Union’s financial assistance may be provided through the types of financing envisaged by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012, and in particular:
|
The Union’s financial assistance may be provided through the types of financing envisaged by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012, in particular grants and also, where necessary, financial instruments and public procurement. Financial help from the Union can be provided in order to give technical assistance in the development of projects by SMEs. |
Amendment 13
Article 7(1)
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
Eligible Entities |
Eligible Entities |
Beneficiaries shall be undertakings established in the Union, in which Member States and/or nationals of Member States own more than 50 % of the undertaking and effectively control it within the meaning of Article 6(3), whether directly or indirectly through one or more intermediate undertakings. In addition, all infrastructure, facilities, assets and resources used by the participants, including subcontractors and other third parties, in actions funded under the Programme shall not be located on the territory of non-Member States during the entire duration of the action. |
Beneficiaries which meet the criteria for cross-border cooperation, and their subcontractors shall be undertakings established in the Union, in which Member States and/or nationals of Member States own more than 50 % of the undertaking and effectively control it within the meaning of Article 6(3), whether directly or indirectly through one or more intermediate undertakings. In addition, all infrastructure, facilities, assets and resources used by the participants, including subcontractors and other third parties, in actions funded under the Programme shall not be located on the territory of non-Member States during the entire duration of the action. |
Amendment 14
Article 10
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
||||
Award criteria |
Award criteria |
||||
Actions proposed for funding under the Programme shall be evaluated on the basis of the following cumulative criteria: |
Actions proposed for funding under the Programme shall be evaluated on the basis of the following cumulative criteria: |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
Measures proposed for funding under the programme, which is designed to support SMEs and capacity-building in defence and security for regions situated on the EU’s external borders, should be assessed on the basis of the following criteria: |
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
Reason
N/A
Amendment 15
Article 13(3)
Text proposed by the Commission |
CoR amendment |
Work programme |
Work programme |
The work programme shall ensure that a credible proportion of the overall budget will benefit actions enabling the cross-border participation of SMEs. |
The work programme shall ensure that at least 20 % of the overall budget will benefit actions enabling the cross-border participation of SMEs. |
Reason
N/A
II. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,
Introduction
1. |
notes that global security is under threat from an increasingly broad range of threats (war, armed conflict, terrorism, illegal immigration, corruption and populism). Each EU Member State and each region has specific security problems. The European Committee of the Regions (CoR) supports the proposed ‘European Defence Industrial Development Programme’ and the aims thereof: enhancing the competitiveness and innovation of the Union’s defence industry, including cyber defence, better exploitation of the results of defence research, promoting collaboration between undertakings in the development of defence products and technologies and the use of Member States’ long-term cooperative projects. Also to be welcomed is the initiative for setting up a European Defence Fund (EDF), encompassing both the ‘European Defence Industrial Development Programme’ and the ‘Preparatory Action for Defence Research’; |
2. |
reckons that the security of each country and of the whole EU is essentially based on two pillars: economic potential and a society hallmarked by unity and cohesion. The security of each individual Member States is now synonymous with the security of the whole EU. The EU must scale up its efforts to improve its security and raise its profile as an influential global player for peace; |
Compliance with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles
3. |
acknowledges art. 173 TFEU as the appropriate legal basis for the Programme as it relates to the competitiveness of industry; |
4. |
stresses that the implementation of the EDIDP programme will be managed by the European Defence Agency which operates as a regulatory agency responsible to the Council only. Moreover, it is not common practice for a regulatory agency to manage such large budget allocations. The CoR therefore calls on the European Commission to ensure the utmost transparency in operating the EDIDP programme and take example from the functioning of executive agencies responsible to the European Parliament; |
5. |
calls on the Commission to use the potential of all EU Member States and not to concentrate support in specific areas. It should also not be forgotten that regional development is likewise important for domestic security in the individual Member States and is one of their development aims; |
6. |
calls for the expansion of the security and defence capacities of regions with external EU borders to be kept in mind; |
Focus on EU value added
7. |
insists that the EU can achieve peace, freedom, equality and stability if it works closely with the Member States’ governments in those areas where the matter of European value added is on the agenda. The action plan on the European Defence Fund must also contain a commitment to this aim; |
8. |
supports the European Commission’s commitment to use all its powers to strengthen the EU Member States’ defence capabilities and to promote cooperation between states, aimed at securing deeper integration and giving clear guidance as to what direction support for planning national defence capabilities and the expansion of competitive, integrated supply chains should take; |
9. |
would point out that the expansion of competitive, integrated supply chains in the EU depends on Member States’ political will to commit to this. The European Defence Fund should shape and promote common measures between Member States in the area of defence products and technologies; |
10. |
underlines that efforts should be undertaken to actively work towards strategic autonomy for the EU and boost its defence capabilities. The competitiveness of the European defence industry must be supported and it should be carefully examined whether contractors really come from the EU. The main contractors and sub-contractors must be EU-based and undertakings must be at least half-owned by EU Member States or natural or legal persons, and be effectively controlled by European capital. The management and actual control of these companies must be locatable in the European Union. Furthermore, the European Commission must watch that no non-Member States exercises de facto control over organisations belonging to a consortium; |
11. |
emphasises that the European Defence Fund does not replace Member States’ own measures, but complements these with cross-border projects that Member States could not finance alone. The European Defence Fund offers — in partnership with Member States, NATO and other international investments — a complement to Member States’ measures and delivers clear European value added for European defence policy; |
Integration of SMEs in the supply chains of the European defence industry
12. |
welcomes the ‘life cycle’ approach for the European Defence Fund in supporting research and development of products and technologies in the area of defence, for which two areas (windows) are planned in the EDF; |
13. |
strongly urges that additional points be given when examining project applications from consortia to which a large number of SMEs belong; |
14. |
points out that a key condition for developing the two area of the European Defence Fund is an effective mechanism for capability planning, in which priorities for research and capabilities are laid down and close coordination of both areas is undertaken; |
15. |
is of the view that additional funding resources for supporting the defence industry in its own territory must be deployed, and endorses the definition of the beneficiaries used by the Commission in its communication; |
16. |
calls on Member States to be actively involved in managing the two fund areas and in laying down their needs and priorities; |
17. |
welcomes the Commission’s plans for the efficient use of civil applications in the military domain; deems investment in these technologies to be an outstanding opportunity for boosting economic growth in the EU and for creating highly skilled jobs, because this area is at the cross-roads of many sectors: electronics, air travel, robotics, high performance computing, space travel, textiles, construction, telecommunications, surveillance technology, energy, navigation, etc.; |
18. |
points out that undertakings working with these innovative technologies are predominantly start-ups and SMEs which, with the help of appropriate support, could make a considerable contribution to technological progress in the defence sector. The Commission’s decision to the effect that the EU wishes to provide targeted support for SMEs in this sector is to be welcomed; |
19. |
calls for better coordination between the relevant services in order to keep interested parties informed and to promote new goods and technologies with dual use. The EU must turn this enormous potential to good use for boosting growth and competitiveness; |
20. |
shares the European Commission’s view in relation to easier SME participation in cross-border projects, which is to be supported as part of the European Defence Fund. It must be borne in mind that the inclusion of SMEs in the European defence industry supply chains should serve to enhance the security and defence of the EU, competitiveness of the industry and the strategic autonomy thereof. The European Defence Fun should offer incentives for achieving these aims; |
21. |
is of the view that the European Commission needs to mobilise all the instruments it has available so that SMEs throughout the EU have equal access to the EDF. Progress in innovation is not measurable in the short term; the results must first reach full maturity. Of course the introduction of a planned, coordinated innovation policy which covers all levels would provide the most innovative undertakings with the incentive to become strategic investors in SMEs; |
22. |
calls on the Commission to support the following measures, by means of which SME participation in defence projects could be stepped up:
|
Funding
23. |
points out that the EIB group is an important partner for investments in dual use technologies where SMEs play an important role in the areas of military equipment and technology for civil use, cybersecurity, vaccines, biosafety and telecommunications and information infrastructure; |
24. |
emphasises that, given the particular nature of the defence sector, not all bank services are suitable for supporting SMEs; welcomes the EIB’s proactive approach of using other instruments such as loans, guarantees and equity; |
25. |
considers that the adoption of a European Defence Fund must not be used as a pretext for reducing or affecting in any way allocations for cohesion policy, which must remain the European Union’s main public investment tool with a view to improving European integration through social, economic and territorial cohesion. |
Brussels, 23 March 2018.
The President of the European Committee of the Regions
Karl-Heinz LAMBERTZ
(6) Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).
(6) Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).