Author Archives: Matthew Min

Single Farm Payment

Single Farm Payment

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Single Farm Payment

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Single Farm Payment

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 [See amending act(s)].

Summary

Since the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) which took place in June 2003, production-related support has been gradually abolished and included in the Single Payment Scheme (SPS), the system of direct payments which European farmers benefit from. This Regulation continues this reform.

Direct payments are support granted to farmers directly under the framework of one of the support schemes listed in Annex I to the Regulation. Some of this support is still directly linked to production; however the majority of direct support is decoupled and granted under the auspices of an income support scheme called the “Single Payment Scheme” (SPS). Under the SPS, support granted to farmers is not linked to production.

The objective of this Regulation is to gradually integrate support coupled with production into the single payment scheme.

DIRECT PAYMENTS

Cross-compliance

Direct support is subject to the principle of ‘cross-compliance’, according to which farmers must comply with a certain number of requirements in order to receive payments. These requirements relate to three areas:

  • public health, animal and plant health;
  • the environment;
  • animal welfare.

If the farmer does not comply with these requirements, they are penalised with a reduction in or cancellation of the direct payments.

Modulation

Modulation is a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments. Direct payments of over EUR 5 000 have therefore been reduced year on year in accordance with a particular percentage of up to 10 % by 2012.

The corresponding amounts are transferred to the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) to enhance rural development programmes, in particular for measures concerning climate change, renewable energies, water management and biodiversity. The modulation system does not apply to either the outermost regions, the Aegean Islands or to Member States subject to “phasing in”.

Farm advisory system

Farmers may take part in the farm advisory system set up by Member States to advise farmers with regard to compliance with regulatory requirements on management matters and good farming and environmental conditions.

Integrated administration and control system (IACS)

Each Member State must set up an integrated administration and control system which enables the efficiency and monitoring of the support granted to farmers by the EU to be improved. Through this electronic system, the Member State is able to deal with aid applications and be assured through administrative checks and on-site checks that payments are made properly, in order to prevent and, if necessary, manage irregularities and recover undue amounts.

Payment

Full payments are to be made to beneficiaries in one or two instalments per year between 1 December and 30 June of the following calendar year. The Commission may authorise advances. Farmers who have artificially created the conditions required for obtaining payments will not receive them.

SINGLE PAYMENT SCHEME

The single payment scheme allocates aid to farmers irrespective of their production. The principal aim of this system of support is to ensure greater income stability for farmers. The latter henceforth receive the same amount of support regardless of their rate of production. This enables them to align their production with market demands. The aim of the Single Payment Scheme is also to improve the competitiveness and sustainability of agriculture.

National ceilings

Budget ceilings for the Single Payment Scheme for each Member State are published each year in a Commission Regulation.

National reserve

Member States set up a national reserve to grant rights to payments to new farmers and to those deemed to be in special circumstances, and to establish rights for farmers in areas subject to restructuring and/or development programmes.

Payment entitlements

In order to benefit from the Single Payment Scheme, farmers must first have payment entitlements, which they must declare together with the eligible hectares. The payment entitlements may be transferred from one farmer to another under certain conditions.

Historic implementation

In the “historic model”, entitlements are calculated based on the amount of direct payments each farmer has received during a reference period (generally the years 2000, 2001 and 2002. Other calculation options are possible in specific cases or when other integrations are concerned). Each direct payment is calculated by dividing the reference amount by the number of hectares which are entitled to the support received.

Regional implementation

Member States may opt to allocate payments at regional level. In that case, regional ceilings are to be established and divided among the farmers in the region. The value of their entitlements is obtained by dividing the financial envelope by the number of hectares declared in the first year of application of the scheme.

Partial implementation

Member States have had the option of partially implementing the single payment system. In this case, Member States keep part of the coupled aid and pay it to farmers in the form of a supplementary payment and according to production. These options will disappear in 2012, except for sheep/goats and suckler cows, two productions which may prove to be crucial in order to avoid agricultural land being abandoned in certain regions.

CONTEXT

This Regulation forms part of the “health check” component of the Common Agricultural Policy after the 2003 reform. Since then the CAP has been resolutely aimed at simplification by making most payments directly to farmers under the Single Payment Scheme. Using the experience acquired since the introduction of the SPS, the Commission is extending the simplification of the CAP into the area of cross-compliance and that of existing coupled aid.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 73/2009

1.2.2009

OJ L 30, 31.1.2009

Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 1250/2009

22.12.2009

OJ L 338, 19.12.2009

Strategy for cooperation with Thailand

Strategy for cooperation with Thailand

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Strategy for cooperation with Thailand

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

External relations > Relations with third countries > Asia

Strategy for cooperation with Thailand (2007-2013)

Document or Iniciative

The European Commission – Thailand Strategy Paper 2007-2013 .

Summary

The partnership put in place between the European Union (EU) and Thailand is intended to facilitate policy and trade dialogue and knowledge sharing. The cooperation priorities presented by the Commission therefore take into account improvements in the socio-economic development of the country.

Strategic cooperation areas

Economic cooperation activities are at the heart of the partnership. The EU therefore supports public reforms in economic areas, improvements to the legal environment for enterprise and investment, and the increase in commercial competitiveness of the country at regional and global levels.

Similarly, planned measures aim at facilitating customs cooperation and adapting rules and technical standards applicable to goods that are to be imported into the EU.

The partners also intend to strengthen their relations in the area of science and technology, higher education and research. Their activities should facilitate the sharing of information, know-how and good practices, as well as strengthening capacities and resources in the sector of research.

Lastly, cooperation should foster dialogue and the sharing of knowledge in the areas of social policy, protection of the environment, good governance, human rights and mine action.

Policy dialogue

A series of themes are to be covered as part of the policy dialogue:

  • the promotion of democracy and human rights;
  • social and human development, particularly as regards health, culture, education and training;
  • immigration and asylum policy, the fight against human trafficking and the protection of displaced persons;
  • the environment and the sustainable management of natural resources;
  • the development of civil society.

Cross-cutting issues

Cooperation actions undertaken must take into account:

  • gender equality and the position of women in the economy;
  • the impact of global trade at social level and the promotion of decent work;
  • management of natural resources, including energy;
  • good governance in public affairs and the promotion of human rights.

Context

The partners’ relations should be intensified through the conclusion of a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA). The negotiations, initiated in 2007, deal particularly with the priorities defined in this Strategy Paper.

Animal welfare

Animal welfare

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Animal welfare

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Food safety > Animal welfare

Animal welfare

The European Union recognises animals as sentient beings that deserve protection. Community legislation sets minimum requirements in order to spare animals from any unnecessary suffering in three main areas: farming, transport and slaughter. It also tackles other issues, such as animal experiments and the fur trade. The 2006-2010 action plan sets out the broad outlines for European intervention in this field, both within the EU and beyond its borders.

GENERAL STRATEGY

  • Action plan on animal welfare 2006-2010

LIVESTOCK FARMING

  • European Convention for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes
  • Protection of farmed animals
  • Protection of chickens kept for meat production
  • Protection of laying hens
  • The protection of pigs
  • Protection of calves intended for slaughter
  • The keeping of wild animals in zoos

TRANSPORT

  • Animal welfare during transport
  • Community standards on staging points

SLAUGHTER

  • European Convention on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter
  • Protection of animals at the time of killing

OTHER

  • Protection of laboratory animals
  • Cosmetic products (from 2013)
  • Cosmetic products (until 2013)
  • Ban on trade in cat and dog fur
  • Trade in seal products

Closer cooperation

Closer cooperation

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Closer cooperation

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Institutional affairs > Building europe through the treaties > The Amsterdam treaty: a comprehensive guide

Closer cooperation

The future enlargement of the European Union to Central and Eastern Europe means that it will be essential to review how the European institutions work. The current structure is inherited from an organisation designed for six Member States and, although it has undergone adjustments to take the accession of new Member States into account, it still works on the same institutional principles.

The increase in the number of Member States will increase diversity within the European Union in terms of each Member State’s objectives, sensibilities and priorities. While this diversity is what constitutes the wealth of the European Union, it may also be an obstacle, if the pace of European integration is determined by the slowest.

The Treaty of Amsterdam represents an unprecedented reform, since it introduces the concept of variable-speed integration into the EU Treaty. In concrete terms, three articles have been added to the EU Treaty (Articles 43 to 45). They allow Member States that intend to establish closer cooperation between one another to make use of the institutions, procedures, and mechanisms laid down by the EU Treaty and the EC Treaty.

Closer cooperation enables the most ambitious Member States to deepen cooperation between themselves while leaving the door open to other Member States to join them at a later stage.

CONDITIONS

The Treaty of Amsterdam stipulates a number of general conditions that must be met before closer cooperation can be launched. These are necessary to ensure that the initiative does not jeopardise the functioning of the internal market. In other words, the acquis communautaire must be preserved. Therefore, before any closer cooperation can be launched, it must show that it will:

  • aim to further the objectives of the Union and protect and serve its interests;
  • respect the principles of the Treaties and the single institutional framework of the Union;
  • be used only as a last resort;
  • concern at least a majority of Member States;
  • not affect the acquis communautaire or the measures adopted under the other provisions of the Treaties;
  • not affect the competences, rights, obligations and interests of those Member States which do not participate in it;
  • be open to all Member States and allow them to become parties to the cooperation at any time, provided that they comply with the basic decision and with the decisions taken within that framework.

Closer cooperation is possible in the fields covered by the EC Treaty and in police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. As far as the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) is concerned, the authors of the Treaty of Amsterdam decided that constructive abstention was already designed to meet flexibility requirements, and that recourse to closer cooperation was therefore unnecessary.

Depending on the pillar concerned, closer cooperation will have to meet certain specific conditions in addition to the general conditions set out in Article K.15:

  • for the first pillar, the cooperation envisaged:

– must not concern areas which fall within the exclusive competence of the Community;
– must not affect Community policies, actions or programmes;
– must not concern the citizenship of the Union or discriminate between nationals of Member States;
– must remain within the limits of the powers conferred upon the Community by the Treaty;
– must not constitute a discrimination or a restriction of trade between Member States and will not distort the conditions of competition between them.

  • for the third pillar, the cooperation envisaged:

– must respect the powers of the European Community and the objectives laid down by Title VI of the Treaty on European Union;
– must have the aim of enabling the Union to develop more rapidly into an area of freedom, security and justice.

ACTIVATION

A new Article 11 has been inserted in the EC Treaty.

This new article provides that, within the framework of the European Community, the initiative for closer cooperation must come from the European Commission following a request to this end by the Member States concerned. The Commission is free to submit a proposal, but if it decides not to do so, it must inform the Member States concerned of the reasons.

When the Council receives a proposal for closer cooperation from the Commission, it must act by qualified majority after consulting the European Parliament.

For the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (third pillar), the procedure differs from that used within the framework of the European Community. The new Article 40 of the EU Treaty provides that the initiative for closer cooperation must come from the Member States concerned. Activation is therefore subject to a Council decision by qualified majority. The Commission is asked for its opinion and the Member States’ request is transmitted to the European Parliament.

SAFEGUARD CLAUSE

In both the first and third pillars, launching closer cooperation depends on a decision taken by a qualified majority of the Council. However, the Member States have a safeguard clause allowing any of them to prevent a vote being taken for important reasons of national policy.

The Council, acting by qualified majority, can then send the question to the European Council if the decision falls under the third pillar, or to the Council, in the shape of the heads of state or government, if the decision falls under the first pillar. In both cases, referral requires a unanimous decision.

In this case, the role of the Court of Justice is crucial because it will have to decide on the degree of importance of the reasons of national policy invoked by a Member State. The Court of Justice therefore acts as a guarantee that the safeguard clause is not abused.

OPERATION

For the implementation of closer cooperation, the new Article 44 of the EU Treaty provides that all members of the Council may take part in the deliberations, but that only those representing Member States participating in closer cooperation play a part in adopting decisions.

Any closer cooperation is subject to all the relevant provisions of whichever Treaty it falls under (EU Treaty or EC Treaty). Depending on the subject, decisions are taken under the procedure laid down for the field in question (unanimity, qualified majority vote, codecision or consultation procedures, etc.).

A qualified majority is defined as the same proportion of the weighted votes of the members of the Council concerned as laid down in Article 205(2) (ex Article 148(2)) of the EC Treaty.

It should also be noted that the other institutions involved in the decision-making process (notably the European Parliament and the Commission) do so in their entirety, making no distinction between Member States which are taking part in closer cooperation and those which are not.

SUBSEQUENT PARTICIPATION BY A MEMBER STATE

The basic principle underlying the system is that participation in closer cooperation is open to any Member State, including those that are not involved from the start.

In the Community field, a Member State wishing to join the others must inform the Council and the Commission of its intention. The Commission then delivers its opinion to the Council within three months. A month after giving its opinion, the Commission decides on the matter and on any specific arrangements it considers necessary.

For closer cooperation under the third pillar, the procedure is different from that under the first pillar, although the time limits specified are the same. In addition to its opinion, the Commission may give a recommendation on specific provisions it considers necessary for the Member State to take part in the cooperation in question. It is then for the Council to take the decision. The request is approved unless the Council decides, by qualified majority, to hold it in abeyance. In this case, the Council must give its reasons and set a deadline for the request to be re-examined.

FINANCING

Except for administrative costs, the expenditure arising from closer cooperation is borne by the participating Member States, unless the Council unanimously decides otherwise.

A regional policy partnership for the Horn of Africa

A regional policy partnership for the Horn of Africa

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about A regional policy partnership for the Horn of Africa

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Development > African Caribbean and Pacific states (ACP)

A regional policy partnership for the Horn of Africa

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 20 October 2006 – Strategy for Africa: An EU regional political partnership for peace, security and development in the Horn of Africa [COM(2006) 601 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

The Horn of Africa, which consists of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda, is one of the poorest and most conflict-prone regions in the world.

The importance of the Horn of Africa for the EU

The EU plays an important role in the Horn region, where it is the main provider of development and humanitarian assistance.

At the same time, the EU has an interest in the stability of the region. The Horn is embroiled in a regional system of insecurity in which conflicts and political crises feed into and fuel one another The crises in the border region between Eritrea and Ethiopia and in Somalia, together with the conflicts in Sudan and the north of Uganda, create instability and insecurity in the region. The instability is further reinforced by illegal migration and trafficking of arms and drugs, as well as refugee flows.

Nevertheless, the stability of this region is important for the EU in view of its proximity to the Red Sea, which is a crucial waterway for trade with Saudi Arabia – the world’s largest oil producer.

Regional dimension and dynamics

The major conflicts reflect the interconnections characterising the region. These are related to the fact that most of the borders are unstable and many are contested. In addition, this factor undermines relations between countries sharing a common border, with some States providing support to armed groups fighting in neighbouring States.

The crises in this region have several cross-cutting regional issues in common, i.e.

  • interdependence between insecurity, poverty and governance. The marginalisation of certain communities is reinforced by the warlords and the business community who benefit from war economies. In addition, authoritarianism, militarism and the interference of external powers contribute to instability and conflict;
  • religious fundamentalism has taken advantage of weak state institutions to spread. It is also strengthened by the grievances wrought by poverty and conflicts and the influence of extremist fundamentalist ideology;
  • migrants, refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) are numerous throughout the region. These populations are not only a source of regional instability, but also vulnerable and easily exploited by traffickers and criminal networks;
  • proliferation and misuse of small arms and light weapons (SALW) contribute to the presence of warlords, militias and criminal networks and also serve as an enabler of terrorism;
  • insecurity of border and peripheral areas;
  • competition for access to natural resources (such as water, timber, fish and fertile land), which are suffering from the consequences of desertification and climate change. In particular, access to limited water resources is of strategic importance. Specifically, five of the seven countries of the Horn share the Nile basin, which is at the centre of potential regional tensions;
  • structural food insecurity mostly affects nomadic pastoralists and agri-pastoralists. Depletion of the natural resources and degradation of pasture areas are potential causes of ethnic tensions and conflicts;
  • the high number of transhumant and cross-border pastoralists are communities which are often marginalised and alienated;
  • the demographic upsurge increases pressure on limited natural resources still further.

Work programme to improve the political stability of the region

The Commission proposes to enhance the partnership between the EU, the AU and regional organisations by means of the following measures:

  • enhancement of cooperation with the IGAD, focusing on three main areas: peace, security and governance; pastoralism and food security; and institutional development;
  • building Africa’s capacities for conflict prevention, mediation and deployment of military peacekeeping operations, with active participation of the AU;
  • fostering of regional integration in the countries of the Horn, in particular by integrating the Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the East Africa Community (EAC) in any long-term strategy to establish peace in the region;
  • supporting African efforts to monitor and improve governance.

In addition, the dialogue between the EU and the Horn must take account of key country-level strategic issues with potential regional ramifications, i.e.:

  • factoring into the dialogue of the interests of the supporters and opponents of the peace process in Sudan, with particular attention paid to the Darfur crisis;
  • putting cross-border state support for armed groups on the political agenda of the EU and the countries of the Horn;
  • finding solutions to border demarcation issues, particularly in relation to the Ethiopian/Eritrean border;
  • taking account of the role of Kenya and Djibouti in regional stability;
  • the participation of Somalia’s neighbouring countries in the Somali peace process, in which they can play a stabilising role;
  • taking account of the regional dimensions of the conflict in northern Uganda in the peace process.

Finally, regional cross-cutting and cross-border concerns should be addressed on the basis of three pillars:

  • improved governance and security, and enhanced dialogue between cultures;
  • enhanced development, trade, security and political participation, and improved management of migration and refugees and prevention of SALW proliferation;
  • improved programmes to address competition for natural resources.

An enabling environment for a successful partnership

The Commission proposes accompanying measures for the successful implementation of the partnership. These measures concern both the EU and the countries of the Horn of Africa.

In particular, the EU must:

  • promote information-sharing and consultation between EU Member States and EU institutions;
  • promote the International Partners Forum (IPF) as a forum for dialogue with IGAD;
  • facilitate political dialogue (Article 8 of the Cotonou Agreement) with key actors, with a strong emphasis on regional issues;
  • tackle issues concerning the Horn of Africa with Egypt, the Arab Gulf States, the League of Arab States, and Central and East Africa;
  • enhance dialogue and coordination with the USA, Norway, Japan, Canada, Russia and China, as well as with the United Nations;
  • strengthen integration into development programmes of human and social rights and gender, demographic issues and the environment;
  • take account of regional and cross-cutting issues in EU strategies and programmes concerning the countries of the Horn region. In addition, the national and regional strategies of the 10th European Development Fund (EDF) for the period 2008-2013 must dovetail with the regional political partnership for the Horn.

For their part, the countries of the Horn must:

  • obtain a coordinated position among Member States, the IGAD Secretariat, regional players and civil society organisations;
  • be open to dialogue on key regional challenges and be engaged in identifying the drivers of change;
  • allocate adequate resources for the dialogue and the work programme;
  • address sources of conflict and promote cross-sectoral cooperation;
  • implement relevant institutional reforms.

The implementation of the partnership starts in 2007 and will be the subject of a joint review in the following two years.

Background

The regional political partnership proposed in this Communication builds on two strategies already being implemented by the EU: the European Consensus for Development and the EU-Africa Strategy. This partnership is in particular a test case for applying the EU-Africa strategy.

 

Partnership for the accession of Bulgaria

Partnership for the accession of Bulgaria

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Partnership for the accession of Bulgaria

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Enlargement > Enlargement 2004 and 2007

Partnership for the accession of Bulgaria

The aim of the Accession Partnership is to assist the Bulgarian authorities in their efforts to comply with the accession criteria. It covers in detail the priorities for accession preparations, in particular implementing the acquis, and forms the basis for programming pre-accession assistance from Community funds such as the Phare programme.
On 25 April 2005 Bulgaria signed its Treaty of Accession to the European Union. The objective is to welcome Bulgaria as a new member of the European Union in January 2007.

In its ” Agenda 2000 ” communication, the European Commission has drawn up a . series of proposals for strengthening the pre-accession strategy for all the candidate countries of central and eastern Europe (CEEC). The general aim of the strategy is to provide a coherent programme to prepare these countries for Union membership and more particularly:

  • to bring together the various forms of aid offered by the European Union within a single framework, the accession partnerships;
  • to familiarise applicants with European Union procedures and policies by offering them the opportunity to participate in Community programmes.

Objective

The objective of the accession partnership (adopted in March 1998 and revised in December 1999, in January 2002 and in May 2003) is to set out within a legal framework the working priorities defined in the Commission’s 2002 Regular Report on Bulgaria’s progress toward accession and with the road map, the financial resources available to help Bulgaria implement these priorities and the conditions which apply to that assistance. The partnership underpins a range of instruments aimed at supporting the efforts of candidate countries in the accession process.

These instruments include a national programme for adopting the Community acquis, joint assessment of medium-term economic policy priorities, a pact against organised crime, the national development plans as well as other sectoral plans necessary for participation in structural funds following membership, and for pre-accession implementation of ISPA and SAPARD. The accession partnership has served as a starting point for the development of a plan of action to strengthen Bulgaria’s administrative and judicial capacities.

Although these instruments will not form an integral part of this partnership, their priorities will be compatible with it.

The implementation of the accession partnership will be monitored under the European Agreement between the European Union and Bulgaria.

Priorities

The accession partnership priorities were reviewed in December 1999 (see p. 3 of the Annex to Decision 1999/857/EC). A final review was published in May 2003 (Decision 2003/396/EC) and forms the basis of the 2003 Commission report.

The revised accession partnership defines the priorities which Bulgaria should wholly or largely achieve by 2003-2004. They were decided jointly by the European Union and Bulgaria. The level of aid granted to Bulgaria will depend on the completion of these priorities.

In 2004, Bulgaria began work to meet the priorities set in its revised partnership. Progress has been made in the areas of public administration reform and reform of the judicial system, the privatisation process and alignment with EU legislation. Nevertheless, further efforts are still required, especially as regards priorities in the field of respect for human rights and the protection of minorities. In this respect, efforts need to be fostered with regard to improving the situation of the Roma community. Much also remains to be done to reduce subsidies to the energy and transport sectors. Improvements in the quality of public investment in infrastructure, education and health are still needed. Reform plans in the area of customs and tax administrations must be applied.

To find out more, see: Adoption of the Community Acquis

Financial Framework

The support provided by the Phare programme and the other pre-accession instruments focuses on the priorities established in the accession partnership. For the years 2000-2004, total annual financial assistance to Bulgaria is around EUR 178 million annually from Phare, EUR 57.6 million from SAPARD, and between EUR 93 and EUR 127 million from ISPA.

Phare

The Phare Programme allocated EUR 1.54 billion to Bulgaria during the 1992-2003 period, including EUR 188.92 million in 2003. The Commission has granted Bulgaria Phare aid under the agreement signed in November 1999 concerning the closure of units 1 to 4 of the Kozloduy nuclear power plant. This agreement provides for a further EUR 200 million in aid for the period 2000-2006. A further EUR 140 million will be made available over the period 2004-2006, in line with the principle of EU solidarity with efforts to decommission certain nuclear installations and with the consequences. The 2004 Phare Programme for Bulgaria consists of an allocation of EUR 208.3 million for the National Programme, plus an allocation for nuclear decommissioning.

The 2004 Phare programme focuses on the following priorities:

  • Political criteria: projects for strengthening public administration at all levels and the judiciary (EUR 36 million); projects to improve transparency, financial control and the fight against corruption and fraud (EUR 8 million); projects for ethnic minorities, vulnerable groups and civil society (EUR 13 million).
  • Economic criteria: projects to promote economic growth and competitiveness and social cohesion (EUR 35 million).
  • Meeting the obligations of membership: projects to enhance the administrative and judicial capacity to implement and enforce legislative measures and assume the obligations of EU membership (EUR 42 million); projects to improve the strategic planning and effective utilisation of EU funds and prepare for structural funds (including implementation of EDIS) (EUR 12 million).

In addition, EUR 36 million from the Phare programme will be devoted to crossborder cooperation programmes on Bulgaria’s borders with Greece (EUR 20 million), Romania (EUR 8 million), Turkey (EUR 3 million), Serbia & Montenegro (EUR 3 million) and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (EUR 2 million).

Pre-accession aid

From the year 2000, financial aid will include aid for agriculture and rural development (SAPARD) and a structural instrument (ISPA) which will give priority to transport and environmental measures. The Regulation adopted in June 1999 for the coordination of Phare, SAPARD and ISPA aid allows the Commission to carry out ex-post checks on contracts when it deems the partner country’s financial supervision insufficient.

The indicative allocation from the Community for the implementation of the SAPARD programme in Bulgaria for 2004 is EUR 68.0 million. The allocation for 2003 was EUR 56.5 million. The main focus of the 2004 SAPARD programme is to prepare Bulgaria’s agriculture for membership of the EU. Consequently, the remaining financial resources only will be spent on acquis-related measures.

The ISPA budget allocation for Bulgaria of just over EUR 100 million per year has been fully committed in each year since 2000 (with only a small shortfall in 2002). The budgetary commitment in 2003 was EUR 112.6 million and the indicative allocation for 2004 will be around EUR 135.4 million. The ISPA strategies were reviewed in 2003. In the case of transport infrastructure, the emphasis is on completing or upgrading the main trans-European road and rail networks, including crossborder connections. In the environment sector, the Bulgarian Government has focused on improving water quality via investments in waste water treatment, sewerage systems and water supply. Urban waste management and air pollution are also priority areas.

References

Commission Opinion COM(97)2008 final
Not published in the Official Journal

ACCESSION PARTNERSHIPS

Council Decision 98/266/EC of 30.03.1998
Official Journal L 121 of 23.04.1998

Decision 1999/857/EC

Official Journal L 335 of 28.12.1999

Decision 2002/83/EC
Official Journal L 44 of 14.02.2002

Decision 2003/396/EC

Official Journal L 145 of 12.06.2003

REGULAR REPORTS

Commission Opinion COM(97)2008 final
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(98)707 final
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(1999)501 final
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(2000)701 final
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(2001)700 final – SEC(2001)1744
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(2002)700 final – SEC(2002)1400
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(2003) 676 final – SEC (2002) 1210
Not published in the Official Journal

Commission Report COM(2004) 657 final – SEC(2004) 1199
Not published in the Official Journal

MONITORING REPORTS FOLLOWING THE SIGNATURE OF THE TREATY OF ACCESSION

Treaty of Accession of Bulgaria of 25 April 2005 – Official Journal L 157 of 21.06.2005
On 11 May 2005 the Bulgarian parliament ratified the treaty of accession to the European Union, which Bulgaria had signed in Luxembourg on 25 April 2005 after the European Parliament had given its assent on 13 April 2005. Bulgaria is scheduled to join the European Union on 1 January 2007.

Comprehensive monitoring report from the Commission COM(2005) 534 final – SEC(2005)1352

Monitoring report of May 2006 from the Commission COM(2006) 214 final – SEC(2006) 596

Communication from the Commission of 16 May 2006 “Monitoring report on the state of preparedness for EU membership of Bulgaria and Romania” COM (2006) 214 final
Not published in the Official Journal

This summary is for information only and is not designed to interpret or replace the reference document.

 

Maritime safety: marine equipment

Maritime safety: marine equipment

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Maritime safety: marine equipment

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Transport > Waterborne transport

Maritime safety: marine equipment

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 96/98/EC of 20 December 1996 on marine equipment [See amending acts].

Summary

This Directive applies to equipment (Annex A) * for use:

  • on board a new European * ship, even if it was constructed outside of the EU;
  • on an existing European ship in order to replace equipment or to install additional equipment.

This Directive does not concern equipment placed on board a ship before its entry into force.

Conformity assessment

Member States appoint bodies responsible for assessing conformity of marine equipment (Annex B). This assessment aims at:

  • ensuring the quality of equipment before being placed on the market;
  • checking marine equipment when issuing or renewing the safety certificate.

Equipment conforming to European standards must bear a mark.

Where a vessel, which is to be transferred to the register of a Member State is not registered in the EU, that State carries out an inspection in order to establish the actual condition of the equipment and whether it complies with European standards.

Non-compliant equipment

If a piece of equipment may compromise the health and/or safety of the crew or passengers, or to damage the marine environment, the Member State responsible shall withdraw it from the market, prohibit or restrict its use.

Testing standards

Certain types of marine equipment require international testing standards to be adopted. In cases where international organisations do not adopt the standards within a reasonable timescale, the standards of European standardisation organisations may be applied.

Key terms
  • Marine equipment: any article which could be used on board a vessel, voluntarily or in accordance with international rules, and for which the administration of the flag State must give its authorisation. In particular, this relates to life saving, fire protection, navigation and radiocommunication equipment.
  • European vessel: any vessel for which safety certificates are issued by EU Member States or in their name.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 96/98/EC

1.1.1999

30.6.1998

OJ L 46, 17.2.1997

Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 98/85/EC

28.11.1998

30.4.1999

OJ L 315, 25.11.1998

Directive 2002/84/EC

29.11.2002

23.11.2003

OJ L 324, 29.11.2002

Directive 2008/67/EC

21.7.2008

21.7.2008

OJ L 171, 1.7.2008

Regulation (EC) 596/2009

7.8.2009

OJ L 188, 18.7.2009

Successive amendments and corrections to Directive 96/98/EC have been incorporated into the basic text. This consolidated versionis for information only.

Related Acts

Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on marine equipment and repealing Directive 96/98/EC [COM (2012) 772 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Comett II

Comett II

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Comett II

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Education training youth sport > Vocational training

Comett II

1) Objective

To reinforce training in the field of technology, with the emphasis on advanced technologies, and to foster the development of highly skilled human resources and the competitiveness of European industry.

2) Community Measures

Council Decision 89/27/EEC of 16 December 1988 adopting the second phase of the programme on cooperation between universities and industry regarding training in the field of technology (Comett II) (1990 to 1994).

3) Contents

Comett II is scheduled to run for five years from 1 January 1909 to 31 December 1949 and has been allocated a total of ECU 200 million, not including the EFTA contribution. Allocation of Community support is based on the principle of cost sharing between the Community and the project applicants.

Objectives of the programme:

  • contributing to economic and social development through technology training: “to improve the contribution of, in particular, advanced technology training at the various levels concerned and thus the contribution of training to the economic and social development of the Community”;
  • joint university-industry training schemes: “to foster the joint development of training programmes and the exchange of experience, and also the optimum use of training resources at Community level, notably through the creation of transnational, sectoral and regional networks of, in particular, advanced technology training projects”;
  • training requirements of small and medium-sized businesses: “to respond to the specific skill requirements of small and medium-sized businesses having regard to the priority measures set out in the Annex”;
  • equal opportunities for men and women in respect of training: “to promote equal opportunities for men and women in initial and continuing training in, in particular, advanced technology”;
  • encouragement of a European dimension: “to give a European dimension to cooperation between universities and industry in initial and continuing training relating to technologies and their applications and transfer”.

Areas covered by Comett II

Strand A: University-Industry Training Partnerships (UITPs)

This network, created under Comett I, should be extended and reinforced under Comett II. Its role is:

  • to identify training needs and to provide a structured, coordinated basis for meeting them;
  • to provide a support structure for the implementation of part or all of the activities;
  • to strengthen cooperation and inter-regional transfer between Member States;
  • to develop links in the form of transnational sectoral networks.

The maximum amount granted by the Community is:

  • ECU 70 000 per UITP for the first year,
  • ECU 60 000 per UITP for the second year,
  • ECU 50 000 per UITP for the third year.

This support, limited to three years, constitutes a flat-rate contribution which may not exceed 50 % of expenditure. The activities to be undertaken under strand A will not exceed 12 % of the overall budget.

Strand B: Transnational exchanges

These include:

  • integrated student placements with companies in other Member States (three to twelve months’ duration);
  • advanced training placements, with companies in other Member States, for students who have completed their initial training, for the purpose of taking part in an industrial development project (six months to two years’ duration);
  • fellowships for university staff seconded to a company in another Member State or personnel of a company seconded to a university in another Member State (two to twelve months’ duration).

The maximum amount granted by the Community is:

  • ECU 6 000 for a 12-month integrated student placement;
  • ECU 25 000 for a 24-month advanced training placement;
  • ECU 15 000 for a three-month exchange of personnel.

The activities to be undertaken under strand B will not exceed 40 % of the overall budget.

Strand C: Joint training projects, with the emphasis on advanced technologies

Such projects include:

  • crash training courses in technology with a European dimension;
  • devising, developing and testing at European level joint training projects in technology;
  • multilateral arrangements for training in technology aimed at establishing, as pilot projects, multimedia systems for distance learning.

The Community’s financial contribution, apart from exceptional cases, is limited to 50 % and may not exceed:

  • ECU 30 000 for a crash course (the normal duration of a project is one year)
  • ECU 500 000 for a joint training project, for the duration of the project, which may be between one and five years.

The activities to be undertaken under strand C will not exceed 40 % of the overall budget.

Strand D: Complementary promotion and back-up measures

Such measures include:

  • support for preparatory activities, particularly for the less-developed regions;
  • support for the network of information centres;
  • setting up of databases on projects and establishment of electronic mail facilities linking projects and partners;
  • conferences and seminars;
  • ongoing evaluation of Comett II;
  • assistance for preparatory visits (ECU 2 000 per person per week) (8 % of the overall budget).

4) Deadline For Implementation Of The Legislation In The Member States

Not applicable.

5) Date Of Entry Into Force (If Different From The Above)

6) References

Official Journal L 13, 17.01.1989

7) Follow-Up Work

Council Decisions of 29 March 1990 concerning the conclusion of agreements between the European Economic Community and certain Member States establishing cooperation in the field of training in the context of the implementation of Comett II (1990-1994):

A Decision 90/190/EEC, Official Journal L 102, 21.04.1990
SF Decision 90/191/EEC, Official Journal L 102, 21.04.1990
ISL Decision 90/192/EEC, Official Journal L 102, 21.04.1990
N Decision 90/193/EEC, Official Journal L 102, 21.04.1990
S Decision 90/194/EEC, Official Journal L 102, 21.04.1990
CH Decision 90/195/EEC, Official Journal L 102, 21.04.1990

8) Commission Implementing Measures

1991 activity report [SEC(92) 1299 final]
Over the entire programme, Comett II is expected to give rise to more than 25 000 exchanges of persons (chiefly placements for students within companies), and a minimum of 5 000 courses aimed at some 150 000 persons in Europe (chiefly engineers and scientists). In 1991, 414 projects were submitted by 153 of the 158 UITPs for a total sum of ECU 73 million. Placements for nearly 15 000 students were proposed in 140 projects, ten times the figure for Comett I; 55 projects proposed 215 exchanges of personnel between industry and universities; 131 projects concerned the organisation of 1 038 courses, and 88 proposed 1 043 preparatory visits for new projects. In terms of total cost, the best-represented sectors are: environment, informatics, automation, foodstuffs and materials. 392 projects were selected in 1991, including 139 transnational placements for 5 083 students; 53 other projects will involve exchanges for 121 employees of industry or universities; 724 crash courses will be organised under 130 projects and, finally, 63 projects concern preparatory visits. These projects account for a total of ECU 21 million, including one million for the environment sector. A further 25 million is required to finance projects accepted in 1990. The projects accepted in 1991 involve 3 000 businesses, 1 000 universities and higher education establishments, and 1 000 professional organisations.

EFTA participation

Following the decision adopted by the Council on 22 May 1989, the European Community has concluded a formal agreement with the EFTA countries enabling universities and industry in those countries to participate.

Each EFTA country may participate in all strands of Comett, for the five years for which Comett II will run, but their level of participation may not exceed that of the Member States of the European Community; the criteria for eligibility and selection are the same. Every project submitted by an EFTA country must involve at least two Member States of the Community. Transnational exchanges between two EFTA countries are not allowed. Each EFTA country will make a financial contribution proportionate to its gross national product in relation to that of the European Community and the Comett budget for the year in question. The EFTA countries and the Member States of the European Community will take the necessary steps to facilitate the free movement and residence of students and other persons participating in Comett activities. Advisory services will be provided through a joint committee comprising representatives of the European Community and the country in question.

1992 activity report [COM(93) 409 final]
In 1992, 555 new projects benefited from Comett funding. 42 new UITPs (University-Industry Training Partnerships) were accepted, bringing to 205 the total of UITPs under Comett II. This total includes 23 regional UITPs (operating in a specific geographical area) and 19 sectoral UITPs (specialising in a particular technological sector).

The projects accepted in 1992 involved more than 5 000 European businesses, some 1 700 higher education establishments and around 2 000 other bodies. 80% of the projects covered at least one SME (a SME is defined as an enterprise employing less than 500 persons).

In 1992, Comett financed more than 6 900 student training courses (up 38% from 1991). 67 projects were accepted under strands B and C, entailing the organisation of 124 exchanges of personnel. 1 300 training sessions were organised in conjunction with the 154 crash training projects. Participation by EFTA countries in 1992 more than doubled (18% of all projects, compared with 7% in 1990).

1993 activity report [COM(94) 368 final]
In 1993, more than 7 700 transnational student placements and more than 200 exchanges of personnel from universities and industry were funded by Comett.

Approximately 500 joint training courses were supported by the programme.

In all, 1993 Comett projects involved 10 800 European organisations, i.e. 6 200 businesses, 1 900 universities and 2 400 other bodies.

More than 43 000 persons benefited from the Comett-funded training courses, with more than 75 000 teaching hours being delivered and some 1 000 different training materials developed during this period.

1994 activity report [COM(95) 409 final]
More than 7 800 transnational student placements, 250 personnel exchanges from universities and industry, and 700 joint training courses were funded by Comett in 1994.

175 513 Europeans benefited from Comett technology training courses.

206 698 hours of technology training were delivered.

A vast range of training materials were developed, including videos, CD-Is, CD-ROMs, audio cassettes, books and slides.

A final evaluation has been undertaken by the Commission, in collaboration with the Member States, to consider how results have been achieved, what benefits have been generated for university-industry cooperation and in which contexts such cooperation is successful.

Final evaluation report [COM(96) 410 final]
Five calls for applications were organised between 1990 and 1994; the projects submitted required a Community contribution totalling almost ECU 1.2 billion.

The selection procedure led to the acceptance of some 3 000 projects, giving rise to:

  • the creation of over 200 University-Industry Training Partnerships covering nearly all European regions as well as many technological and sectoral areas;
  • the organisation of some 40 000 transnational exchanges of students, graduates and personnel;
  • the organisation of almost 10 000 advanced training courses, attended by a quarter of a million Europeans; and
  • the development of more than 4 500 training materials, of which over one third were software or video based.

These projects entailed the participation of more than 30 000 organisations from 19 European countries across the entire higher education sector, more than 20 000 companies (of which over three quarters were SMEs) and some 5 000 other types of organisations. They covered training needs in virtually all technology-related areas, and were often a catalyst for cooperation and innovation beyond the Comett programme itself.

A unique European network has been created, capable of organising efficiently, on an annual basis, thousands of transnational industry-university exchanges (notably student placements) and intensive international advanced training courses.

Cooperation with other European programmes in the fields of education, training, R&D and innovation has been a permanent feature throughout the programme.

Both the quantity and quality of advanced training supply has improved, particularly in peripheral areas, thereby helping to enhance European competitiveness. Awareness and understanding of the advantages of industry-university cooperation in respect of advanced training and technological transfer has increased greatly.

The main elements of Comett have been incorporated into the new Leonardo da Vinci programme.

Integrating the environment into aerial transport

Integrating the environment into aerial transport

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Integrating the environment into aerial transport

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Transport > Transport energy and the environment

Integrating the environment into aerial transport

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission of 1 December 1998 to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Air Transport and the Environment [COM(1999) 640 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

Globally, air transport contributes to the greenhouse effect and to the depletion of the ozone layer. Regionally, it contributes to acidification, ozone formation and eutrophication. Locally, in the vicinity of airports, air transport is partly the cause of noise and air pollution.

This communication sets out the strategy the European Union is to pursue to put in place a coherent and environmentally friendly policy in the field of air transport.

The pillars of the strategy

The first pillar of the strategy proposed in the communication is the improvement of technical environmental standards on noise and gaseous emissions. One example of practical action is the improvement of air traffic management systems, which should allow a major saving in fuel consumption.

The communication also proposes the introduction of economic and regulatory market incentives to enhance the competitive edge of operators and users which choose to use state-of-the-art technologies and environmentally friendly operations. The Commission will work to integrate environmental costs into charging systems and to improve the infrastructure at intermodal connecting points so that users and operators can actually choose more environmentally friendly services.

Another pillar indicated in the communication is environmental protection measures to be applied in airports. Under this pillar of the Community strategy, various action is proposed to assist airports, limit noise and link airports to other modes of transport.

The communication emphasises the need to encourage research and innovation relating to the environmental performance of aircraft, including assessment of the atmospheric effect of aircraft exhaust gas emissions. A long-term strategy of this nature is essential.

The communication invites the air transport industry to sign voluntary environmental agreements and to register under the EMAS scheme.

The Commission underlines the importance of adopting international solutions within the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

https://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l28116.htm

Related Acts

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 27 September 2005: Reducing the Climate Change Impact of Aviation [COM(2005) 459 – Not published in the Official Journal].

The Commission considers the options available for reducing the impact of the air transport sector on climate change. In particular, it suggests – in addition to pursuing the possibilities offered in research, air traffic management and energy taxation – integrating the air transport sector into the Community Emissions Trading Scheme.


Directive 2002/30/EC

of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 March 2002 on the establishment of rules and procedures with regard to the introduction of noise-related operating restrictions at Community airports [Official Journal L 85 of 28 March 2002].

The purpose of this Directive is to prevent an overall increase in noise and to seek to reduce aircraft noise in order to improve the current acoustic environment, in particular by gradually phasing out the noisiest aircraft.

Communication [COM(2000) 821 final Not published in the Official Journal]. Communication from the Commission to the Council: Community objectives for the 33rd Assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and ICAO Council decisions prior to this Assembly in the field of environmental protection. The communication sets out the following Community objectives:

  • deal with the impact, in terms of noise pollution, of the increase in demand for air transport: the Community will seek the adoption both of a resolution on limiting the operation of the least noise-efficient aircraft, and of a more stringent noise standard for aircraft;
  • introduce more stringent standards for all gaseous emissions from air transport;
  • strengthening economic incentives to improve the environmental performance of aircraft.

The 33rd ICAO Assembly was held in September 2001.

Protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users

Protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Internal market > Motor vehicles > Technical implications of road safety

Protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users

The European Union intends to reduce the number of deaths and the severity of injuries to pedestrians and cyclists involved in accidents with motor vehicles. Car manufacturers will therefore need to make changes to the fronts of their vehicles.

Document or Iniciative

Directive 2003/102/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users before and in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC.

Summary

Around 8 000 pedestrians and cyclists are killed and a further 300 000 injured each year in road accidents.

Accidents occur particularly often in urban areas. Even when cars drive at relatively low speeds, very serious injuries can be caused by a collision with a moving vehicle, particularly in the case of impact with the frontal structure of a motor vehicle. Below 40 km/h, however, it is possible to considerably reduce the severity of injuries by modifying the fronts of motor vehicles.

The Directive sets the safety requirements which motor vehicle manufacturers will have to meet in order to reduce the severity of the injuries suffered by pedestrians and other vulnerable road users, such as cyclists and motorcyclists, when they are hit by the frontal surface of a vehicle.

The Directive is based on Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community. The harmonised technical provisions for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to pedestrian protection are necessary to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market.

Scope

The Directive applies to the frontal surfaces of vehicles, which mainly means the bonnet and the bumper.

It applies to passenger cars (category M1 vehicles) not exceeding 2.5 tonnes and commercial vehicles (category N1 vehicles) not exceeding 2.5 tonnes and derived from M1 vehicles. There is provision for the Commission to examine the possibility of extending the scope of the directive to vehicles not exceeding 3.5 tonnes.

Safety provisions

The Directive proposes limit values to be observed in the construction of the frontal structures of vehicles. These values should not therefore be exceeded in a collision between a vehicle and a pedestrian. In order to ensure compliance, the vehicles will have to undergo a number of safety tests. These tests and limit values are based on recommendations made by the European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee.

If the maximum limit values are exceeded, the Member States may no longer grant EC type-approval or register the vehicles concerned.

The technical provisions will enter into force in two stages for which the directive sets out transitional periods. The provisions for the first stage will have to be met for all new types of vehicles from 1 October 2005 and for all new vehicles from 31 December 2012. The provisions for the second stage will be compulsory as of 1 September 2010 for all new types of vehicles and from 1 September 2015 for all new vehicles. This transitional period gives manufacturers time to comply with the limit values and incorporate these changes into the construction of new types of vehicles without having to make immediate changes to vehicles already in production.

Given the speed of technological development in this field, manufacturers may develop alternative measures that are at least as effective as those in the Directive. Depending on the result of the feasibility study carried out by independent experts by 1 July 2004, the Commission may well amend the provisions of the directive.

The Commission plans to conduct an initial assessment before 1 April 2006, then every two years thereafter.

Amendment of the type-approval system

The Directive is one of the specific Directives with which compliance is necessary in order to ensure conformity with the EC type-approval procedure. Directive 70/156/EEC should therefore be amended accordingly.

Background

The European Commission has made it a priority to reduce the number of persons killed and injured on Europe’s roads. Its target is to reduce road deaths by 50% by 2010.

With this objective in mind, the European Commission entered into discussions with European, Japanese and Korean motor vehicle manufacturers. These resulted in the industry making a pledge to introduce measures aimed at improving pedestrian safety. Following the opinion of the European Parliament and of the Council of Ministers, the Commission drew up a legal instrument establishing the main aims and basic technical provisions required to ensure the requisite legal certainty in this area.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Directive 2003/102/EC [adoption: codecision COD/2003/0033] 7.12.2003 31.12.2003 OJ L 321 of 6.12.2003

Related Acts

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users [COM(2007)560 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The Commission proposes combining the requirements of Directive 2005/66/EC (use of frontal protection systems) and Directive 2003/102/EC (pedestrian protection) in a single regulation, in order to improve the consistency and implementation of measures to protect pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. The Commission is reviewing existing passive requirements and is combining them with an active measure involving the use of brake-assist systems such as anti-lock brake systems (ABS). This has involved discussions between the Commission and European, Japanese and Korean car manufacturers and other interested parties.

The proposed regulation lays down requirements for the manufacturing and operating of vehicles and details the obligations of manufacturers (approved braking systems, frontal protection), those of the Member State authorities (monitoring of the application of requirements, penalties) and detailed rules for implementation.

Directive 2005/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 relating to the use of frontal protection systems on motor vehicles and amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC [Official Journal L 309 of 25.11.2005].

Commission Decision 2004/90/EC of 23 December 2003 on the technical prescriptions for the implementation of Article 3 of Directive 2003/102/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users before and in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Directive 70/156/EEC [Official Journal L31 of 4.2.2004].

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 11 July 2010 – Pedestrian protection: Commitment by the European automobile industry [COM(2001) 389 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The European Commission presents an evaluation of the commitment reached with the European automobile industry, represented by the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA).