10. We have given further consideration to the following on the basis of a
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum. We maintain our opinion[22] that it raises questions of political importance. We now make no
recommendation for its further consideration, but suggest that it would be relevant to any debate
covering industrial or commercial competitiveness:--
Department of Trade and Industry
(17815)
12452/96
COM(96)589 |
Commission Communication :The First Action Plan for Innovation in
Europe. |
| Legal base: |
-- |
Background
10.1 We reported twice[23] on the Commission's
Green Paper on innovation, which discussed the various factors influencing successful innovation
in the Community and made a number of suggestions for action. We then considered the Action Plan[24], setting out the Commission's crystallised proposals and
summarising the observations of Member States and other bodies who were consulted on the Green
Paper.
The Government's response
10.2 We have now received from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science
and Technology (Mr Ian Taylor) a Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum dated 11 March. He explains
that the Government is not required to produce a formal response to the Action Plan, but he says:
"There is much in the Action Plan that we welcome, such as the exchange of best
practice between Member States, recognition of the need to simplify administrative procedures and
the explicit recognition that the responsibility for innovation lies primarily with companies."
"We have reservations on some of the details. In particular there needs to be a
European added-value to any work proposed at Community level. Any European work should complement
existing work at Community level, ie this should be the starting point for any Community
activities."
10.3 The attachment to the Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum gives the
Government's detailed comments on the specific measures proposed in the Action Plan, and on the
contribution that they could make in relation to the three identified priorities (fostering an
"innovation culture", establishing a framework conducive to innovation, and linking
research and innovation more effectively). It concludes that:
"If the Action Plan is implemented in the spirit in which it seems to have been drawn
up, after taking subsidiarity and the role of the market into account, the Community could
potentially give a considerable boost to innovation in Europe."
10.4 The Minister says that follow-up action is now likely to be taken through the
appropriate Councils. The Council Conclusions on the Action Plan are being drafted by the
Presidency, and are expected to be endorsed by the Research Council at its meeting in May.
Conclusion
10.5 We thank the Minister for sending us a copy of his detailed comments on the
Action Plan, showing how these important issues are to be taken forward. On the basis of this
information, we now clear the document.
10.6 We remain of the view, however, that the issues raised are of political
importance. When we first reported on the Green Paper, we suggested that it would be relevant to
any debate covering commercial or industrial competitiveness. This remains the case.
22.(17815) 12452/96; see HC 36-xi (1996-97), paragraph 15 (29 January 1997). Back
23.(16869) 4332/96; see HC 51-xi (1995-96), paragraph 13 (29 February 1996) and
HC 51-xix (1995-96), paragraph 8 (15 May 1996). Back
24.(17815) 12452/96; see HC 36-xi (1996-97), paragraph 15 (29 January 1997). Back
|
