STRUCTURED DIALOGUE AFTER THE EXPIRY OF
THE ECSC TREATY
(21690)
12107/00
COM(00) 588
|
Commission Communication: "the future of the structured dialogue after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty".
|
| Legal base:
| — |
| |
| Document originated:
| 27 September 2000 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 2 October 2000 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 27 October 2000 |
| Department: |
Trade and Industry |
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 6 November 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| To be discussed in Council:
| None planned |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared |
Background
17.1 The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC)
Consultative Committee, which has existed since 1952, comprises
108 members, directly appointed by the Council, and representing
the producers, consumers and workers in the coal and steel sectors.
It delivers opinions on matters of general policy relating to
those sectors, or on more legal or technical questions. The expiry
of the ECSC Treaty in July 2002 means that the Committee will
have to be dissolved. The purpose of this Communication, which
the Commission has produced at the request of the Member States,
is to consider ways in which consultative arrangements for the
two sectors might best be organised in future.
The current document
17.2 The Commission suggests that there are essentially
four options available after 2002. These are:
— the creation
of an ad hoc structure similar to the current system;
— the creation of a round table, which
would meet periodically and bring together the coal and steel
sectors in a tripartite format;
— the creation of a committee appointed
by the Commission, and directly answerable to it; and
— the transfer of responsibility for the
coal and steel sector to the Economic and Social Committee (ESC).
17.3 The Commission suggests that the last of
these represents the most viable and flexible, and least costly,
approach. In particular, it considers that the other options either
do not reflect the impending expiry of the ECSC Treaty or would
entail the setting up of free-standing structures with an ill-defined
status (which it believes would be hard to justify for sectors
"which are no longer deemed by the Member States as requiring
special treatment", and will in future be governed by ordinary
law). The Commission also suggests that amalgamation would be
advantageous for the coal and steel industries in that they would
be consulted on more proposals than under the ECSC regime, and
for the ESC in that it would acquire the Consultative Committee's
expertise in structured dialogue. Moreover, it believes that such
a step would be timely in view of the wider examination currently
being undertaken of the ESC's role and structures. However, it
recognises that there would be budgetary implications for the
ESC, and that some increase — perhaps of the order of 25
to 30 — would be needed in its membership (which is currently
set at 222).
The Government's view
17.4 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 6 November
2000, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Competitiveness
at the Department of Trade and Industry (Mr Alan Johnson) says
that the Government believes that the structured dialogue provided
by the ECSC Consultative Committee has been valuable in sharing
knowledge and encouraging debate. He says that, although the Commission
has considered various alternative fora, it has not in the UK's
view done so in sufficient depth. In particular, he considers
that an analysis of the costs of each option should be included.
On the other hand, he regards the proposal that the ESC should
incorporate some of the structures and working methods from the
Consultative Committee as a positive one, and he says that the
Government will be seeking a fuller explanation from the Commission
of how the new structure will enable coal and steel industry issues
to be debated effectively.
Conclusion
17.5 The Minister has made clear that action
here rests with the Commission, and that this document has been
produced for the information of the Member States at their request.
We are therefore clearing it, but we would like him to keep us
informed of any developments, including those which meet the concerns
identified in his Explanatory Memorandum.
| 
