4 European Institute of Technology
| (27994)
14871/06
+ ADDs 1-2
COM(06) 604
| Draft Regulation establishing the European Institute of Technology
|
| Legal base | Article 157(3) EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Trade and Industry
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 12 June 2007
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 41-ii (2006-07), para 1 (29 November 2006)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 25 June 2007
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared but further information requested
|
Previous scrutiny
4.1 In November 2006, we considered this draft Regulation to establish
the European Institute of Technology (EIT).[14]
The accompanying impact assessment said that the reasons for the
"innovation gap" between the European Community and
its competitors is that in Europe:
- funding, outstanding people and world-class facilities are
dispersed, not concentrated in a comparatively few centres of
excellence;
- there is not enough research and education which
looks across traditional academic disciplines and focuses on opportunities
for innovation in the medium- and longer-term;
- there are poor connections between education,
research and innovation; and
- Europe's universities have insufficient freedom
from state interference, most of the staff are not of an entrepreneurial
mind and the universities need to be modernised.
4.2 The Commission believes that the EIT would help
overcome these weaknesses by bringing together businesses, research
bodies and universities in new ways to create centres of excellence
in which post-graduate teaching, research and innovation would
be integrated. The first draft of the Regulation proposed that
the EIT's tasks should include:
- identifying matters of potential
major economic and social interest for Europe which are likely
to generate the best added value from innovation;
- deciding in which of those matters to invest
resources;
- selecting about six Knowledge and Innovation
Communities; defining their rights and obligations in agreements;
and evaluating their performance;
- raising the EIT's income; and
- promoting the recognition of EIT degrees and
diplomas.
4.3 The Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs)
would be joint-ventures of partner organisations. They would be
selected by the EIT to carry out integrated innovation, research
and education in a specific field. Businesses, research bodies
and universities would voluntarily form themselves into partnerships
which would compete for designation as KICs. Each KIC would last
seven to 15 years and would raise its funds from public and private
sources.
4.4 The Commission proposed that the EIT should be
financed through: contributions from the European Community's
budget; payments from Community programmes; contributions from
Member States and public authorities; contributions from business
and private organisations (such as companies, banks and venture
capitalists); bequests and donations; and revenue generated from
the EIT's activities. The Commission forecast that the total combined
costs of the EIT and KICs between 2008-13 would be €2.367
billion.
4.5 The Government was concerned about the proposed
size of the EIT's budget and the absence of a break-down of what
the money would be spent on and where it would come from.
4.6 We concluded that there appeared to be widespread
agreement on the need to bring education, research and innovation
closer together. But it was not clear to us that the European
Institute of Technology, as proposed by the Commission, would
be either the best or even an effective means to achieve that
aim. Because of the importance of the issues, we recommended the
proposal for debate in the European Standing Committee. The debate
took place on 30 January 2007.
The Minister's letter of 12 June 2007
4.7 The Minister of State for Science and Innovation
at the Department of Trade and Industry (Malcolm Wicks) tells
us that the Government's overall approach to the proposal for
the EIT has been one of cautious support. He says that:
"The Government has sought to work constructively
with our partners to achieve an outcome which improves the chances
of the EIT becoming a useful addition to the range of instruments
available to support European innovation and competitiveness."
4.8 The Minister tells us that the EIT concept has
evolved substantially during the negotiations on the draft Regulation.
In particular:
"— [The EIT] has moved away from a
single, bricks-and-mortar institutional model to one based on
networks of existing organisations;
— There will be no independent degree-awarding
powers for the EIT which will remain the preserve of individual
institutions and the systems of Member States;
— It will have a more gradual launch, with
two to three Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) in the
first period to 2013, rather than the original proposal for six
KICs;
— Agreement on a two-phase approach which
will allow lessons to be learnt from progress of the initial KICs,
and a requirement for a further legal decision by [the] Council
and European Parliament before any expansion in the number of
KICs; and
— There will be a light-touch governance
regime, which allows substantial autonomy for the individual KICs,
while maintaining appropriate transparency, quality assurance,
accountability and evaluation provision."
The Minister encloses with his letter a copy of the
Presidency's revised draft of the Regulation.
4.9 Article 19 of the revised draft proposes that
"The financial envelope for the implementation of this Regulation
during a period of six years from 1 January 2008 is set at EUR
[308.7] million." The Minister says that the size of the
budget is still under discussion in both the Council Working Group
and the European Parliament. The Government has opposed a budget
of €308 million because the Commission has not yet provided
a sufficient justification for that amount (which would represent
25% of the margin of heading 1A (competitiveness for growth and
employment) of the EC budget. The Minister adds, however, that
it appears from the most recent Council Working Group meetings
that a large majority of Member States are ready to agree to the
Commission's proposal. The Presidency aims to achieve a "general
approach" on it at the Competitiveness Council's meeting
on 25 June.
4.10 The Minister says that:
"The Government is of the view that the EIT
proposal as amended during the course of negotiations in the Council
Working Group could enhance the innovation performance of Member
States, by linking up existing excellent organisations. It would
focus on strategic priority areas where given the nature and scale
of the innovation challenge, action at European level could generate
the 'critical mass', that could not be achieved by Member States
alone."
Conclusion
4.11 In our view, the draft Regulation to set
up the European Institute of Technology and the Knowledge and
Innovation Communities has been substantially improved during
the negotiations. We welcome the intention to proceed gradually,
so that the EIT and KICs can benefit from the lessons of experience.
We understand the reasons for the Government's reservations about
the budget. We understand that the European Parliament is also
concerned about it. It appears to us likely, therefore, that whatever
the outcome of the Council meeting on 25 June, it will be necessary
for the Council to reconsider Article 19 in the light of the European
Parliament's views.
4.12 We have no further questions to put to the
Minister and we are content to clear the document. We should,
however, be grateful if the Minister would provide us with progress
reports on the remaining stages of the consideration of the draft
Regulation.
14 See headnote. Back
| 
