Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on - the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No. 3528/86 on the protection of the Community's forests against atmopsheric pollution', and - the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No. 2158/92 on the protection of the Community's forests against fire'
C 51/24 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 2. 2000 Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on — the ‘Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No. 3528/86 on the protection of the Community’s forests against atmospheric pollution’, and — the ‘Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No. 2158/92 on the protection of the Community’s forests against fire’ (2000/C 51/05) On 5 October 1999 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 175 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposals. The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 16 November 1999. The rapporteur was Mr Ribbe. At its 368th plenary session (meeting of 8 December 1999), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 102 votes to one, with two abstentions. 1. Introduction 1. 1. Council Regulations No 307/97/EC, amending Regu- lation No. 3528/86/EEC on the protection of the Community’s forests against atmospheric pollution, and No. 308/97/EC, amending Regulation No. 2158/92/EEC (1) on the protection of the Community’s forests against fire, take Article 43 (‘agri- culture’ — now Article 37) of the Treaty as their legal basis. On 30 April 1997 the Parliament queried this matter with the Court of Justice. On 25 February 1999 the Court gave its judgement in joint cases C-164/97 and C-165/97. The judgement repealed both regulations and stipulated that the Council should have used Article 130s (‘environment’ — now Article 175) of the Treaty as the only legal basis. However, the Court suspended the effects of the repeal to enable the Council to adopt two new regulations with the same purpose within a reasonable time. It is recalled that the Community forest monitoring 1. 3. scheme established by Regulation (EEC) 3528/86, and extended until the end of 2001 by the 1997 regulation referred to in point 1. 1 above, aims at improving knowledge of forest health. Together with the International Cooperative Programme on Assessment and Monitoring of Air Pollution Effects of Forests (ICP Forests)(2), the scheme is part of a Pan-European Programme for Intensive Forest Monitoring. After having monitored forest condition separately until 1990, ICP Forests and the EU agreed upon a common monitoring system in 1991. Today 34 European countries including all 15 EU Member States participate in the monitoring. 1. 2. In response to this Court judgement, the Commission is now proposing two new regulations. As regards their substance, these new regulations are (almost) identical to the repealed ones, but this time they are based on Article 175 of the Treaty. The financial allocation for these two measures (respectively EUR 34 million and EUR 50 million for the period 1997 to 2001) has however been adjusted in line with the actual budget allocations for 1997-1999 and those provided for in the 2000 PDB. Under the 1997 regulations, the financial reference amounts for the same period were respectively ECU 40 million and ECU 70 million. 1. 4. The general objective of the Community forest fire protection scheme set up by Regulation 2158/92/EEC, and modified by the 1997 regulation, is to reduce the number of forest fire outbreaks and the extent of areas burnt. It does so by part-financing measures to identify the causes of forest fires and the means of combating them, to set up or improve systems of prevention (such as protective infrastructures) as well as to establish forest fire monitoring systems. The 1997 regulation, besides extending the scheme by five years until the end of 2001, put special emphasis on the need to further develop the Community information system (data base) on forest fires. (1) At several points (e. g. on the cover page), the English version of the Commission’s proposal erroneously refers to Regulation 2158/86/EEC instead of 2158/92/EEC. (2) This programme was established under the UN-ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). 23. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 51/25 review of 1. 5. In its 1998 Communication on a forestry strategy for the European Union (1), the Commission announced a more the Community forest monitoring substantial scheme in the year 2001. On the basis of, among other things, a planned workshop with scientific experts and other interested parties, it intends to submit a proposal for amending the existing regulation by the end of the year 2000. One of the main aims of such a proposal would be to widen the scheme by including, in addition to air pollution, other stress factors affecting forest ecosystems, such as drought, climate change or disease. (2) Regarding the Community forest fire protection scheme, the communication also announced an extension beyond 2001, stating that this specific action will be continued and strengthened. (3) 2. General remarks In accordance with its opinion (4) on the 1997 regu- 2. 1. lations, the Economic and Social Committee welcomes the extension of the two schemes until the end of 2001. It also welcomes the proposed change of the legal base, which — in line with the Court’s judgement — now reflects the predominantly environmental dimension of the schemes in question. However, the Committee is very much concerned 2. 2. about the proposals’ budgetary aspects. It notes that the financial allocation proposed for both schemes is considerably lower than the amounts envisaged in the 1997 regulations. This decrease does not do justice to the potential of both schemes, which could part-finance a far larger number of useful projects. The Committee therefore urges the budget authority to consider the scope for increasing the proposed financial allocation. the cost-effectiveness of the measures carried out. It therefore suggests that these reports be published one year before the expiry of both schemes, i. e. by the end of 2000. In addition, the proposed new regulations should include a reference to the planned extension of both schemes beyond the year 2001. Two specific amendments to this end are proposed under point 3 below. 2. 4. The Committee chooses to make no further remarks on the substance of the proposed schemes, as it awaits the review proposals planned for the end of 2000. At this stage, it wishes to confine itself to a few brief considerations which the Commission should take into account when preparing these review proposals: — the review process should involve all relevant players including environmental NGOs; — the coordination with other monitoring systems (such as the one under Directive 96/62 on ambient air quality) should be strengthened; — the scope for (further) associating the CEECs in accordance with the association agreements and the relevant additional protocols should be examined. 2. 5. Against the background of the 1999 report on forest conditions in Europe (5), which shows, among other things, a general deterioration of the crown condition of the main tree species, the ESC would finally stress the need for policy makers to act upon the information provided by the schemes in question: it is up to them to take the necessary policy initiative to reverse the observed trends. A case in point is the need for a further reduction of tropospheric ozone concentrations, as it gets more and more apparent that ozone can lead to visible forest damage, especially in the Mediterranean area. 2. 3. The Committee is of the opinion that the planned reports on the application of the two regulations should serve as a basis for the discussion of the review referred to in point 1. 5 above and should include an assessment of the impact and Against the background of the general remarks made above, the Committee proposes the following amendments: 3. Specific remarks (1) COM(1998) 649, 3. 11. 1998 (2) This is echoed in point 5 of the Council Resolution of 15 December 1998 on this subject, which calls on the Com- mission to (…) improve continuously the effectiveness of the European monitoring system of forest health, taking into account all the potential impacts on forest ecosystems. (3) Again, this is confirmed in the December 1998 Council Resolution which in its point 6 ‘advocates the continuation (…) and possible improvement to the Community scheme (…) in view of the positive impact it has had (…). ’ (4) OJ C 66, 3. 3. 1997. 3. 1. Article 1 of the proposed amendment of Regulation No. 3528/86 Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No. 3528/86 is replaced by the following: (5) Jointly published by the UN-ECE and the European Commission. C 51/26 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 2. 2000 ‘Article 11 (1 and 2 unchanged) 3. One year before expiry of the period referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall submit to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Com- mittee and the Committee of the Regions a report on the application of this Regulation including an assessment of the impact and the cost-effectiveness of the measures carried out and recommendations for the further develop- ment of the scheme. Before expiry of the period referred to in paragraph 1, 4. this Regulation shall be reviewed by the Council and the European Parliament on a proposal from the Commission and on the basis of the report referred to in paragraph 3. ’ ‘(1 and 2 unchanged) Article 10 One year before expiry of the period referred to in 3. paragraph 1, the Commission shall submit to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Com- mittee and the Committee of the Regions a report on the application of this Regulation including an assessment of the impact and the cost-effectiveness of the measures carried out and recommendations for the further develop- ment of the scheme. 3. 2. Article 1 of the proposed amendment of Regulation No. 2158/92 Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No. 2158/92 is replaced by the following: 4. Before expiry of the period referred to in paragraph 1, this Regulation shall be reviewed by the Council and the European Parliament on a proposal from the Commission and on the basis of the report referred to in paragraph 3. ’ Brussels, 8 December 1999. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI