The EESC recommends that the European Commission and the Member States support further studies and research that would tap the potential of gifted children and young people, aiming to facilitate employment and employability within the framework of the EU and, in a context of economic crisis, enhance specialist knowledge and prevent brain drain. It also recommends that greater consideration be given to each Member State's existing models for and experience in working with highly gifted children, and presents various proposals aimed at improving educational care for children and young people with high abilities.
Download — EESC opinion: Unleashing the potential of children and young people with high intellectual abilities in the European Union
The EESC has looked very carefully at the proposed Common Strategic Framework (CSF) which is now fully integrated in the draft Common Provisions Regulation and seeks to translate the objectives of the Union's Cohesion Policy into practice through better coordination between the several EU Structural Funds. The EESC has also listened carefully to the various points of view expressed by the representatives of organised civil society during a successful and well-attended hearing. The EESC supports the creation of a Common Strategic Framework; an effective CSF will also remove the unnecessary and inefficient separation that currently exists between the key funds. The EESC cautions, however, against additional bureaucracy or administrative complexity arising from the CSF and argues for a strong and genuine implementation of the partnership principle.
This own initiative opinion has been drafted in response to the Commission staff working document adopted on 24 April 2012 and which sets out its current thinking of what a European Code of Conduct on Partnership (ECCP) should look like during the forthcoming cohesion policy programming period. The EESC has strongly defended the need for an ECCP; in the meantime the Council has indicated that it wishes to delete all reference to an ECCP upon which the EESC President has written to the Council, Parliament and Commission arguing the need to maintain the Commission's proposals as is.
The EESC is deeply worried about the increasing concern felt among organised civil society with regard to the implementation of the partnership principle. Reports from some Member States show an on-going trend towards a dilution of this partnership principle and a decrease of participation by organised civil society.
Letter by President Staffan Nilsson to the Ministers responsible for Cohesion Policy in the European Union on the importance of the Partnership principle in the Common Provisions Regulation
This exploratory opinion for the Cyprus Presidency examines the possibility for the European Union to develop a so-called macro-regional strategy for the Mediterranean; these integrated strategies seek to coordinate the various EU policies for a given functional & territorially defined region. The Mediterranean region is geographically very large and has varying economic, social, political and cultural features, and countries with different systems and infrastructures (EU countries, non-EU countries with EU candidate status, and non-EU countries taking part in Euro-Mediterranean cooperation). For this reason the EESC proposes that two subregional policies (for the eastern and western Mediterranean) should be set up, which would be complementary, coordinating their work with each other and with that of the macro-regional Adriatic-Ionian strategy.
Download — Macro-regional strategy in the Mediterranean
The EESC welcomes this legislative proposal which ensures the effective resolution of failing financial institutions within the EU, and supports the introduction of harmonised rules regarding intra-group financial support. The Committee also stresses that the Central Banks, including the ECB, have to be involved in the assessment of the recovery and resolution plans, while remaining independent. Professional advice of consumer organisations, trade union representatives, etc., should also be sought. The Committee encourages a greater degree of certainty for the institutions by introducing explicit and more clearly defined rules. The opinion demands more clearly defined rules for the Special Manager (SM) as a highly intrusive early intervention measure, and points out the need for additional clarifications regarding both the bail-in tool and the Resolution Authorities (RAs).
Download — Recovery and resolution of credit institutions
