Eurozone Finance Ministers issued the following statement following their meeting in Denmark this morning.

"The stability and integrity of the Economic and Monetary Union have required swift and vigorous measures that had been implemented recently, together with further qualitative moves towards a genuine Fiscal Stability Union.

In order to further improve market confidence and in accordance with the agreement reached at the Euro Summit on 9 December 2011 and reiterated on 2 March 2012, we have reassessed the adequacy of the overall EFSF/ESM lending ceiling of EUR 500 billion which, given EUR 200 billion long term commitments of the EFSF, currently entails a 300 billion maximum lending volume for the ESM.

We agreed on the following principles:

• The paid-in capital of the ESM will be made available more quickly than initially foreseen in the ESM Treaty, in respect of national procedures. Two tranches of capital will be paid in 2012, a first one in July, a second one by October. Another two tranches will be paid in 2013 and a final tranche in the first half of 2014. In line with the ESM Treaty, the payment of the capital will be further accelerated if needed to maintain a 15% ratio between the paid-in capital and the outstanding amount of ESM issuances.
• The ESM will be the main instrument to finance new programmes as from July 2012. The EFSF will, as a rule, only remain active in financing programmes that have started before that date. For a transitional period until mid-2013, it may engage in new programmes in order to ensure a full fresh lending capacity of EUR 500 billion.
• The current overall ceiling for ESM/EFSF lending, as defined in the ESM Treaty, will be raised to EUR 700 billion such that the ESM and the EFSF will be able to operate, if needed, as described above. As of mid-2013, the maximum lending volume of ESM will be EUR 500 billion. The combined lending ceiling of the ESM and the EFSF will continue to be set at EUR 700 billion.
• In addition EUR 49 billion out of the EFSM and EUR 53 billion out of the bilateral Greek loan facility have already been paid out to support current programme countries. All together the euro area is mobilising an overall firewall of approximately EUR 800 billion, more than USD 1 trillion.
• Moreover, euro area Member States have committed to provide EUR 150 billion additional bilateral contributions to the IMF.  

The euro area made substantial progress over the past 18 months to address the challenges stemming from the sovereign debt crisis. Progress was notably made with regard to fiscal consolidation and growth enhancing structural reforms in a number of countries, the successful implementation of the adjustment programmes in Ireland and Portugal, the Greek PSI operation and the agreement on a second Greek programme. Important improvements were made to improve the governance of the euro area through enhancements of the stability and Growth Pact, the new macro-economic imbalances procedure, the Euro Plus Pact and the Fiscal Compact enshrined in the new Treaty on Stability, Cooperation and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union. Finally, robust firewalls have been established. This comprehensive strategy has paid off and led to a significant improvement of market conditions." 

In Ireland, 636 kg of municipal waste was generated per person in 2010, 4th highest in the EU: 57% was landfilled, 4% was incinerated, 35% was recycled and 4% was composted.

In the EU27 overall, 502 kg of municipal waste1 was generated per person in 2010, while 486 kg of municipal waste was treated2 per person. This municipal waste was treated in different ways3: 38% was landfilled, 22% incinerated, 25% recycled and 15% composted. 

The amount of municipal waste generated varies significantly across Member States. Cyprus, with 760 kg per person, had the highest amount of waste generated in 2010, followed by Luxembourg, Denmark and Ireland with values between 600 and 700 kg per person, and the Netherlands, Malta, Austria, Germany, Spain, France, Italy, the United Kingdom and Portugal with values between 500 and 600 kg. Finland, Belgium, Sweden, Greece, Slovenia, Hungary and Bulgaria had values between 400 and 500 kg, while values of below 400 kg per person were recorded in Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Estonia and Latvia.

This information4 is published by Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union.

Incineration represents half or more of waste treatment in Denmark and Sweden

The treatment methods differ substantially between Member States. In 2010, the Member States with the highest share of municipal waste landfilled were Bulgaria (100% of waste treated), Romania (99%), Lithuania (94%) and Latvia (91%).

The highest shares of incinerated municipal waste were observed in Denmark (54% of waste treated), Sweden (49%), the Netherlands (39%), Germany (38%), Belgium (37%), Luxembourg (35%) and France (34%). In ten Member States incineration was equal to or below 1%.

Recycling was most common in Germany (45% of waste treated), Belgium (40%), Slovenia (39%), Sweden (36%), Ireland (35%) and the Netherlands (33%). The Member States with the highest composting rates for municipal waste were Austria (40%), the Netherlands (28%), Belgium (22%), Luxembourg (20%), Denmark (19%) and Spain (18%).

Recycling and composting of municipal waste together accounted for 50% of waste treated or more in Austria (70%), Belgium and Germany (both 62%), the Netherlands (61%) and Sweden (50%). In five Member States less than 10% of waste was recycled or composted.

Municipal waste, 2010

	Municipal waste generated, kg per person	Total municipal waste treated, kg per person	Municipal waste treated, %
			Landfilled	Incinerated	Recycled	Composted
EU27	502	486	38	22	25	15
Belgium	466	434	1	37	40	22
Bulgaria	410	404	100	-	-	-
Czech	317	303	68	16	14	2
Denmark	673	673	3	54	23	19
Germany	583	583	0	38	45	17
Estonia	311	261	77	-	14	9
Ireland	636	586	57	4	35	4
Greece	457	457	82	-	17	1
Spain	535	535	58	9	15	18
France	532	532	31	34	18	17
Italy	531	502	51	15	21	13
Cyprus	760	760	80	-	16	4
Latvia	304	304	91	-	9	1
Lithuania	381	348	94	0	4	2
Luxembourg	678	678	18	35	26	20
Hungary	413	413	69	10	18	4
Malta	591	562	86	-	7	6
Netherlands	595	499	0	39	33	28
Austria	591	591	1	30	30	40
Poland	315	263	73	1	18	8
Portugal	514	514	62	19	12	7
Romania	365	294	99	-	1	0
Slovenia	422	471	58	1	39	2
Slovakia	333	322	81	10	4	5
Finland	470	470	45	22	20	13
Sweden	465	460	1	49	36	14
United Kingdom	521	518	49	12	25	14
Iceland	572	531	73	11	14	2
Norway	469	462	6	51	27	16
Switzerland	707	708	-	50	34	17
Turkey	407	343	99	-	-	1

* Estimated by Eurostat

0 equals less than 0.5%, "-" indicates a real zero

______________________________________

 1.     Municipal waste consists to a large extent of waste generated by households, but may also include similar wastes generated by small businesses and public institutions and collected by the municipality; this part of municipal waste may vary from municipality to municipality and from country to country, depending on the local waste management system.

For areas not covered by a municipal waste collection scheme the amount of waste generated is estimated. Wastes from agriculture and industry are not included.

 2.     The reported quantities of waste generated and treated do not match exactly for some Member States, for the following reasons: estimates for the population not covered by collection schemes, weight losses due to dehydration, double counts of waste undergoing two or more treatment steps, exports and imports of waste and time lags between generation and treatment (temporary storage).

 3.     Waste treatment refers to the following methods:

Landfill is defined as the depositing of waste into or onto land, including specially engineered landfill and temporary storage of over one year.

Incineration means thermal treatment of waste in an incineration plant.

Recycling means any recovery operation by which waste materials are reprocessed into products, materials or substances whether for the original or other purposes, except the use as fuel.

Composting is the biological treatment (anaerobic or aerobic) of biodegradable matter resulting in a recoverable product.

In principle, data on treated municipal waste only refer to waste treated within the Member State, and does not take into account waste exported for treatment. However, recycling capacities may be limited in small countries. Luxembourg is a case where recycled amounts include exports.

 4.     For further information, please visit the web site of Eurostat, under Statistics / Environment / Environmental Data Centre on Waste.

In a Europe-wide survey of attitudes to water, including how to pay for it, 49% of Irish respondents agreed that water users should be charged but there should be measures in place to prevent negative social effects. A further 17% thought that all water users should be charged for the volume of water used in all cases.

Sixty-three per cent of Irish respondents agreed that the price of water should reflect the environmental impact of water use.

And the survey found that more Irish people drink tap water than the EU average; 68% of Irish people drink tap water only, compared to an EU average of 49%.

Some other highlights from the report are listed below.

The summary report is available here: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_344_sum_en.pdf  

• Irish least likely to think that all water users should be charged for the volume of water they, use regardless of individual circumstances, at 17% – a further 49% agree that water users should be charged but think that there should measures to offset potential negative social effects.
   
• Across the EU 42% of people think that water users should be charged for the volume of water they use regardless of individual circumstances and 42% think that there should be measures to offset potential negative social effects. Danish respondents were most likely to agree that water users should be charged for the volume of water they use in all cases at 66%. Greek (58%) followed by Maltese and Portuguese respondents (both 57%) were most likely to think that there should measures to offset potential negative social effects. 
• 63% of Irish respondents agree, or tend to agree, that the price of water should reflect the environmental impact of water use, i.e. water should be more expensive if its use has a greater impact on the environment. The EU average is 61% with Swedish respondents most likely to be in agreement at 79% and Hungarians least at 51%.  
• A large majority (86%) of Irish respondents think that non-potable water re-use should be generalised provided the lower water quality does not affect people's health. This is marginally below the EU average of 88%.
   

Other findings

• Only 40% of Irish respondents feel well or very well informed about the problems facing groundwater, lakes, rivers and coastal waters in Ireland compared to an EU average of 37%. Danish (62%) and Austrian (60%) respondents are most likely to feel well or very well informed and Latvians least at 16%.  
• A majority of Irish people surveyed (67%) believe that water quality problems are serious, just below the EU average of 68%. Respondents in Romania (94%), Italy (91%) and France (89%) were most likely to consider water quality a serious problem for their country and respondents in Finland (39%) and Austria (40%) least likely. 
• 42% of Irish respondents think that the quality of groundwater, rivers, lakes and coastal waters has deteriorated over the past ten years compared to 27% who think it has remained the same and 26% who think it has improved. These figures are similar to the European average: 44% think that the quality of groundwater, rivers, lakes and coastal waters has deteriorated over the past ten years, 25% think it has remained the same and 23% think it has improved. Dutch respondents (46%) were most likely to think that it had improved in their country and Bulgarians and Romanians least at 5%. Similarly, Romanians were most likely to think that water quality had deteriorated over the past ten years at 67%.  
• The number of Irish people who see chemical pollution as a main threat to the water environment in Ireland has dropped 3% to 75% since the previous survey was carried out in 2009. Ireland is one of only two countries (the other one being Hungary, which is down 5%) where the numbers of people seeing chemical pollution as a threat is declining. Across the EU, the number is up 9% to 84%.
• Around three-quarters (73%) of Europeans think that the EU should propose additional measures to address water problems, and about half of this group (37% of total) would like to be able to express their views on these measures. Fewer Irish people (66%) think the EU should propose additional measures to address water problems and more of them (41%) would like to be able to express their view on these measures. Support for EU measures is lowest in Estonia (55%) and the UK (56%) and highest in Germany and Slovakia (both 81%).
• More Irish people drink tap water than EU average: 68% of Irish people drink tap water only compared to an EU average of 49%. 20% of Irish respondents drink only mineral water and 11% drink both tap water and mineral water. Consumption of tap water only is highest in Sweden and Denmark (91%) and lowest in Cyprus and Luxembourg (21%). Consumption of mineral water only is highest in Malta and Cyprus (both 64%) and lowest in Denmark (2%), Sweden and Finland (both 3%). 
• 61% of Irish people surveyed think industry does not do enough to use water efficiently. This is a little below the EU average of 65% and also well below Greece at the top of the scale where 77% think industry does not do enough. Respondents in Cyprus and Estonia (both 38%) are least likely to think that industry does not do enough. 
• Irish people most likely to agree that households are not doing enough to use water efficiently – 75% of Irish people think that households do not do enough to use water efficiently compared to an EU average of 61% and just ahead of Greeks (73%) and Bulgarians (72%). At the other end of the scale, Estonians (39%) are least likely to think that households are not doing enough.
   

One thousand people in Ireland were interviewed for the survey between 5 and 8 March 2012 by IMS Millward Brown.

The summary report is available here: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_344_sum_en.pdf

For more information:

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/blueprint/index_en.htm

For more information on EU research into water, please see: MEMO/12/203

Advocate General’s Opinion in Case C-12/11, Denise McDonagh v Ryanair Ltd

Air carriers such as Ryanair are obliged by EU law to provide accommodation, meals and refreshments to passengers whose flights have been cancelled. EU law does not imply either release from, or temporal or monetary limitation of, the obligation to provide such care to passengers.

Air carriers such as Ryanair are obliged by EU law to provide accommodation, meals and refreshments to passengers whose flights have been cancelled. EU law does not imply either release from, or temporal or monetary limitation of, the obligation to provide such care to passengers.

According to the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice this rule does apply to passengers whose flights have been cancelled because of extraordinary circumstances such as the closure of airspace following the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano. It does not appear to be disproportionate to impose on air carriers such an obligation to provide care  in so far as they are free to pass on the resulting costs to airline ticket prices. What is more, that is a policy which has already been put into effect by Ryanair, which introduced a special levy in April 2011 in order to cover the costs which it had incurred in providing care to passengers whose flights had been cancelled owing to the eruption of the Icelandic volcano.

In practice the air carrier is required under EU law to provide, free of charge, meals and refreshments in a reasonable relation to the waiting time and, where necessary, hotel accommodation and transport between the airport and the place of accommodation, and must place at their disposal means of communicating with third parties. 

As regards the obligation to pay compensation, on the other hand, the air carrier is not obliged to do so if it can prove that the cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances.

Background

Following the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland, the airspace over most of northern Europe – including Irish and UK airspace, in particular – was closed between 15 and 23 April 2010 on account of the risk represented by the volcanic ash cloud. From then until 17 May 2010, the airspace of a number of Member States to and from which Ryanair provided services was sporadically and intermittently closed.

Ms McDonagh was one of the passengers whose flight from Faro to Dublin, scheduled for 17 April 2010, was cancelled because of the volcanic eruption. Flights between continental Europe and Ireland did not resume until 22 April 2010 and Ms McDonagh was finally able to return to Ireland on 24 April 2010. According to Ms McDonagh, Ryanair did not provide her with the necessary assistance and it is required to pay her around EUR 1 130 by way of compensation or damages, to cover the costs which she incurred for meals, refreshments, accommodation and transport.

The Dublin Metropolitan District Court (Ireland), which is hearing the dispute, asked  the Court of Justice essentially whether the closure of airspace owing to the eruption of a volcano is covered by the notion of 'extraordinary circumstances’, requiring the air carrier to provide care for the passengers, or whether it fell within a category of events above and beyond extraordinary circumstances, possibly releasing the carrier from that obligation. Additionally, the Court was asked to give a ruling, in particular, on the question whether the obligation to provide care must be limited, in temporal or monetary terms, in those circumstances.

Full text of the opinion: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=120742&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&cid=2297 

Note: The Advocate General’s Opinion is not binding on the Court of Justice. It is the role of the Advocates General to propose to the Court, in complete independence, a legal solution to the cases for which they are responsible. The Judges of the Court are now beginning their deliberations in this case. Judgment will be given at a later date.

New rules on vaccination against Bluetongue are published today, and enter into force tomorrow, 22 March 2012. These rules are expected to better prevent outbreaks and limit the economic impact of Bluetongue on farms in the EU.

The European Commission welcomes the change in the rules, which would now allow for vaccination also in Bluetongue-free areas, thus allowing for preventive vaccination in areas that are at risk.

The amendment of Council Directive 2000/75/EC follows the Commission’s strategy "prevention is better than the cure" and allows more flexibility for Member States to develop national vaccination strategies for the prevention and control of Bluetongue.

Under the new rules, Member States will be able to use inactivated vaccines which are considered safer for use, since, contrary to "live vaccines", they cannot replicate. These inactivated vaccines which have been developed over the last few years, have been the preferred tool for Bluetongue control and prevention of clinical disease in the EU.

The number of outbreaks in the EU has been decreasing steadily over the past years. This success is attributed primarily to the vaccination campaigns, using inactivated vaccines, which the EU has co-financed over the years (€150 million in 2008, and allocation of €120 million in 2009, €100 million in 2010 and €16 million in 2011). In 2008, a total of 45.000 outbreaks were reported across the EU. That number dropped to 1.118 in 2009, 176 in 2010 and only 39 in 2011.

For more information: http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/index_en.htm 

Of the European Commission's 27 Commissioners, nine are women, including Ireland's Máire Geoghegan-Quinn.

Marking Women's Day 2012, several of them today insisted on the importance of getting more women into decision-making roles.

Commissioner Maire Geoghegan-Quinn spoke to a group of Irish women scientists in Dublin today (via video link) and said " While 46% of PhD graduates in Europe are women, only 30% of researchers are female and only 19% of top level academic posts are filled by women. With all the challenges facing us, we simply cannot afford to waste the talents of female scientists and engineers."

Commissioner Viviane Reding is calling for more women on company boards – just one in seven board members at Europe's top companies is a woman (13.7%) and in Ireland that's just one in eleven (8.7%). "In these challenging times, the stakes are too high to just keep the status quo – persistent failure to enable women to use their full potential has cost us dearly - it is time to act now." She says if there is no change then quotas should be considered.  They already exist in Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. (more below) Reputable studies have shown that earnings in gender balanced companies are considerably higher than those which are not and which have all male boards. (more below)

Meanwhile, Cathy Ashton, the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs, praised the key role of women in the Arab Spring, while Neelie Kroes, Commissioner for Digital Policy called for the I.T. sector to take more account of women.

MORE about women on company boards

Words from Viviane Reding, European Commission Vice-President and EU Justice Commissioner

"In the past few decades, Europe has made significant progress in getting more women into the workforce. The female employment rate is 62%, up from 55% in 1997. Women are also making great strides in education: they now represent 60% of new university graduates. European Union legislation and financial support have contributed to these advances.

Despite this progress, there has been one significant shortfall: the lack of women at the top levels in companies. Many qualified women cannot break through the glass ceiling when climbing the corporate ladder. The facts are bleak: Just one in seven board members (13.7%) at Europe's top companies and one in 30 boardroom chairs (3.2%) is a woman.

In Ireland, the situation is even worse, with women making up 8.7% of board members.

There has been some limited progress in recent years. The gender balance in Europe's boardrooms saw a 1.9-percentage point increase from October 2010 to January 2012, compared to a long-term average rise over the last decade of 0.6 percentage points per year). However, France, which introduced quota legislation on gender balance in boards in 2011, alone accounts for around half the increase in the EU. But overall, change remains stubbornly slow. At the rate of progress over the last years,  it would take another 40 years to achieve something approaching gender balance in boardrooms. The number of women chairing major company boards has even declined, falling to 3.2% in January 2012 from 3.4% in 2010.

In these difficult economic times – when we are facing the twin challenges of an aging population and skills shortages – it is more important than ever to take advantage of everyone's skills. There are four main reasons for helping women to finally break the glass ceiling in company boards.

First, the economy: getting more women into the labour market is an important contributor to improving Europe's competitiveness. Having more women in the workforce will also help achieve the EU's goal of raising the employment rate for adults to 75%. You have to build up the pyramid with a strong base. Governments have a responsibility to improve and facilitate work-life balance so people can combine a family and a career.

Second, the business case for more women on boards: a growing number of studies show a link between more women in senior positions and companies’ financial performance. For example, a report by McKinsey found that gender-balanced companies have a 56% higher operating profit compared to male-only companies. Ernst & Young looked at the 290 largest publicly-listed companies. They found that the earnings at companies with at least one woman on the board were significantly higher than in those that had no female board member.

Thirdly, several EU Member States have started to act by introducing legally binding quotas for company boards. The group of first movers includes Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. Denmark, Finland, Greece, Austria and Slovenia have adopted rules on gender balance for the boards of state-owned companies. These different quota rules are new, and they can be a challenge for businesses operating in several EU countries. For example, businesses may have to comply with different national quota laws if they want to participate in tenders for public works.

Fourthly, Europeans support better gender balance. In a new Europe-wide opinion poll, 88% of people across say that, given the same competence, they think women should be equally represented in top business jobs. In Ireland the figure was 96%.

Across Europe, from politicians to academics to business leaders, people are aware that women mean business. This is a big step forward.

So, where do we go from here? One year ago, the European Commission, the European Parliament and Ministers from several Member States challenged publicly-listed companies in the EU to voluntarily improve the gender balance. Chief executives were asked to sign the "Women on the Board Pledge for Europe" to voluntarily increase women's presence on corporate boards to 30% in 2015 and 40% in 2020. But so far, only 24 companies across Europe have committed.

That is why the European Commission has now launched a public consultation to identify possible action at EU level to redress the imbalance in Europe's boardrooms. Can we continue to rely on self-regulation? Do we need binding quota rules as we have seen in several EU countries? Do we perhaps need coordinated or even harmonised action at EU level? Do we need quotas for all companies, or should we start with the larger ones?

Breaking the glass ceiling for women on company boards is a common challenge facing Europe's economy. We can no longer afford to waste female talent. Persistent failure to encourage and enable women to make full use of their potential has cost us dearly. In these challenging times, the stakes are too high to keep the status quo. It is time to act now. "

EU Heads of State and Government have today stressed that the Europe 2020 strategy is Europe's growth strategy and its comprehensive response to the challenges it is facing. One of the targets of Europe 2020, through the Innovation Union flagship is to boost innovation, research and development in Europe. In particular Europe needs to improve its ability to transform good research into innovative products and services that meets market demand. 

The conclusions of the European Council stress the need for more efforts to complete the European Research Area by 2014, as well as a number of other important advances that are necessary. This memo sets out progress achieved on some key areas of EU action on research and innovation, a vital component of Europe's future competitiveness and growth.

Where are we on Innovation Union?

The Innovation Union is one of the seven flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy for a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy. Launched by the European Commission in October 2010, it aims to improve conditions and access to finance for research and innovation in Europe, to ensure that innovative ideas can be turned into products and services that create growth and jobs.

Good progress has been made in launching and implementing 30 out of the 34 Innovation Union commitments. Notably, by the end of 2011, based on wide stakeholder consultations, the Commission has put forward all six legislative proposals announced in the Innovation Union (Horizon 2020, new Cohesion policy, reform of public procurement legislation, a new regime for venture capital, standardisation package and legislative proposals for unitary patent protection). These proposals will bring a step change in framework conditions for innovation in Europe.

For more on Innovation Union see: http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm

Horizon 2020 - more and better funding for research and innovation

The Commission has proposed to increase investment in research, innovation and education in support of the EU's pro-growth agenda. Horizon 2020, the proposed €80 billion investment programme for research and innovation for 2014-2020.  It brings together all existing EU research and innovation funding and provides support in a seamless way from idea to market, through streamlined funding, simpler programme architecture and rules for participation. 

Horizon 2020 embodies many of the specific Innovation Union commitments.  It focuses on societal challenges like climate change or health. It devotes significant funding to SMEs, financial instruments, supporting public procurement of innovation, facilitating collaboration, and supporting research on public sector and social innovation. The Commission will also seek to close the innovation divide in Europe by developing the synergies between Cohesion policy funding and Horizon 2020.

The Commission is already supporting top research and innovation across Europe.  The current EU Seventh Framework Programme for Research (FP7) is worth €55 billion from 2007-2013. The last call for proposals under FP7, in July of this year, will be the biggest ever under an EU research programme, providing close to €10 billion to researchers and innovative companies.  

Delivering the European Research Area

The European Council conclusions today stressed the effort needed on the European Research Area (ERA), following the commitment made in February 2011 to complete ERA by 2014.

ERA will provide a genuine single market for knowledge, research and innovation. This will enable researchers, research institutions and businesses to better move, compete and co-operate across borders.  Currently, there is too much fragmentation across Europe, too much duplicated work, and too many barriers preventing knowledge circulation and researcher mobility. This wastes scarce resources – resources that could be more effectively used to stimulate innovation and create growth and jobs.

The Commission is due to propose a framework for achieving the ERA later this year, following a wide-ranging public consultation that too place during autumn 2011. The framework will focus on a number of ‘big ticket’ items which are crucial for achieving ERA and will make the biggest impact on the economy. One of the initiatives to help achieve ERA will be that major research stakeholders – both those who fund and those who do the research – will be invited to sign up to a formal joint commitment with the Commission to deliver on the main priority measures in the ERA Framework. These "ERA-Pacts" will contain a clear roadmap, based on common objectives, with precise, realistic deliverables for research actors and for the Commission, and clear deadlines for achieving them.

Developing a single innovation indicator

The European Council conclusions called for the rapid development of the single innovation indicator that had been identified in the Innovation Union flagship. The indicator is to measure the share of fast-growing, innovative companies in the economy. The indicator will cover both technological and non-technological innovation. The Commission is working closely with Member States on data collection in order to present reliable, consistent and comparable results by the end of 2012.

The European Commission continues to monitor innovation performance in Europe through a wider series of indicators. The Innovation Union Scoreboard (IP/12/102) provides a comparative assessment of the research and innovation performance of the EU27 Member States and the relative strengths and weaknesses of their research and innovation systems, based on 24 indicators. The EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard analyses European and international companies in terms of their R&D investment (IP/11/1205).

IPR valorisation

In line with the European Council request to explore options for setting up an intellectual property rights (IPR) valorisation instrument, the Commission has carried out a study and convened an expert group. The results of both are now publicly available. Building on this work, the Commission is analysing the case for action in this field and will report to the Council.

IPR valorisation means exploitation of intellectual property rights through selling, licensing and other methods, and its transformation into goods and services. This should help accelerate the commercialisation of research results and help unlock the innovation potential from unused patents.

For more information see: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/intellectual-property/index_en.htm

Helping business innovate:  simplification and SME-friendly measures

Major efforts have already been made over the past year to simplify participation in the current Framework Programme for Research (FP7). The Commission Decision of January 2011 (C(2011)174) adopted three measures concerning the use of average personnel costs, a simpler cost reimbursement for owner-managers of SMEs without a salary, and the establishment of a clearing committee for ensuring the consistent application of the FP7 rules across all Commission services. These measures have been highly appreciated by the research community, especially by innovative SMEs. 

Latest figures show that the European Commission is keeping its promises on research funding for Small- and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). SMEs are set to receive 15.3% (€2.4 billion) of the €16.3 billion committed so far under the Cooperation part of the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7). This surpasses the goal of 15% set by the European Parliament and European Council. SME funding under the Cooperation Programme is expected to remain above 15% for the rest of FP7, meaning SMEs will receive at least €4.8 billion of the €32 billion available under the Cooperation programme. Overall, around €7 billion of the FP7 budget of €55 billion is expected to go to around 17,000 SMEs. 

Access to finance for innovation – RSFF and Horizon 2020

Financial markets and institutions are often reluctant to back research- or innovation- intensive companies or projects due to the relatively high level of uncertainty inherent in their activities. As a direct answer to this challenge, in 2007 the European Investment Bank and the European Commission jointly created a new lending instrument called the Risk-Sharing Finance Facility (RSFF).

The RSFF improves access to debt financing for promoters of research and innovation investments by sharing the underlying risks between the European Union and the European Investment Bank. Together they are providing up to €2 billion for the period 2007-2013. That has so far helped 75 companies benefit from over €7 billion in EIB loans to projects enhancing European growth and competitiveness. 

Horizon 2020 will maximise the growth potential of companies by providing them with adequate finance when they need it. The Commission has proposed some € 3.5 billion for financial instruments that will leverage many times this amount in private finance for loans and equity investments in innovative projects and companies. Under Horizon 2020, a debt financing instrument will provide loans and guarantees on a market-driven, first-come first served basis for investment in research and innovation. An equity instrument will provide venture capital to individual start-ups and growing enterprises.

For more on the RSFF see: http://www.eib.org/products/loans/special/rsff/index.htm

For more on Horizon 2020 see: http://ec.europa.eu/research/horizon2020/index_en.cfm?pg=home

President Barroso made the following key points at the signature ceremony of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union:

"The Commission warmly welcomes the fact that the agreement remains open to all, as well as the treaty commitment to incorporate its substance into EU primary law within five years at the latest."

"The Commission will prioritise the preparation of secondary legislation on those elements of the Treaty for which this is appropriate. This is in line with our major advances in terms of economic governance over recent months, namely the six-pack of legislative measures. The Treaty is an important part in our global strategy to restore stability in European public finances. As we have said before, stability is a prerequisite of confidence, and confidence is indispensable to sustainable growth."

"In the eyes of the world, what is at stake is the very credibility of the euro area and of Europe as a whole: its ability to deliver sustainable fiscal consolidation, growth and employment.  The euro is not just a currency of some countries, the euro is the currency of the European Union. Through their formal commitment at the Treaty level to increase discipline and convergence, the Member States are showing that from monetary union we are now progressing towards a true economic union."  

"Contrary to all the negative prophesies about the future of the euro, and even of the European Union, this agreement with its binding rules in terms of reinforced governance signals the irreversibility of the euro and  a  very important step forward in European integration." 

"This Treaty represents the very culture of financial stability that is a prerequisite for true a economic union."  

"I am convinced that the Member States and the EU institutions are now in a much better position to complement these indispensable efforts on fiscal responsibility with further reforms for competitiveness and increased solidarity." 

The full text of the Speech is available on Rapid: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/12/145