Category: Archive – 2010

Background – Directives setting limits on emissions:

Directive 2000/25/EC sets limits on the emissions of gaseous and particulate pollutants by engines intended to power agricultural and forestry tractors.

 

Directive 2005/13/EC amends Directive 2000/25/EC and introduces the current applicable stage of emission limits for the majority of diesel engines as Stage III A.  On the 1st January 2011, these limits will be replaced by Stage III B limits.  The latter are more stringent than Stage III A limits. 

Reasons why manufacturers are finding difficulties to comply with Stage III B limits:

To comply with Stage III B limits, current engines need to be substantially modified.

Compliance costs for manufacturers to cope with the new emission limits are significant. These costs include for example research and development costs, equipment redesign costs, after treatment devices costs, documentation and labelling costs, etc.

Flexibility scheme:

Directive 2005/13/EC introduced the flexibility scheme to facilitate the transition between the different emission stages.

The flexibility scheme allows the tractor manufacturer to place on the market either (1) for each engine power category a limited number of tractors not exceeding 20% of the tractors manufacturer's annual sales (calculated as the average sales in the EU of the latest 5 years) or (2) a fixed number of tractors as stipulated in the Directive.  The second option is intended for smaller enterprises which produce lower volumes of engines.

Key Points for revision

COM (2010) 607 proposes to modify the provisions of the flexibility scheme to mitigate the effects from the transition of emission Stages III A to III B by extending its application while maintaining the entry into force of the exhaust emission limit Stage III B to preserve the objective of the Directive to reduce emissions of gaseous and particulate pollutants in the European Union.

Who will be effected?

Type-approval Authorities, manufacturers, authorised representatives, and importers, of tractors.

Deadlines

Feedback by noon of Friday 17^th December 2010. On: ;

;                    

The "green economy" is a significant business opportunity for SMEs, but they require reliable partners in financing their investments and the right legislative framework. This was the message brought forward at the European conference "How green makes money", which took place in Brussels earlier this month to which GRTU President Paul Abela and Director General Vincent Farrugia attended. The conference featured President Herman Van Rompuy, Minister Vincent Van Quickenborne as well as economists Jeremy Rifkin and Geert Noels. The event was organised by the Belgian Presidency of the EU and the European Commission in association with UEAPME and its Belgian members UNIZO and UCM.

 

The ambitious goals set by the EU to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while increasing the use of renewable resources and improving energy efficiency will not be reached without the contribution of European crafts and SMEs. Some companies are already on the right track in this respect and are making profits in the process. However, many SMEs have difficulties in finding partners to finance their „green‟ projects, while others are held back by red tape and complicated procedures.

 The vast majority of SMEs will require more attention if we want the „green economy‟ to expand beyond niche markets in the months and years to come.

Many SMEs are willing to invest in more energy-efficient systems and environmentally-friendly production processes. However, they often face obstacles in getting access to finance, with banks being reluctant to fund such investments and lacking the specialised staff needed to evaluate SME projects. Bank staff should be trained to objectively assess SMEs' investments projects and more awareness raising initiatives are needed.

The existing financing opportunities created by the EU, the EIB and the EIF are a good starting point, however, funding and granting mechanisms must be simplified. Moreover, these schemes must be made more attractive for decentralised financial intermediaries, which are the backbone of SME finance in many countries. Structural funds can and should also be used to promote investments in the green economy, although their potential has remained largely un-tapped so far due to difficult procedures and requirements. It is also necessary to foster alternative sources of funding for SMEs, such as risk capital, and to reinforce the use of guarantee schemes.

On the regulatory framework, the EU policy action in the field should be based on the Small Business Act and on the principles of subsidiarity, better regulation and "Think Small First". If legislation triggers deep and structural impacts on SMEs, specific measures such as guidelines, thresholds, longer and/or staged implementation periods, technical assistance and simplified procedures must be foreseen to avoid companies being placed out of the market.

In the next years, Europe will have to switch to a more resource efficient economy. Small entrepreneurs are willing to do their part and have fully understood that the „green economy‟ is an opportunity and not a threat.

However, SMEs need the right partners and the right rules to succeed, and they expect progress on both aspects.

In October 2010, the Philippines lifted its ban on imports of beef and beef products from Spain. This followed earlier decisions to lift the bans on imports from a number of other EU Member States. In 2000, the Philippines introduced an import ban on beef of European origin, citing a risk of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) without providing any scientific justification for the measure.

This measure went beyond the international standards set by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and did not take into account the stringent control and surveillance measures in place in the European Union. At the same time, no ban was imposed on certain non-EU countries with a similar BSE risk status to the EU.

Since the introduction of the ban, the European Commission, the EU Delegation and EU Member States regularly raised the issue with the Philippines in all available fora and in every bilateral meeting, at technical and political level. On these occasions, the European Commission requested the Philippines to lift the ban for all affected EU Member States. As a result, the Philippines revised its import conditions in several stages and re-opened its market to several EU Member States. With the recent lifting of the BSE ban on Spain, Portugal remains the only Member State subject to the ban. But even once the ban is lifted, countries still have to undergo a country by country procedure for accreditation of Foreign Meat Establishments, which is considered lengthy and non-transparent.

In the year 2000, before the introduction of the ban, exports of European beef to the Philippines exceeded 19,000 tonnes and were valued at over 24 million Euros.

This development should allow Spanish exporters to gain access to the Philippine market again. The European Commission will also continue to raise the issue with the Philippines in order to re-open the market for imports from Portugal and to ensure that international standards are followed. EU business is invited to inform the Commission of any new developments in this matter.

For further information:

UEAPME – debate at EU level on macroeconomic differences across Member States, including wage setting

A serious debate on the uneven economic performance of Member States across the EU must also look at national wage policies as a factor, according to UEAPME, the European craft and SME employers' organisation. Speaking at the Macroeconomic Dialogue, Secretary General Andrea Benassi welcomed the focus put by the Belgian Presidency of the EU on the macroeconomic imbalances in the eurozone and on how Europe can quickly recover from the current downturn. The vast majority of small companies are still struggling and hesitant to invest and create new jobs, he stressed. With public finances under pressure, only private investments will help to prop up the domestic demand upon which many SMEs rely.

This means both bringing back confidence in the stability of the financial system and setting the right incentives for companies to invest, said Mr Benassi, who also called for an in-depth discussion on the effect of wage policies on the competitiveness and employment rates of some Member States, urging all social partners to do their part in this respect.

The crisis has taken its toll not only on SMEs' confidence and production levels, but also on public finances, leading some Member States on the brink of default and putting a serious strain on national budgets. Financing the recovery is therefore a concern, continued Mr Benassi. "Mobilising private spending and private investments is the only way out. This means first and foremost acting to restore confidence in the stability of the financial system. The agreement reached at the G20 meeting last week and the conclusions of the last European Summit are positive signs in this respect", he stressed.

Secondly, the right conditions must be created to stimulate private companies to invest and create growth and employ-ment, explained Mr Benassi. For instance, a prolongation for one year of the temporary support measures for loan guar-antees and risk capital, introduced in 2008 and due to expire in December, would help both traditional small businesses and innovative companies and enable them to invest. Incentives in promising sectors such as energy efficiency are also of use, as they provide a stimulus for demand in the construction sector and upgrade infrastructures to stricter standards.

Last but not least, Mr Benassi praised the Belgian Presidency of the EU for putting on the table the issue of the different economic performances of Member States and of the possible causes, not only at fiscal level but also in terms of competi-tiveness and employment rates. According to UEAPME, a debate at European level on all factors, including wage devel-opments, would provide added value and greatly help in identifying possible bottlenecks. The technical level of the Mac-roeconomic Dialogue would be the ideal context for such a debate, Mr Benassi suggested today.

"The Belgian Presidency has rightly put the issue of lost and uneven competitiveness on the table. We must discuss all the possible causes for the current situation, including the effect of wages on the economic performance of some Member States. This is clearly a sensitive issue, but we are convinced that a debate at EU level would lead to a more rapid and more solid economic recovery in Europe. All social partners should do their part in this respect", concluded Mr Benassi.

GRTU received the communication below from the MSA: As national competent authority for the implementation of the EU Directives on medical devices (93/42/EEC, 90/385/EEC and 98/79/EC), the Malta Standards Authority wishes to remind you of your legal obligations when importing medical devices both from within the EU and from outside the EU.

 

The basic (non-exhaustive) legal requirements for each individual medical device placed on the Maltese market are:

Devices must be CE-marked on the outer packaging, instructions leaflet and, where possible, on the product itself. The CE-mark must be in the format required by the Directives;

Devices must display all the information and warnings required by the relevant Directives (e.g. for general medical devices, refer to Annex I section 13 of Directive 93/42/EEC);

All information on the outer packaging, instructions leaflet and on the product itself must be in, at least, the English or Maltese language;

The outer packaging, instructions leaflet and, where possible, the product itself must bear the full name and full address of the original manufacturer and, in cases where the manufacturer is based outside the EU, the full name and full address of his EU authorized representative must also be present. Hence, when importing products manufactured outside the EU, ensure there are 2 addresses present;

In case of products marked as sterile, have a measuring function or present a medium or high risk, the CE-mark must be followed by a 4-digit number which is the identification number of the third-party laboratory authorized by the EU to check compliance of medical devices. You can use the EU Commission's website to check whether a particular laboratory is approved for testing medical devices –http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newapproach/nando/index.cfm?fuseaction=notifiedbody.main   

Some medical devices require registration in at least 1 Member State. You are required to ensure the product is registered already in another Member State, otherwise contact us to check whether registration is required;

Ask the manufacturer for a "Declaration of Conformity" before importing devices. The Declaration of Conformity will state which EU Directives and EU standards have been used. These must refer to the Medical Devices Directives mentioned above;

The details on the Declaration of Conformity (including manufacturer's name and address, EU representative's name and address, product name and product traceability numbers) must perfectly match the details on the product and product packaging.

These regulations have been in force in Malta since 2001. No excuses for non-compliance will be accepted and full responsibility for the compliance and safety of medical devices falls exclusively on the economic operators. The fact that a device has been already marketed in Malta or in another EU Member State for several years does not replace the above obligations. The fact that a device has been accepted by users (be it private or Government entities) in the past does not replace the above obligations. The fact that similar products are already on the market does not replace the above obligations.

Failure to adhere to the regulations will not be tolerated. Non-compliant products will be withdrawn from the market, actions will be taken against the economic operator, and all other EU Member States shall be informed so that the product is also withdrawn from their markets.

Should you require any clarifications kindly contact:            Mr. David Pulis, or 23952000

The European Commission published on 18th November, a Communication on "the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) towards 2020 – Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future". The reform aims at making the European agriculture sector more dynamic, competitive, and effective in responding to the Europe 2020 vision of stimulating sustainable growth, smart growth and inclusive growth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The paper outlines three options for further reform.

The Commission communication does not go into all the details of the reform. Taking account of the detailed impact assessments which are underway for each of the options set out in the Communication, the Commission will prepare legislative proposals which will be presented in summer 2011. It will organise a consultation during which stakeholders will be invited to submit their views on the options and contribute to the impact assessment of the different options by submitting their analysis. These proposals will follow the co-decision procedure applied for the first time to a CAP reform, following the entry into force of the new Treaty. The CAP reform should enter into force in 2014.

The Communication outlines 3 options for the future direction of the CAP, in order to address these major challenges

adjusting most pressing shortcomings in the CAP through gradual changes;

making the CAP greener, fairer, more efficient, and more effective; moving away from income support and market measures and focusing on environmental and climate change objectives.

In all 3 options, the Commission foresees the maintenance of the current system of 2 Pillars – a 1st Pillar (covering direct payments and market measures, where rules are clearly defined at EU level) and a 2nd Pillar (comprising multi-annual rural development measures, where the framework of options is set at EU level, but the final choice of schemes is left to member states or regions under joint management). Another common element to all 3 options is the idea that the future system of direct payments cannot be based on historical reference periods, but should be linked to objective criteria.

"The current system provides different rules for the EU-15 and the EU-12, which cannot be continued after 2013", Commissioner Ciolos insisted today. More objective criteria are also need for Rural Development allocations.

There is as yet no exhaustive list of agricultural practices which will be supported under the 'green' component of direct payments. An impact assessment is currently underway in order to determine the most relevant techniques.http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-post-2013/communication/index_en.htm

Euro zone governments have bungled the way they are presenting their work on a future bailout mechanism, stoking tensions in financial markets, said Business Leaders in Europe. Last month's summit of EU leaders was a communication failure that spooked investors and must not be repeated when the bloc's leaders meet next in mid-December.

 

Financial markets were unsure what to make of the October summit's statement, which said very generally that private investors would be involved in the euro zone's future, permanent economic crisis mechanism for countries facing financial problems.

The current bailout mechanism, valid until 2013, does not involve any "haircuts", or asset value reductions, for holders of government bonds. But analysts said uncertainty over the crisis mechanism has prompted many investors to dump the bonds of fringe euro zone countries, exacerbating Ireland's economic problems and forcing it to seek EU aid.

Economists and political analysts have also been critical of how EU leaders and some officials have handled communications during the debt crisis, saying this ineptitude in some cases has worsened the situation.  Germany's call in early November for asset value reductions for private bond holders in a future euro zone rescue mechanism prompted a selloff of Irish and Portuguese debt.

European leaders later said any implementation of such a mechanism would not come until 2013. But in a sign that the issue remains far from settled, Spanish economy minister Elana Salgado said that 2013 was too early to start involving private sector creditors in euro zone crisis mechanisms.

The Official Opening of the Sant Antnin Recycling Facility is a milestone in the Waste Managment Strategy. WasteServ (Malta) Limited were instrumental and both managment and staff are to be commended. WasteServ started quite a few years back in relation with a waste separation strategy by introducing Bring in Sites in local Councils. This in itself six years ago was not an easy feat.

 

Today, WasteServ manages the MRF facility but is no longer responsible for any logistics of recovery outside these premises. Green MT, a fully owned subsidiary of GRTU, recoveres and pays contractors for recovery of the grey bag, bring in sites, Government Departments, Schools in 41 Local Councils in Malta and Gozo. Green MT as such is responsible directly for a population of 285,000. Green MT is funded by private industry, the producer who places packaging waste on the market. These producers pay the Schemes for their operations. Wasteserv have now offshouldered all this responsability and it is well that the public is aware that Green MT recovered 14,163 tonnes of Recyclables, between July 2009 and September 2010, and delivered all this material for processing at the Sant Antnin Material recovery Facility.

This means that 43% of all material recovered at this facility came from Green MT in a 15 month period of operation.  In 36 months 33,000 tons of material fractions were received at this facility. We are proud to have been prime movers in the increase of recovery of separated waste . Agreements with 41 Local Councils who contributed to this success were also instrumental in this sector.

We now need to move on. Today Green MT recovers over 78% of all material brought to this facility. Despite all the goodwill results show that economies of scale are not being reached. The private sector needs to take over this facility under a managment agreement with the same WasteServ (Malta) Limited. 

Schemes funded by private industry provide near to 95% of all separated waste delivered to this facility. Schemes need to run this (MRF) facility. Private facilities are currently not being permitted and this is resulting in operations at unauthorised facilities, thus creating a sizeable black market economy.

Today we are at a crossroads, either Schemes are allowed to operate under EU Directives or else Government through WasteServ, can once again go back to the drawing board in breach of EU Directives.  Only time will tell!

SIB International Fair 23-27 November 2010

The annual International fair for computer and information technologies that will take place in the Exhibitions Parc of Le Kram in Tunis between the 23^rd and 27^th of November 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For more information please visit the following link:                                                      http://www.sogefoires.com/index.php/salon-sib.html

Human Resources Expo 2-4 December 2010

An annual International fair for human resources development including training, employment, management, Coaching, talents, and employability that will take place from the 2^nd to the 4^th of December 2010 at the Exhibitions Parc of Le Kram in Tunis.

For more information please visit the following link:               http://www.exposervicestunisie.com/hr/

Dardeco 2010, 17-26 December 2010

An annual fair for furniture and decoration that will take place from 17^th to the 26^th of December 2010 at the Exhibitions Parc of Le Kram in Tunis.

For more information please visit the following link: http://www.fkram.com.tn/event/index.php?evt=68