The Commission
is of the opinion that the Council common position preserves the essence of
the original Commission proposal and takes the European Parliament’s main
amendments at first reading into account.
The
differences of substance between the common position and the original
Commission proposal are as follows:
- Article
3(a): addition of a specific objective that
broadens the scope of the programme by providing that it can support
measures intended to prevent drug consumption, in particular by reducing
drug-related harm and making use of methods of treatment based on latest
scientific knowledge;
- Article
3(c): the involvement of the European
Parliament in the process of evaluating the Drugs Action Plans is
emphasised;
- Article
4(b): a proposal for a specific project will
be eligible for financing if it involves at least two Member States or
one Member State and one acceding or applicant state (instead of three
Member States, as originally proposed by the Commission);
- Article 6: women and parents are listed among the target groups of the
programme;
- Article
9: when the annual work programme is
adopted, the expert technical opinion of EMCDDA will be taken into
account;
- Article
10: comitology: the double committee principle
is introduced (management committee for the adoption of the annual work
programme and advisory committee for other questions, whereas the
original Commission proposal provided only for an advisory committee).
The Council
common position is based on a compromise between the European Parliament, the
Council and the Commission. The compromise concerns the text as a whole,
including the question of comitology. The Council common position takes over
the solution negotiated by the three institutions in connection with the
"Civil Justice" programme (COD/2005/0040),
namely the inclusion of a recital concerning notification of the implementing
measures to the European Parliament and a Commission declaration on the
matter. As a consequence, the Commission accepts the common position.