Bulletinof the European Communities

Supplement 5/77

Commission Reporton the Establishmentof a European Foundation

sent to the European Council

on 17 November 1977

COM(77) 60017 November 1977

Blank page not reproduced: 2

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Commission

This publication is also available in Danish, Dutch, French, German and Italian.

A bibliographical slip can be found at the end of this volume.

Articles and texts appearing in this document may be reproduced freely in whole or inpart so long as their source is mentioned.

Printed in Belgium 1978

Catalogue Number: CB-N F- 77 -OO5-EN-

contents

Page

Preface .Introduction .

A European Foundation: tasks and objectives

Needs

. .

To strengthen understanding of, and support for, the work of

the CommunityTo strengthen understanding between the citizens of theCommunityTo project the Community to the world

Tasksandmethods

TasksMethods .Complementarity in action: matching fundsThe problem of prioritiesNeed for a programme .

Activities:youthwork

Importance of measures on behalf of young peopleA first field of activity: encouragement of language teachingSchools .Highereducation .Young adultsExchanges of ' young workers

Activities: scientific debates and symposia, research actMties

Relationship between science and societyWidening the scope of national initiativesResearch into European integration

Activities: social and occupational groups

Inadequate contact between the different socio-professional

groups .Need to encourage useful contact .

Activities: culture and information

. .

Cultural activities .A greater knowledge of the common heritageGreater awareness of European civilization

Promoting contact between those active in socio-culturalfields .Foundation action vis- ii-vis publicity and the mass media

Activities outside the Community

. .

General principles .Applicant countries .Other European countriesDeveloping countriesMethods .

Conclusions

The European Foundation: structure and finance

Structure

Need for an autonomous foundationChoice of instrument creating the foundationInstrument governed by private lawInternational agreementRegulation based on Article 235 of the EEC TreatyOrganization of the FoundationiheBoard .The Executive CommitteeThe President .The Secret,,' ry-General . . The programme .Budgetary provisions and controlAdministrative structure of the FoundationSeat of the Foundation .

Financing the Foundation

Need for diversified resourcesThe Community subsidyGovernment grants .Private contributions

Conclusions

Preface

At its meeting in Rome on 26 March 1977 the European CounciP instructed theCommission to draw up a report on the terms of reference, nature and funding

of a European Foundation along the lines suggested by Mr Tindemans in his re-port on European Union 2 for presentation at its end of the year meeting.

At its own meeting on 30 March the Commission instructed the President to ap-pOint a group of outside experts to assist with the preparation of the report.

Meetings of the group were held on 1 July, 3 October and 27 October under thechairmanship of Mr Olivi, Adviser hors classe. The list of members is given be-low:

Mr P! Nyboe Andersen

Lord Asa Briggs

Mr H. G. Buiter

Professor Etienne Cerexe

Mrs Colette Flesch

Mrs Katharina Focke

Professor Geoffrey J. Hand

Mr G. D. Jurgensen , Ambassador

Mr Max Kohnstamm

Dr Arrigo Levi

Professor Heinz Maier-Leibnitz

The Right Hop.. Geoffrey Rippon

Bull. EC 3-1977, point 2.2 Supplement 1/76 Bull. EC

S. 5/77

Chief General Manager of AdelsbankenCopenhagen; one-time Danish Minister

Provost of Worcester College, University ofOxford

Burgomaster of Groningen; one-time Secre-tary-General of the European Trade UnionConfederation

University of Louvain; Private Office of theBelgian Prime Minister

Member of the Luxembourg Parliament andMayor of Luxembourg; Member of the Eu-ropean Parliament

Member of the Bundestag, one-time FederalMinister for Youth, Family Affairs andHealth

Former Chairman of the Irish Council ofArts; European University Institute, Flor-ence

Paris

Chairman of the European University Insti-tute, Florence

Editor of ' La Stampa , Turin

President of the Deutsche Forschungsge-meinschaft. Bonn

Member of the UK Parliament; Member ofthe European Parliament

Prof. Sen. Giovanni Spadolini Chairman of the Senate Education Com-mission; one-time Minister of Cultural As-sets

The following attended as observers:

for the Hague Club (private foundations):

Dr Thorwald Risler (Steering Committee) Secretary-General ofthe Stiftverband fUr die deutsche Wissen-schaff

for the Council q( Europe, Strasbourg:

Mr Maitland Stobart Directorate of Education and of Culturaland Scientific Affairs

Discussions produced a general agreement on the main characteristics , objectives,working methods and structure of the European Foundation and the Chairmanwas instructed to draw up a report accordingly. The Commission would like express its gratitude to the Group for its valuable contribution to the preparationof this Report.

The Commission has studied and approved the report for submission to the Eu-ropean CounciL

S. 5/77

ntrod uction

1. The idea of a European Foundation wasmooted by Mr Leo Tindemans , Belgium s PrimeMinister, in the conclusion to Chapter IV (A Cit-izen s Europe) of his report on European Union.

The chapter comes between the section of the re-port outlining political proposals for progress tow-ards European Union and the final section deal-ing with strengthening of the institutions. Inother words Mr Tindemans turns from the realmof politics to consider the attitude of the man inthe street to the European venture as a whole.The fact that our countries have a common des-tiny is not enough' , he writes. ' This fact mustalso be seen to exist.'

It will take a long time and a lot of effort tocreate this new European awareness and the en-ergies of the largest possible number oforganiza-tions and private individuals will have to be har-nessed. This is why Mr Tindemans suggests thecreation of a European Foundation , independentof the existing Community institutions and thefuture institutions of the Union, with the objectof making European integration ' a matter for usall' by--,-initially at least- promoting greater un-derstanding among our peoples

The following report takes a close look at theterms of reference, nature and funding of a Eu-ropean Foundation along the lines suggested byMr Tindemans.

It is important to underline the fact that this Re-port follows Mr Tindemans' proposals to the letter.This has meant studying the extremely widerange of objectives indicated by the Belgium For-eign Minister. A procedure has been suggested inthis Report which should facilitate the decision ofthe European institutions.

1 Supplement 1/76 Bun. EC

S. 5/77

European Foundation:tasks and objectives

Needs

To strengthen understanding qf, andsupport for, the work qf the Community

2. The initial creation of the Community wouldnever have been possible had there not been adeep and widespread revulsion against the disas-trous effects of repeated conflict between Euro-pean States. In carrying out their Treaty commit-ments governments have been able to count ona continuing high level of popular support inmost member countries. There are now many cit-izens in the Community, however, who have no per-sonal experience qfthe miseries Qf a divided past.. someshow signs of disappointment with the perfor-mance of the Community; in some of the newermember countries support has never been ashigh as in countries which were original mem-bers , and in recent years the economic crisis hasdiverted attention to the immediate problems ofrising prices and falling employment.

In addition , much of the day-to-day work of theCommunity remains invisible to most of its cit-izens. Unlike national states it neither offers di-rect services to , nor makes direct demands onthe great majority of them. Nor does it have evena symbolic presence in their midst: no/lag, no curren-cy, not even (as yet) a common passport. It is hardlysurprising that , in spite of the efforts made bythe institutions themselves to provide informa-tion about their activities the Community for manyremains a remote and bureacratic structure.

In these conditions, a continued high level ofpopular support for the Community cannot betaken for granted. Direct elections to the Euro-pean Parliament will offer an important occasionto renew interest in , and support for, it. But suchelections will only take place every five years.

A sustained effort is needed, on a much largerscale than in the past. An independent Foundationequipped with s4fficient resources to reach the grassroots Qf European public opinion would provide ameans Qf making all citizens aware of the meaning Qf

Europe in the widest sense and Qffiring their interestin it. Its work should seek to develop the Euro-pean citizen s sense of belonging to one and thesame community with a common heritage fromthe past and a common destiny for the presentand future. This Community feeling is still large-ly lacking and hence it is sometimes difficult forEuropeans to grasp that the achievements of theEuropean Community apply to all its members.

To strengthen understanding betweenthe citizens Qf the Community

3. Support for the Community among the gen-eral public is directly related not only to their at-titudes to it as a set of institutions , but also theattitudes of the citizens of each member countrytowards those of the other Community countries.The sense of sharing a common destiny and acommon purpose has already been forged amongthose who are involved in the work of the insti-tutions of the Community but it is very muchweaker among the great mass of the populationof the member countries who have not had thisexperience. The fact that most people still liveand work in a purely national context are seriousbarriers to increased understanding and mutualconfidence

Many events, (some velY recent) show how little prog-ress has been achieved in mutual understanding be-tween peoples. Recent opinion polls confirm howthe ancient evils rooted in historical prejudicevery often seem to reassert themselves with un-suspected force. Both national governments andmany voluntary bodies , including private founda-tions, have been working hard over the years tomultiply human contacts between the countriesof the Community, but the task is immense; andthese contacts very often operate on a bilateralbasis , without any Community dimension. TheCommunity institutions have made, and aremaking, a contribution also, but this is limited

both by resources and their own terms of refer-ence. A new Community-based initiative designedfurther to extend the opportunitiesfor meaningful con-tacts between citizens Qfthe Member States would notonly show its desire seriously to contribute to the crea-tion Qf a ' citizens ' Europe , but also to help to streng-then a sense Qf social cohesion within it.

S. 5/77

A strengthening of the social infrastructure of theCommunity is a fundamental need to enable it tomeet the challenges with which it is now faced.

It is these considerations which led Mr Tinde-

mans to define the aims of the European Foun-dation as ' to promote either directly or by assisting

existing bodies, anything which could help towardsgreater understanding among our people by plac-ing the emphasis on human contact: Youth ac-tivities, university exchanges, scientific debatesand symposia, meetings between the socio-pro-fessional categories, cultural and information ac-tivities

' .

To prqject the Community to the world

4. Mr Tindemans added that ' This Foundationwill also have a role to play in presenting abroadthe image of a United Europe . Here he was

pointing to another major need.

It has often been said that a certain ' Europeanidentity ' is clearer to those outside the Commu-nity than those inside it... The ' European ven-ture ' definitely has considerable impact on out-siders and there is considerable potential for im-proving the Community s external influence. Theunification of Europe has a worldwide impact forobvious historical , political and economic reasons:hence the even greater pOlitical need to streng-then Community representation by stepping upinformation activities and creating new oPpOrtu-nities for contact. New initiatives will have to be tak-en ((the Community s role and policies and, above all,the vital needfor European unity are to be understoodat international level.

Tasks and methods

Tasks

5. It follows from the above reasoning that thenew Foundation s tasks could take the followingbroad outline:

(a) within the Community: the Foundation shouldpromote wider and more thorough knowledge ofthe realities and problems of European unifica-tion and a greater degree of mutual understand-

S. 5/77

ing between the peoples of the Member States , soas to make them aware of their common destiny;(b) outside the Community: the Foundation s gen-eral objective should be to increase the flow ofinformation and sharpen the external image of aunited Europe as a new factor on the world sceneand help to make Community aims and policiesbetter known.

Methods

6. In order to achieve these objectives theFoundation should adhere to the basic principleof complementarity with respect to activities or-ganized by the Member States , Community insti-tutions, other European organizations and privatebodies. It should take advantage of experiencegained here and there in order to find spheres ofactivity where its scope for independent, flexibleaction could help to fill in gaps , encourage co-operation and avoid duplication of resources byproviding guidance for individual measureswhose influence is often limited.

A list drawn up at short notice for the Group onthe most important activities organized in theCommunity has revealed that significant stepsare already being taken, but that their effective-

ness and practical results are somewhat restricted.Understandably enough national. Governmentmeasures, for instance, generally aim to encou-rage better understanding of their own views andpolicies. The measures taken by Community insti-tutions, though extensive in certain fields , remaininadequate for lack of authority to act and of ap-propriate resources. Although private bodies areengaged in what it is in many ways a remarkablerange of activities , most of them are increasinglyhindered by lack of funds.

The Foundation s fundamental role would be toprovide additional opportunities and new initia-tives complementary to those already organized.This principle q( complementarity is essential;

is fundamental to the Foundation s workingmethods.

Complementarity in action: matching funds

7. If the European Foundation is to be anewautonomous and flexible organization, no new

bureacratic structure must be created alongsidethe existing ones.

Notwithstanding this general principle, it must bepointed out that a European Foundation coulQnot directly administer all the activities necessaryfor attaining these objectives. On the contrary,the Foundation s direct activities will (at least for

an initial period) have to concentrate on pro-grammes to be implemented with the cooperationof other organizations. Mention should be madein this connection of the experience of US foun-dations with matching funds. This is a techniquefor cooperation between organizations which decide

.finance jointly a given prQject. In practice , the insti-tution instigating the project is in charge andmeets a major share of the costs, the rest beingborne by one or several partners. This technique(which has now been widely adopted by Euro-pean foundations , notably the European CulturalFoundation) would have a twofold advantage forthe European Foundation:

(a) it would give the Foundation the opportuni-ty to keep projects submitted in line with its gen-eral objectives;

(b) it would enable private capital to participateregularly in its activities , as recommended by MrTindemans.

The Foundation could thus act as a ' clearinghouse' able to furnish information on all Euro-pean initiatives and activities going-on within theCommunity.

Here it must be stressed that there is no questionof the Foundation depriving other foundations orprivate bodies of funds: on the contrary, thismethod would make them partners of the Euro-pean Foundation, adding to both their resourcesand activities without detracting from their au-tonomy.

The Foundation should therefore include suchoperations, which could cover extensive fieldsand call for the widest possible range of cooper-ation and both human and financial assistance. Ifthe Foundation s activities move in this directionfrom the start, the flexibility of its operations willalso be guaranteed.

The problem Qf priorities

8. One of the most difficult and crucial prob-lems the newly-created Foundation will have tosolve will certainly be that of priorities. The fol-lowing pages look into Mr Tindemans s sugges-

tions and illustrate the extremely vast range ofactivities that the Foundation could usefully un-dertake. We feel that it would be premature atthis stage to . try and classify the various prioritieswithout detailed prior study. The selection willlargely depend on the amount offunds allocated to theFoundation, but at least it is certain that priorities willhave to be clearly established.

These priorities, moreover, might well change astime goes by and the Foundation s success willdepend on its ability to remain alive to changingrequirements and to meet them.

Needfor a programme

9. The Foundation will therefore have to drawup a programme which takes fully into accountsurveys and activities already inexistence on spe-cial topics. The dictates Qf caution and realism shouldbring the Foundation s departments to deal with thispreliminmy task during its first months. Here too, theFoundation need not always use its own re-sources but should cooperate with other special-ized institutes and foundations which , we havebeen informed, would be only too ready to do soas soon as it is set up.

For this reason , therefore , this report cannot out-line programmes for the Foundation to followonce it gets off the ground, but only guidelineson preparing programmes, these being essentialat this stage for defining the European Founda-tion s prime objectives.

Activities: youth work

Importance Qf measures on behalf

of young people

10. The Tindemans Report particularly advocat-ed bringing people together, youth activities anduniversity exchanges. It is Qfvital importancefor theEuropean venture that young people in the Member

S. 5/77

States should deepen their understanding and be sup-plied with better i1?formation. On 9 February 1976\the Council and the Ministers of Educationmeeting within the Council adopted an actionprogramme on education, covering such subjectsas better coordination between educational sys-tems in Europe, cooperation in higher education

and the teaching of foreign languages. The Foun-dation could very well join in the realization ofthese objectives by financing schemes whichwould complement the Council programme.

A .first .field of activity: encouragementof language teaching

11. A first field of activity (which would indeedbe a condition for any development of exchangesand contacts between Community countries)would be the development of language teaching.A special feature of the European Community isits diversity of languages and cultures; this is asource of wealth , but also of difficulties. Paradox-ically, however, although the need for knowledgeof languages is growing with the increase in con-tacts between countries and the enlargement ofthe Community, the shortening and rationaliza-tion of educational syllabuses in all countries hasled to an alarming reduction in the time devotedto foreign language teaching.

Following the action programme mentionedabove, the Foundation should have as one of itsobjectives the promotion qf improved languageteaching, firstly by improving the training ofteachers , who should be encouraged to considertheir work as teaching the civilization qf the count,ywhose language they teach. Joint training periods

for teachers from the various Community coun-tries , could be directly promoted by the Founda-tion, with the cooperation of public and privateorganizations , as well as measures to encouragelanguage study by young people both at schooland after leaving.

Schools

12. For some time now , governments and pri-vate organizations have built up a wide range ofactivities designed to improve teaching on the

S. 5/77

Community in schools, offering teachers and pu-pils the change of visiting other European coun-tries and sometimes studying there.

However, these activities are not organized on a con-tinual or regular basis. As far as studies on theCommunity are concerned much progress willstill have to made before the situation can beconsidered even relatively satisfactory. Manyyoung people terminate their studies with little orno knowledge of the Community and the life in

which they will later have to take an active part as vo-ters in elections to the European Parliament. Actionmust be taken without delay to remedy this si-tuation and the Commission intends to presentproposals to the Council (Ministers of Education)in 1978.

The Foundation could play an important part byproviding suPpOrt for activities organized by gov-ernments, the Community institutions and pri-vate organizations to improve teachers under-standing of the Community, to promote the pro-duction qf teaching materials and to encourage ex-perimental schemes.

The Foundation could also contribute to the in-crease and diversification of existing schemes forexchanges of teachers and pupils and fact-findingvisits. These exchanges are at present organizedon a bilateral basis (particularly between France,the Federal Republic of Germany and the UnitedKingdom). They are tied to and conditioned bylinguistic considerations. The Foundation couldplaya useful role by providing funds to extendthe numbers taking part in these schemes andimprove the balance qf exchanges between the differ-ent Member States.

The Foundation should also provide assistancefor schemes which give schoolleavers the chanceof voluntary work in another country. Many suchschemes exist already and have proved effective.Now that young people are experiencing greaterand greater difficulty in finding jobs , extendingthese schemes would be particularly useful.

! OJ C 38 of 19. 12. 1976 and Bull. EC 2- 1976, point 2252.

Higher education

13. In higher education the situation is more sa-tisfactory, at least as regards teaching. Many univer-sities and establishments of higher education of-fer courses ' on the Community. A network ofspecialized research institutes is being built up inEurope and a considerable number of universitylecturers and research workers specialize in Com-munity studies. Over the years, the Commissionhas made a major contribution towards encourag-ing and supporting these measures via its infor-mation activities , and is continuing to do so. Thesetting-up of the European University Institute atFlorence is a very important new development inthis connection. The cooperation envisaged in theaction programme adopted by the Council is alsoprogreSSIng.

However mobility Qf students and lecturers in thevarious member countries is not so sati~factOlY, notonly as regards European studies as such but par-ticularly exchanges of students in other disci-plines. The situation is aggravated by the finan-cial difficulties experienced by all governmentaland private institutions when organizing traveland accommodation , as well as by the slow paceat which progress has been made in the reciprocalrecognition of academic awards within the Com-munity. The Foundation could aim to coordinateand support such inter-governmental and Com-munity initiatives.

Young adults

14. Despite the increased number of young peo-ple going on to higher education , most secondaryschool leavers join the ranks of the job-seekers.

Theyfol'm a velY important part Qfthe population yettheir prospects of receiving information are dis-tinctly limited both by the lack of opportunitiesfor contact and travel and by the absence of anystimulus to follow ' European ' training.

Unless they make use of Article 50 of the EECTreaty! the Community institutions have verylittle means of getting through to young adultsall the more so since young people s organiza-

tions , both political and cultural, are graduallylosing ground.

The Foundation should examine existing arrange-ments for intra-Community contacts in sportculture and other activities (possibly includingpolitical activities). Requests regularly made to theCommission show that there is considerable poten-tialfor such activities and that all the organizationsconcerned have difficulty in obtaining European spon-sorship andfinancial ass;stance. This particularly ap-plies to the organization of sporting competitionswith teams. from other countries and to culturalactivities , especially music and drama. Europeanrepresentation ;n fields which interest the mqjorUy Qfyoung people would certainly prove effective.

Exchanges Qf 'young workers

15. The only Article of the EEC Treaty whichmentions young people is Article 50 , which statesthat Member States shall, within the framework Qfajo;nt programme, encourage the exchange Qfyoungworkers . Up to now financial difficulties, butalso, and above all, the complexity of problemsarising from this type of exchange (language dif-ficulties, hesitancy of employers and even ofyoung people who could take part in such train-ing on account of job uncertainties) have prevent-ed organization of any schemes on a large scale.The Foundation could be responsible-in closecooperation with Community institutions and theMember States-lor promoting the attainment Qfthe

oQiectives enshrined in Article 50 and providingfundson a worthwhile scale. This sphere of activity is oneof the most important for the achievement of theFoundation s objectives; cooperation with trade

unions at European and national level' shouldplaya special role in this connection.

Activities: scientific debates and symposia,research activities

Relationship between science and'society

16. We are not suggesting that the EuropeanFoundation aims to promote scientific activities.Various other moves to promote Europeanscience in different fields are now receiving Com-mission support.

1 Point 15.

S. 5/77

It is in keeping with the Foundation s terms of

reference, however, to promote such things asmeasures to stimulate discussions on the relations be-tween science and society. All the important problemsin this field have a European dimension and directlyconcern the European Community. It is not justa matter of protecting the environment and livingstandards but the velY position of science in Euro..

pean society which should be one of the Foundationmain concerns. Discussions should be encouragedon the crisis of science in European society by at-tempting to provide a basis for a better mutualunderstanding between science and culture.

There will be no question of increasing the num-ber of meetings and contacts between scientists:it is often said that they meet too often! TheFoundation should, on the contrary, support anymeasures to take scientists out of their shell andpromote discussions and meetings between themand the Community s leading political, culturaland social figures to debate the ever-increasing,sometimes distressing and undoubtedly Communi-ty problems caused to society by the developmentof science.

Widening the scope Qf national initiatives

17. Moreover, with this in mind , the Founda-tion should keep itself well informed of symposiaheld at national level and ensure that personali-ties from other Community countries contributeto and benefit from these meetings. By confer-ring its patronage and providing material supportthe Foundation could make a practical and well- timedcontribution to add a 'Community ' dimension toothelwise purely national initiatives. The Founda~

tion s practical support should also help to makepublic opinion in all Community countries awareof the results of these high-level discussions.

Research into European integration

18. We have already seen tha~, throughout theCommunity, a large number of research bodiesin the universities and outside, are beginning totackle the problems of European integration.These efforts and their results are very often con-fined to the national sphere and are communicat-

S. 5/77

ed only to specialists , one country s researchers

sometimes remaining unaware of the activities ofthe others. As a result we have duplication, an inevi-table waste Qf resources, and sometimes both the un-dertaking .and its results take on a very ' national'character. Hence the need.for contact and coordina-tion .felt by all Qf those concerned. The European

Foundation , in close cooperation with the Com-munity institutions, could play an essential partin achieving this end. It is not intended that theFoundation should centralize research into theproblems of integration , nor should it exert directcontrol over them. On the contrary, as far as pos-sible , it should encourage the breaking down Qf bar-riers in this type Qf research in Europe, and the crea-tion of a network of active research centres, to

foster multinational participation in the proposedfields of study.

The Foundation must needs use the experienceof other agencies , particularly the European Uni-versity Institute in Florence.

The main purpose should be to encourage know-ledge and contact enabling as many people aspossible in the different countries (not to mentionthe European institutions) to benefit from the re~

suIts of this research. It is thus clear that finan-cial support must be found for the translationand the wide dissemination of these results.

Activities: social and occupational groups

Inadequate contact between thedifferent socio-prQfessional groups

19. One of the most striking facts of Commu-nity life is the persistent lack of mutual aware-ness of the different problems which affect socialand professional groups in each country. Variousprofessional associations and the trade unionshave increased the number of their contacts atCommunity level , yet the flow of knowledge isnot sustained and is still very inadequate. Forthis reason misunderstanding and friction aboundand cooperation is often impeded. As a result iso-lationist attitudes persist and have been aggra-vated of late by the economic crisis and the dis-couragement often felt by the people involved

when faced with the lack Qf commitment to theCommunity within Europe.

Need to encourage us~ful contact

20. What is needed , therefore, is not so muchcontact between occupational groups or their re-presentatives (who very often meet and get toknow each other in a European forum already) asaction within each country which will enableless-informed levels of society to improve theircontacts with their counterparts. Here action bythe Foundation would go beyond the mattersdealt with by the Community information of-fices , which are more the concern of the Euro-pean institutions. The Foundation s task shouldbe to promote contacts between social and profes-sional groups , so that they can discover and un-derstand the different situations in the variouscountries. This would definitely help to dispeltraditional prejudices and cliches, always sostrong in situations where the interests of similargroups in different countries of the Communityclash.

There is no doubt that the Foundation could easily ob-tain the support of the trade unions both at nationaland Community level. A definite programme couldthus be- jointly drawn up, which would facilitateregular and more extensive collaboration betweenthe different professional groups in theCommu-nity and improve their understanding of eachother.

Activities: culture and information

Cultural activities

21. It has become almost a commonplace to saythat part of Europe s great wealth is , and shouldremain, the diversity of its cultures. Each peoplewithin the Community has a past, rich in histOlY, aswell as a lively cultural scene today. Although cultu-ral exchanges between European countries haveincreased latterly, one could easily show that theyare still not enough. Their very diversity can in-deed be one of the main obstacles, hence theneed which we have emphasized for people toimprove their command of languages and therebylearn more of each other s countries. Moreover,ignorance of the cultural atmosphere in other countriesnourishes pr~judices and stereotyped conceptions.Only by increasing cultural contacts can we help

European citizens to recognize those ' commonheritages' which are made so much of in at-tempts to define European civilization.

Clearly, the Foundation does not aim to expandelitist' efforts. The idea of ' culture' has long

been dissociated from an isolated out-of-date cul-ture, reserved for a minority. Cultural celebra-tions today concern the largest possible numberso that we can claim that culture is enjoyed everytime people seek knowledge and use their intel-lectual faculties, regardless of level or subject

matter.

The Foundation s cultural activities ought ther~fore tobe aimed at the largest possible number and to be con-sistent with the political oqjectives underlying its crea~tion. It is too early at this stage to determine pri-orities and to work out carefully possible coursesof action; it should be stressed , however, that theselection of proposals for action should be con-sistent with the primary objective of greater cul~tural awareness between our countries and theencouragement of European solidarity.

A greater knowledge qf the common heritage

22. The Foundation should have clear guide-lines for encouraging a greater knowledge of thecultural and artistic heritage of our countries. Thegrowth in tourism has increased contact betweenCommunity citizens, although in most casesthese great movements of population have notproduced the ' cultural' fruits that one mighthave hoped for. One of the tasks of the Founda-tion could be to give tourism a more cultural aspect,with a Community orientation, aided by publicand professional bodies in the different countriesso that the people of Europe learn to see the

countries they visit, to know more about theirpast, as well as their present.

This could be one way of obtaining popular sup-port not just for schemes designed to spreadknowledge of the arts in Community countriesbut also for ~fforts to preserve our artistic heritagethreatened by the destruction of the environmentand sometimes by public and individual neglect.This problem is a ' European ' one and should beseen as such by public opinion. By cooperatingclosely with both public and private organizations

S. 5/77

in the Member States , and in accordance with theinitiatives taken by the Council of Europe, theEuropean Foundation could participate inschemes on a Community scale and thus en-hance solidarity between the citizens of Europe.

One possible scheme could be to organize jointexhibitions and events in museums and cultural cen-tres within the Community, so that the citizens ofEurope can distinguish their common links fromamongst the wealth of their cultural diversity,links which despite the adversities and enmitiesof their history make them joint inheritors. Allrhetoric aside the Community is more than a geo-political entity, neither is itfor mere geo-political rea-sons that we are attempting to make the citizens Qf ourcountries into responsible Europeans with a sense Qftheir common destiny.

Greater awareness Qf European civilization

23. The cultural education of Europe s citizens

must not be forgotten. For instance , the . historyof the Community countries is still inadequatelycovered and is often presented from a nationalpoint of view. We do not propose a uniformpopularized history of Europe for all the childrenin the Community, but rather an increase in theirknowledge Qf other countries Qf the Communitythrough studies and publications in histo/Y, geographyand the histOlY Qf art encouragement being givenwhere possible to translations in the variousCommunity languages.

All this could be done without encroaching onthe cultural autonomy of the different countries.The introduction ofa transnational dimension into thestudy Qf European histOlY is required in order toprepare the minds of European citizens for co-operation , and this can be done without in anyway deviating from intellectual and scientific im-partiality. The Foundation should encouragethose initiatives~scattered and hesitant as theyare-which have already been taken in this fieldin Europe , and where possible promote coopera-tion between the cultural organizations of Mem-ber States operating within the Community.

S. 5/77

Promoting contact between those activein socio-culturalfields

24. Contacts between those active in. socio-cul-tural fields in the Community (sometimes termedcultural workers' and including promoters of

cultural events, writers, actors, musicians, pain-ters , etc) are usually irregular, infrequent and un-organized. This impedes the exchange of ideasand the correlation of activities. Various countriesof Europe have many different plans for promot-ing .cultural activities both at national and locallevel. The Foundation should encourage socio-cultu-ral workers in the different Community countries toattent both national and local gatherings.

It would be important for the Foundation toaward' European prizes ' in various cultural fields.

The encouragement and support of town-twin-ning, equally, constitutes one of the activities tobe carried out under this heading.

Foundation action vis-a-vis publicityand the mass media

25. The lack of information about the Commu-nity in the different countries of the Communityis a well-known fact. If it is the function of theinstitutions of the Community, notably the Com-mission , to keep the public informed of their ownactivities it could well fall to the Foundation, in co-operation with the mass media and withjournalists ' as-sociations, to promote the training Qf publicists,

whom there are not enough. Very often the pu-blicist does not have enough direct experience ofEuropean matters and gives a partial , often in-adequate, view of European events. There havebeen various uncoordinated schemes of latelaunched by schools of journalism and by profes-sional associations. The Foundation could help tocoordinate and develop these, and to strengthentheir Community aspects , by making it easier fordifferent nationalities to take part. It could also en-

1 As a concrete example of a potential area of activity for theFoundation, one member of the group suggested the organ-ization of exhibitions based on important themes (the 18thcentury, Modern Life) putting European civilization into animmediate and tangible perspective.

courage the different Community press agenciesto organize courses in journalism.

T~ere is one objectiv~ which ought to have pri-onty

rOt the Foundation as a means of bringing

our different peoples together. Information aboutday-to-day matters in other contries is largely de-fective and sometimes encourages prejudice onall sides. This is especially so with the audiovis-ual mass media, which have an immediate andprofound effect on all citizens ' in all countries.Without wishing to adopt a propagandist line theFoundation ought to seek the regular cooper~tionQf the radio and television authorities in the Commu-nity so that magazine programmes as well asnews bulletin dealing with all aspects of social lifein the Community fill a larger and more impor-tant share of radio and television output. Thiscould help the national mass media to be more objec-tive and to widen their intellectual horizons. The ex-change Qf programmes should be encouraged, sothat European viewers may be offered as manynon-national programmes as possible.

The training Qf 'European publicists within thenumerous private organizations involved withcultural and information matters connected withEuropean integration should be another of theFoundation s objectives in this field.

A non-partisan Foundation, free of political andeconomic bias , could help fill certain very evidentgaps.

Activities outside the Community

General principles

26. There is little point in repeating that thehistorical responsibilities incumbent upon Europeand the effects of European economic integrationare widely felt abroad. We mentioned above thatthe foundation could well playa major role out-side the Community which would clearly justifyits existence alongside Community or MemberStates' institutions or organizations whose activ-

. .

ItIes must needs be geared to the requirementsand by extension the restraints of internationalrelations. This is particularly true in the case ofapplicant countries and will remain so until suchtime as they become full members of the Com-

munity. The priorities and objectives in this con-nection are fairly clearcut.

Applicant countries

27. The importance of any form of action aimedat informing public opinion in countries whichhave applied for Community membership is self-eviden!. The opening or imminent opening of In-forma,tIon O!fice~ by the Commission is a step inthe fight direction. But the Foundation couldwell playa major part in increasing public aware-ness qf European problems, encouraging debate .anddrawIng on the resources of organizations andother facilities available for this purpose in thecountries in question where the public is ul1familiar

with the historical backcloth to the move towards Eu-ropean integration and subsequent developments inthis direction.

Other European countries

28. A European foundation would not be trulyEuropean if it did not do its utmost to promote?reater understanding Q/ the Community facts Qf /ffeIII those European countries which for a varietyof reasons are to remain outside the Community.

It is up to the Foundation to cooperate with the privateorganizations concerned, which have already ex-pressed an interest in joint action and with theCouncil Qf Europe.

Developing countries

29. The Community s policy 'on relations withthe developing countries is one of the pillars ofits external policy and beyond doubt one of themost important components of its image in theworld .at large. The Lome Convention in particularhas done much to enhance the Community s imagea.broad.

. The Foundation , acting in close coopera-tion with the Community institutions, must

1 A member of the group suggested that the Foundation

shoul~ organize a ' European television week' to improve co-operation and exchanges between the national TV networks ofthe Community.

S. 5/77

grasp every opportunity of increasing understand-ing of European problems in these countries.

Finally, the Foundation could have an active roleto play in the broad cultural links envisaged betweenArab countries and the Community.

Methods

30. One of the methods with could be used bythe Foundation in the pursuit of its external ac-tivities is cooperation with Member States ' govern-mental organizations in non-member countries,

par-ticularly those active in the cultural and informa-tion fields.

The idea that there is so much rivalry and jeal-ousy between these cultural organizations, that

cooperation is often made impossible, belongs tothe realm of mythology. A national outlook pre-dominates of course , but it need not be the onlyone. The organizations work together far moreoften than is commonly believed , and reports inthis area are very encouraging. The European

Foundation could suggest joint action by culturalorganizations in non-member countries to dem-onstrate to the outside world that European unitytranscends national differences.

The European Foundation could also collaboratewith cultural organizations in non-member coun-tries to help establish a European presence.

Conclusions

31. It follows from all these considerations thatif the Foundation does its work properly, the endresult should be to increase public awareness andinvolvement in the European venture.

Proposals for setting up a European Foundation musttherefore be made in the general context of the Trea-ties. Indeed , the objectives of the Treaties and ourattemps to achieve European union will remain adead letter unless there is an increased awarenessof what the Community means in philosophicaland material terms.

S. 5/77

The European Foundation:structure and finance

Structure

Needfor an autonomous foundation

32. The need to provide the Foundation withmaximum room for manoevre, the intention toentrust it with the task of promoting private in-itiatives in the move to achieve European Unionthe closeness of its contacts with private organ-izations and agencies, its dependence on fundsother than government grants and the generaldemand for neutrality all tend to guarantee theFoundation maximum autonomy.

This autonomy must find expression not only inthe legal instruments constituting the Foundationbut also in the modus operandi of the Founda-tion s various organs. Care must be taken to rec-oncile such autonomy with the EEC Treaty s re-

quirements governing the setting up Qf decentral-ized organizations according to which there mustbe an element of control by the Community in-stitutions over the Foundation s activities.

Choice Qf instrument creating the Foundation

33. It should be pointed out first of aU that thestatus of foundations varies considerably fromone Member State to another because of the legaland historical background and the different trad-itions and customs relating to voluntary organi-zations. The degree of autonomy of foundationsrun by public or private organizations varies sub-stantially from one country to another, both intheory and in practice.

It is not possible to go into these legal and his-torical differences in this paper. In any event itmight be quite unnecessary, since the EuropeanFoundation should enjoy a rather special status view of its objectives and activities.

In point of fact , one of three formulae could bechosen:(a) an instrument governed by private law;

(b) an international agreement between the MemberStates;(c) a regulation based on Article 235 Qf the EECTreaty.

The European University Institute in Florencewas established by international agreement whilethe European Centre for the Development of V cational Training in Berlin and the EuropeanFoundation for the Improvement of Living andWorking Conditions in Dublin were establishedby regulation.

Instrument governed by private law

34. It is conceivable that the Community, in ex-ercising its legal capacity under Article 211 of theEEC Treaty, could create the European Founda-tion by means of a private instrument under thecivil law of one of the Member States. Opting forthis method would in turn make it necessary

choose the countlY whose laws are mostfavourable tofoundations in order to ensure at least that privatecapital from the country where the headquarterswere situated could be allocated to the Founda-tion on the most advantageous and favourableterms , in accordance with the wish expressed byMr Tindemans that the Foundation should be fi-nanced ' to a large extent' by private funds. At allevents national legislative provisions would have tobe approved in the other Member States so that pri-vate contributionsfrom those countries could enjoy thefavourable treatment available under the laws Qf thecountJy where the Foundation s headquarters were lo-cated.

It does not seem advisable, therefore, that the

Foundation should be set up by an instrumentgoverned by private law , especially since it wouldlead to considerable delay in setting up its organsand would limit the choice of location for itsheadquarters.

I ' If action by the Community should be necessary to attainin the course of the operation of the common market, one ofthe objectives of the Community and this Treaty has notprovided the necessary powers, the Council shall, actingunanimously on a proposal from the Commission and afterconsulting the Assembly, take the appropriate measures.'

S. 5/77

International agreement

35. The traditional international agreementwould, of course, ensure that all the MemberStates were a party to the creation of the Foun-dation and would oblige them to participate in itsfinancing. The procedure for concluding such agree-

ments in particularly cumbersome, however, and theneed for ratification by the Member States in ac-cordance with constitutional procedure couldgreatly delay the agreement's entry into force.Moreover, the formula of an international agree-ment could make it organizationally difficult forthe Community to give assistance (particularly ofa financial nature) to the Foundation; legal diffi-culties could also arise from the fact that tasks are tobe entrusted to the Foundation which could be re~garded as falling within the competence Qfthe Com-munities.

Regulation based on Article 235Qf the EEC Treaty

36. It follows from what has been said abovethat particular attention should be given 'to thepossibility of using Article 235 to set up the Eu-ropean Foundation by Community regulation.

As we have tried to show in this report , recourseto Article 235 for the purpose of creating theFoundation is possible only if the tasks entrustedto it may be considered as in line with the oqjectivesof the Community.

regulation adopted pursuant to Article 235would also enable the European Foundation tobe created by a Community instrument andtherefore to be governed ipso facto by Community le-gislation. It goes without saying that the proce-

dure for adopting such a Regulation is less com-plex than that for concluding an internationalagreement. And last but not least , by virtue ofthe fact that a regulation , i.e. an instrument di~

rectly applicable in all Member States , is involvedwhat might be termed a reception structure (bywhich we mean preferential legal and tax treat-ment which would be immediately standardized)could be defined to attract private contributions.

The use of a legislative instrument to create anautonomous Foundation is not without precedent

S. 5/77

in recent times in our countries (i.e. the Fonda-tion de France and, in certain respects, the Volks-wagenwerke Foundation). Particularly strikingand conclusive examples are to be found , more-over, in a country that is rightly considered ashaving vast experience of foundations, namely,the United States. It was a proposal from Congressand an Act Qf that same body that gave birth to theNational Foundation on the Arts and Humanities

which in turn set up two broad-based institu-tions: the National Endowment for the Human-ities and the National Endowment for Arts.

Although the act creating them was exclusivelypublic and the annual Federal budget subsidystill accounts for a large part of their income,these institutions are now receiving increasinglysubstantial support from private donations. Theirautonomy vis- ii-vis the Federal administration isabsolute , apart from annual scrutiny by Congress.

This sort of semi-public foundation proves very

useful whenever activities designed to benefit thepublic need to be shielded from sectarian iflPU-ences and bureaucratic restrictions. This should be

done in the case of the European Foundation. Thefollowing suggestions have been made with thisin mind.

Organization of the Foundation

37. The Foundation could be organized as fol-lows:

(a) a Board;(b) an Executive Committee;

(c) a President;

(d) a Secretaty-General.

The Board

38. The Board should have overall responsibilityfor the Foundation. It would take all the mqjordecisions. There should be no ex Qfficio memberbut persons appointed for their personal qualifica-tions and experience. They should perform theirduties free from all outside interference for a pe-riod of not less than six years.

To make sure that the Foundation may benefitfrom contributions from a large number of eminentpersonalities from all walks of life (culture, politicsbusiness , trade unions), the Board could comprisethirty-five members.Several nomination procedures are conceivable.For example , one . could envisage the following:(a) 19 members of the Board could be nominatedjointly by the Governments qf the Member States,thus assuring adequate representation of eachcountry.(b) 12 members could be nominated by the Com-mission, after consultation with the European Parlia-ment.(c) Lastly, 4 supplementmy members could becoopted by the rest.

Such a procedure would have the advantage ofexpressing the three elements that must be thebase of the Foundation.

The active participation of Member States(member nominated jointly by Member States).

The Community character of the Foundation(member nominated by the institutions).

The autonomy of the Foundation (cooptedmembers).

The Board should meet at least twice a year.

would appoint the Executive Committee andPresident.

The Executive Committee

39. This should comprise at least nine membersand be chaired by the Foundation s President. Itwould be responsible both for decisions concern-ing the implementation of programmes , and forregularly monitoring the Foundation s work. Themembers should be appointed for a renewableterm of office of three years.

The President

40. He would also be appointed for a renewableterm qf qffice qf three years. It goes without sayingthat the choice of President will be decisive forthe Foundation s image and effectiveness.

The Secretary-General

41. The Board would appoint him and have thepower to dismiss him. He would be responsiblefor managing the Foundation s day-to-day activ-ities , following directives from the Board and Ex-ecutive Committee.

The programme

42. As mentioned above ' the Board of theFoundation will draw up one of its main instru-ments~a five-year outline programme. This pro-gramme would of course be no more than aguide but would still provide the sense of direc-tion required in view of the great variety and thevelY wide range of tasks which must be assignedto the Foundation in its constitution.

The programme should be adopted by the Board qfthe Foundation with the agreement Qfthe Communityinstitutions, in accordance with a procedure based onthe consultation procedure introduced by the JointDeclaration Qf4 March 19752for decisions havingfl-nancial implications. Arrangements should bemade to see that whatever happens the pro-gramme can be adopted within a reasonable length Qftime qfter being submitted by the Board Qlthe Fol(n~dation to the Community institutions (for example, sixmonths).

As far as the first programme is concerned, theact setting up the Foundation should provide forits submission by the Board of the Foundation tothe institutions no later than 'six months from thedate that the Foundation s organs take up theirduties. The time the Foundation takes to comeinto full operation would thus be reduced to aminimum , and it might even come into operationduring this first period.

These conditions concerning adoption of the pro-gramme, notably as to the institutions' role, will

meet the requirement of institutional balance im-posed by Community law with respect to decen-tralized bodies , while ensuring that the Founda-tion is fully independent in carrying out the ac-tivities in the programme.

Point 9.2 OJ C 89 of 22.4.1975 and Bull. EC 2- 1975, point 25.

S. 5/77

BudgetalY provisions and control

43. The Foundation should of course administerits own budget. Similarly, internal control of fi-nancial administration could be carried out by a Fi-nancial Controller answerable to the Foundation.

In any case ex post facto financial control shouldbe within the competence of the European Courtof Auditors.

Measures would have to be taken regarding judi-cial review of the Foundation s activities.

Administrative structure of the Foundation

44. The Foundation should be endowed with alight administrative structure. The staff should have

contractual status, and the organs of the Foun-dation should try whenever possible to have re-course to experts from Community countries.AdvisOlY committees could be set up by the Foun-dation itself, which would have been empoweredto do so by the regulation setting it up. Ad hocresearch could be done under contract.

Such a structure should enable the Foundation tofunction independently and flexibly and in closeliaison with the European institutions.

Seat of the Foundation

45. It is still too soon to draw up a proposalconcerning the seat of the Foundation. It should

be pointed out, however, that a Foundationwhich should be essentially operational and draw

as much as possible on human and material con~tributions from outside should have its seat in aplace that has European significance and is easilyreached from all the other Community countries.

Financing the Foundation

Needfor diversified resources

46. One of the most striking features of MrTindemans' proposal on the European Founda-tion is the assertion that the Foundation shouldnot be financed solely by grants from the Com-munity or the Member States: a substantial pro-

S. 5/77

portion Qfits activities should be financedfrom privatefunds. It will offer the innumerable supporters ofEuropean unification in our countries an oppor-tunity to make a personal contribution by aidingthe Foundation . Manifold sources. of fundsshould help to consolidate the Foundation s in-dependence and give it a ' democratic' staturebesides the possibility of swelling its resourcesyear by year as it goes from strength to strength.But this~fusing ' Qf public and private funds needs tobe car~fully arranged and calls for .an ' ad hoc recep-tion mechanism

The Community subsidy

47. As suggested in the chapter concerning theFoundation s structure, use could be made of thescope offered by Article 235 of the EEC Treatyto issue a Regulation whereby the Foundation

could be swiftly established and its executive bo-dies set up. Obviously the Foundation s activitiescannot get under way unless adequate funds are allo-cated to it right from the start.

Thus, from the very beginning the Foundationmust be able to call on an adequate Communitygrant to cover the expenses of moving into pre-mises , starting up, organizing the studies requiredto establish the programmes and taking the firsturgent measures. The competent Community insti-tutions should reach an agreement on 'policy so that

the programmes may proceed on the assumption

that the grant will probably be renewed for sub-sequent years.

It is too early to put forward any specific financialproposals at this point in time , as the decision toestablish the Foundation has not yet been takenand the objectives set out in this report have notyet been approved.

Government grants

48. The setting up of the Foundation would berendered easier by the allocation of annual grantsand other funds by the Member States, inde-pendently of their interest in particular points ofthe programme. This apart from the question ofad hoc grants, for ventures of special interestwhich might also be contemplated by the Mem-

ber States in order to boost the Foundation s re-

sources from time to time.

Private contributions

49. Adoption of a Community regulation basedon Article 235 of the EEC Treaty (a legal act im-mediately applicable in the Member States) wouldmake it possible to rule on the legal and tax positionof contributions by institutions and private individuals,without any other legislation being required. Inorder to attract funds, the regulation setting upthe Foundation would have to introduce standardpreferential treatment for the Foundation s as-sets. It obviously could not accept contributionsconditional upon tasks not compatible with itsaims.

The Foundation should also be empowered tosolicit annual contributions from firms or privateindividuals, which could provide a practical long-term demonstration of active support and partici-pation by the European citizen in this joint ven-ture.

Finally, it should be mentioned that frequentadoption of the ' matching funds ' scheme l couldwell prompt regular contributions from privatefunds to the work of the Foundation.

Public audit ofthefmancial stewardship of the Foun-dation , as proposed in the present report, wouldnot in any way deter private contributions , butwould in fact serve as an additional assurance forthe donors.

I Point

S. 5/77

Concl usions

Throughout the preparation of this Report, theconstant concern of the group of independent

personalities , convened by the Commission to as-sist it in the elaboration of the Report, has beento make sure that the proposed European Foun-dation was original, yet complementalY to those

European institutions already active in relatedfields. Because of this, the group concentratedupon new initiatives and new methods, whichcould only be effectively exploited by an auton-omous Foundation. At the same time the groupdid not lose sight of the fundamental motivationthat lay behind Mr Tindeman s proposal , namelyto promote exchanges and contacts between Euro-pean citizens.

While it may seem that the objectives outlinedare both numerous and wide in scope, this is dueabove all to the breadth of the areas of suggestedaction and the desire to cover all possible tasksas fully as possible.

It is for this reason that the .final choice of objec-

tives and priorities should eventually be taken bythe European Institutions and by the Foundationitself, along the lines of the procedural and struc-tural proposals contained in this report , once thedecision on an initial allocation of resources tothe Foundation has been taken.

S. 5/77

European Communities Commission

European Foundation - Commission report to the European Council

Supplement 5/77 Bull. EC

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

1977 - 28

p.

- 17,6 X 25,Ocm.

DA. DE, EN, FR. IT, NL

Catalogue number: CB-NF-77-005-EN-

BFR

50,

DKR

3.40

LIT

1200

HFL UKL USD

1.40

The Commission sent to the European Council on 17 November 1977 a Report on theEstablishment of a European Foundation.

The idea of the Foundation was first mooted by Mr Tindemans, the Belgian Prime Min~ister, in his report on European Union. Mr Tindemans proposed ' that the European

Council should decide to create a European Foundation, to be financed partly by sub-

sidies from the Community or the States but whose activities will to a large extent befinanced from private funds. Its object will be to promote, either directly or by assistingexisting bodies, anything which could help towards greater understanding among our

peoples by placing the emphasis on human contact: youth activities, university ex-

changes, scientific debates and symposia, meetings between the socio-professional

categories, cultural and information activities. This Foundation will also have a role play in presenting abroad the image of a United Europe:

Taking up Mr Tindemans s ideas, the Commission put this plan to the European Council

at its meeting in Rome on 25 and 26 March 1977. With the European Council's en-

dorsement the Commission set up a group of outside experts to prepare a report on

the Foundation.