COUNCIL CONSEIL OF EUROPE DE L'EUROPE

COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367

CONCLUSIONS

OF THE 367th MEETING

OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES

HELD IN STRASBOURG

FROM 20 TO 28 FEBRUARY 1984

STRASBOURG

COUNCIL OF EUROPE CONSEIL DE L'EUROPE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS

Strasbourg, 12 March 1984 Confidential Misc(84)5 Draft Addendum II Item 32

DRAFT CONCLUSIONS OF THE 367TH MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (held in Strasbourg from 20 to 28 February 1984)

DRAFT ADDENDUM II

32. STAFF SALARIES

195th and 196th Reports of the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts (Concl(84)366/45 and 46, CM(84)7 and 18)

NB. Delegations are requested to hand their amendments in to the Secretariat by 6 pm on Friday, 16 March 1984.

E71.851 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 Misc(84)5 - 2 - 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 NB. This item was listed for discussion during the sitting 10 opening at 11 am on Thursday 23 February 1984. The Staff 11 Committee had organised a peaceful demonstration of members of 12 staff in the passage leading to the Committee of Ministers' 13 room to coincide with the arrival of delegations for that 14 sitting. 15 16 Two delegations commented unfavourably on the staff demonstration. The 17 staff seemed to be unaware of the political reality surrounding the 18 salary situation, and the demonstration had been counter-productive in 19 that it had lost sympathy for the staff and had shown that they did 20 not appear to be particularly busy. 21 22 The Deputy Secretary General replied that it was the task of the 23 Secretary General to ensure that the staff were motivated and worked 24 with enthusiasm. The fact that the members of staff who had joined the 25 demonstration had thereby lost some 15 to 20 minutes of working time 26 was of minor importance; it should be recalled that staff worked later 27 than required in the evenings or during the week-end if necessary. 28 29 There was at present a feeling of malaise amongst the staff. This was 30 not because they were being asked to make sacrifices - they were well 31 aware that they were not alone in that and had not complained of the 32 fact that the results of the application of the basic salary 33 adjustment procedure already represented a considerable sacrifice in 34 terms of loss of purchasing power. The staff had a feeling, whether it 35 was justified or not, that they were being discriminated against 36 vis-a-vis the staff of the European Communities, and that certain 37 governments did not pursue the same salary policy in the two 38 institutions which nevertheless were considered to be complementary. 39 40 In conclusion, he said that the essential thing was to dissipate the 41 feeling of malaise and to get the staff motivated. 42 43 In subsequent interventions under this item of the agenda, a number of 44 delegations commented that the staff demonstration had been peaceful - 45 good humoured even - and had not hindered their access to the 46 Committee of Ministers' room. One delegation additionally described it 47 as unwise. 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 On the question of staff salaries as such, the Chairman noted that 55 the Committee wished to consider the 195th and 196th reports of the 56 Co-ordinating Committee jointly. 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 - 3 - Misc(84)5 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 The Deputy Secretary General made the following statement: 10 11 "At the previous meeting (items 45 and 46 - see Addendum I to 12 Concl(84)366), I reported to you that the Secretary General was 13 seriously concerned about the application in present circumstances of 14 the crisis levy on the salaries of category A and L staff. It emerges 15 from the 196th report that the austerity policies of the member States 16 with regard to salaries are already fully reflected in the results 17 which follow from application of the salary review procedure. I would 18 recall that this procedure leads to a real term reduction in 19 salaries, at 1 July 1983, of between 1.4% and 2.8% according to grade. 20 To then impose an additional levy would lead to almost doubling the 21 effects of the salary restraint measures applied to staff of the 22 Co-ordinated Organisations. 23 24 In this connection, I pointed out that the already substantial gap 25 between the remuneration of Community officials and that of staff of 26 the Co-ordinated Organisations would further widen considerably, which 27 gives rise to a feeling of discrimination within the Secretariat. 28 29 By way of example, the present gap ranges from between 6.5% and 11.9% 30 for resident unmarried staff and between 12% and 19.7% for 31 non-resident heads of family with two children. 32 33 I hope that you will accept my proposal that the question of the levy 34 should be referred back to the Co-ordinating Committee for 35 reconsideration. This proposal seems to me to be both prudent and 36 reasonable; it comes down to letting your own experts reconsider the 37 application of the crisis levy in the light of two new specific 38 elements, namely the consequences in terms of loss of purchasing power 39 of application of the scales in the 196th report and the widening of 40 the salary gap between the Communities and the Council of Europe. 41 42 Finally, I would like to mention that the salary adjustments are due 43 to take effect as from 1 July 1983, ie eight months ago. I therefore 44 strongly hope that the Committee of Ministers will be able to see its 45 way clear to agree to payment of arrears on the basis of the 196th 46 report and to ask the Co-ordinating Committee to reconsider the salary 47 restraint measures. Once again, in the face of the fears that the 48 Secretaries General are expressing, the crisis of confidence that 49 the Staff Committee has and the doubts which I think I can detect at 50 governmental level - for no Council or Committee of Ministers has yet 51 taken a decision - it seems right and timely to ask the Co-ordinating 52 Committee to go into the matter again." 53 54 The Chairman reported on a meeting he had had with the Chairman of 55 the Staff Committee at the latter's request earlier that morning. Mrs 56 Paulus-Levy had recalled that she had explained the main reasons for 57 the staff's unrest in her letter of 25 January 1984 (see Appendix to 58 Addendum I to Concl(84)366). This unrest was mainly due, she had said, to 59 the differences of treatment between staff of the European Communities 60 and the Council of Europe. There had always been a gap between 61 salaries paid by the two institutions. According to the Staff Committee's 62 figures, this gap was at present 15%, and if the levy was implemented 63 as foreseen it would increase to 20% for certain grades. 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 Misc(84)5 - 4 - 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 Mrs Paulus-Levy had reported that the staff took a very serious view 10 of this situation, and had in no way hidden the fact that a negative 11 decision on the part of the Committee of Ministers could have very 12 serious consequences. 13 14 The Chairman of the Staff Committee had also referred to the 15 statements made by the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, Mr 16 Ellemann-Jensen, in replying to parliamentary questions during the 17 recent Part-Session of the Assembly. In reply to this the Chairman had 18 said that of Mr Ellemann-Jensen was determined to intervene among his 19 Community colleagues with the aim of getting the European Communities 20 to show more restraint in staff salary matters. 21 22 The Chairman had also said to Mrs Paulus-Levy that he recognised that 23 the decision to be taken by the Committee of Ministers under the 24 present item of the agenda was a political one. 25 26 Finally, the Chairman of the Staff Committee had reported to him that 27 as Council of Europe staff, whatever their nationality, were paid in 28 French francs, non French members were having to face increasing 29 difficulties since they had financial commitments in their home 30 countries. 31 32 To clear up a possible misunderstanding the Secretary to the 33 Committee explained that the Staff Committee was not to 34 be likened to a trade union or other self-appointed negotiating body 35 or pressure group. The Staff Committee had been established by the 36 Committee of Ministers itself under the Staff Regulations, and its 37 attributions and functions were defined in Appendix I thereto. Legally 38 speaking it was a subsidiary body of the Council of Europe. Its 39 members were elected by the staff, and at the most recent election (6 40 February 1984) more than 75% of the staff had participated, and had 41 largely confirmed the outgoing staff committee-in-office, all the 42 staff who had been members of the former Staff Committee and who had 43 stood for re-election having been re-elected with overwhelming 44 majorities. 45 46 It was one of the functions of the Staff Committee to represent the 47 staff. Consequently, what the Chairman of the Staff Committee had 48 said to the Chairman of the Ministers' Deputies, as just reported by 49 the latter, largely reflected the feelings of the staff as a whole. 50 51 The Chairman invited delegations to turn their attention to the 52 specific proposal made by the Deputy Secretary General. As stated in 53 paragraph 4 of Notes on the Agenda No. 4851 the proposal was: "that 54 the Deputies should approve as soon as possible the recommendations 55 made by the Co-ordinating Committee in its 196th report concerning the 56 annual review itself (see paragraph 17 of Appendix II to CM(84)18), 57 and at the same time suspend the application of the levy and also 58 refer the question of the application of the levy back to the 59 Co-ordinating Committee for reconsideration in the light of the 60 situation as it had evolved since the 191st report was drawn up, in 61 particular with regard to the widening of the salary gap between the 62 Co-ordinated Organisations and the European Communities. Naturally, if 63 any subsequent reimposition of the levy should result in over-payments 64 having been made to category A and L staff they would be required to 65 repay the amount of the levy." 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 - 5 - Misc(84)5 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 The Representative of Italy said that owing to the late issue of 10 the Secretariat documents concerned, they had not yet arrived in Rome 11 and consequently his authorities were not yet in a position to 12 consider the proposal of the Deputy Secretary General. In the 13 circumstances, he would be in an embarrassing position if it were 14 sought to take substantive decisions at the present meeting. 15 16 The Representative of Portugal noted what he described as a very 17 significant coincidence in that the delegations which appeared to be 18 in favour of approving the Co-ordinating Committee's recommendations 19 as they stood happened to pay much larger contributions to the budget 20 than did Portugal. However, the position of his own delegation on this 21 matter had nothing to do with the size of its budgetary contribution, 22 but related to its interest in the coherence and cohesion of the 23 Organisation. 24 25 After commenting favourably on the efficacy of the work of the 26 Secretariat, he said that he had been struck by the Deputy Secretary 27 Geneal's use of the word "discrimination". Portugal was not yet a 28 member of the European Communities, but it was a fact that the 29 governments of countries that were were paying different rates for the 30 same job being done by people employed by different institutions but 31 who sometimes even worked side-by-side. He was not saying whether 32 anyone was being overpaid or not. 33 34 It was a principle of law that when new facts arose in a case they 35 should be considered by the relevant bodies. There were indeed new 36 elements in the staff salary question, and while it was true that the 37 Notes on the Agenda were issued late, what was proposed therein was 38 simply that the Deputies should take a decision to refer the matter 39 back to the competent body for reconsideration in the light of the new 40 elements. He could see no reason to defer such a decision. The image 41 of the Organisation was at stake and the Deputies were well enough 42 paid to solve complex problems and should be able to take such a 43 decision now rather than postpone it. 44 45 He stressed that in urging an immediate decision, he was not speaking 46 from fear of the veiled threat of a staff strike, but rather from fear 47 for the Deputies' own collective conscience. 48 49 The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany felt that 50 there was no new element. The Co-ordinating Committee had considered 51 the matter carefully, and at its latest meeting had itself found that 52 there was no new element. This being so, his delegation felt that a 53 reference back would serve no useful purpose. 54 55 The Representative of Austria said that he understood that at its 56 latest meeting the Co-ordinating Committee had started from certain 57 hypothesis of real-term salary reductions in certain reference 58 countries, and that in at least one case the hypothesis had proved 59 incorrect. 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 Misc(84)5 - 6 - 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 Austria could see no justification for increasing the salary gap. The 10 Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs had carried out his exploratory 11 mission concerning the role of the Council of Europe in the process of 12 giving new impetus to European unification, and the Deputies now had 13 working parties considering how to make the Council of Europe more 14 effective. It would be against the interests of the Council of Europe 15 to allow the salary gap to increase and thereby lose all its best 16 staff. Accordingly, Austria could support the proposal of the Deputy 17 Secretary General. 18 19 He could also support the points made by his Portuguese colleague 20 concerning a reference back to the Co-ordinating Committee. 21 Reconsideration of a question could never be a bad thing; new elements 22 may indeed be encountered. 23 24 The Representative of the United Kingdom said that the points 25 raised by the Deputy Secretary General and by the Representatives of 26 Austria and Portugal had also in fact been taken into consideration 27 during the very lengthy and complicated negotiations that had led to 28 the package reflected in the 191st report of the Co-ordinating 29 Committee. The high/low inflation rate element had been one of the 30 factors that had been taken into account. It had to be recalled who 31 had taken part in those negotiations; in addition to the government 32 representatives there had also been representatives of the Staff 33 Associations/Committee and of the Secretaries General. The Secretaries 34 General had approved the package that had emerged from the 35 negotiations. There were no new facts now that would justify 36 unscrambling the package. 37 38 The Representative of Spain shared the views of his Austrian and 39 Portuguese colleagues, and supported the proposal of the Deputy 40 Secretary General. 41 42 The Representative of Norway made the following statement: 43 44 "When the question of a special levy was discussed in the 45 Co-ordinating Committee, Norway was one of the countries which were 46 sceptical as to its introduction. The final result in that committee, 47 however, was reached after difficult negotiations and Norway gave its 48 consent to that compromise. 49 50 I should like to state quite clearly that my authorities are concerned 51 about the widening salary gap between the Co-ordinated Organisations 52 and the European Communities. They do not think there is justification 53 for such a. gap. On the Norwegian side there is full recognition of the 54 excellent work of the Secretariat of the Council of Europe, and we 55 will in our policy seek to find solutions which maintain this high 56 standard. The present problem is to a large extent a Community 57 problem. We appeal to the Community countries to find solutions which 58 reduce rather than increase the salary gap. 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 - 7 - Misc(84)5 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 In conclusion, there is a certain hesitation on the Norwegian side to 10 the proposal to refer the question of the application of the levy back 11 to the Co-ordinating Committee for reconsideration. However, we can go 12 along and agree to refer it back if there is a wish to do so from 13 several other countries. Some delegations have expressed a wish to 14 postpone a decision on the implementation of the levy to our next 15 meeting, and we are also in favour of postponement of that particular 16 decision. Finally, we think that the Co-ordinating Committee 17 feasibility study comparing inter alia wage levels and differences 18 should be speeded up as much as possible." 19 20 The Representative of Ireland said that it appeared to him that 21 the Deputies may not succeed at the present meeting in taking the 22 procedural decision concerning a reference back to the Co-ordinating 23 Committee. If that were so, he felt that the substantive decisions 24 should also be postponed until the following meeting. 25 26 The Co-ordinating Committee had already examined all pertinent 27 factors. It had been said that there were now new elements, but he was 28 not himself convinced that they were such as to justify a reference 29 back to the Co-ordinating Committee. 30 31 The Deputies should continue to study the salary question with all due 32 sympathy for the staff and their need for motivation. However, they 33 should also take into account the economic situation in the member 34 countries. The Co-ordinating Committee for its part should take into 35 account when formulating its recommendations the tragic situation of 36 unemployment in Europe. There were already some young people today who 37 would never ever get a job in their lives - this was a tragic waste of 38 human resources. In Ireland, a levy was paid to help the government to 39 try to create jobs. 40 41 His authorities also of course had in mind the excellent work being 42 done in international organisations. However, the so-called 43 discrimination against the Council of Europe staff as compared with 44 Community staff may not in fact hold up to examination. If there were 45 a move to reduce Community salaries, the gap would be narrowed. 46 47 In conclusion, he proposed that the Deputies revert to this item of 48 the agenda at their following meeting. 49 50 The Representative of Sweden agreed with his Norwegian and Irish 51 colleagues about deferring decisions until the following meeting. 52 53 In the Co-ordinating Committee, Sweden had been working to achieve the 54 best possible compromise for the staff. He recalled that at the 55 previous meeting in a statement which was quoted in paragraph 2 of the 56 Notes on the present item of the agenda, the Deputy Secretary General 57 had said that: "the effect (of the levy increasing the salary gap) 58 would in all probability be accentuated when the rate of the levy was 59 raised to 3% from 1 July 1984 and again to 4.5% from 1 July 1985. This 60 widening of the salary gap would be contrary to what was understood 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 Misc(84)5 - 8 - 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 when the Co-ordinating Committee's 191st report was drawn up modifying 10 the salary adjustment procedure." This was certainly true - the 11 Secretaries General had tried at the time to obtain a guarantee 12 against the occurrence of this effect, but their position had not been 13 accepted. There was a decision (paragraph 38 of the 191st report) to 14 try to reach comparisons of duties, grades and levels of remuneration 15 in the Co-ordinated Organisations, other international organisations, 16 certain civil services and certain private sector firms. There was a 17 working party studying that matter, but the comparisons had not yet 18 been established. To his mind, it was not the levy which caused the 19 widening of the salary gap; the cause was the salary policy of the 20 European Communities. This being so the levy itself was not really the 21 problem. 22 23 He could not support the proposal to refer the whole matter back to 24 the Co-ordinating Committee for reconsideration. The Co-ordinating 25 Committee had already studied the question over and over again, and 26 for the Deputies to take a decision in favour of a reference back 27 would entail a risk of the system of co-ordination falling apart. 28 However, while he could not support a reference back, he could accept 29 the Co-odinating Committee's recommendations concerning the 1983 30 salary adjustment as such (196th report). 31 32 Finally, he suggested that if the Deputies agreed to resume 33 consideration of this item at their next meeting, it may be that by 34 that time they would have been informed of the position of the 35 Councils of the other Co-ordinated Organisations. 36 37 The Representative of France noted that there was recognition that 38 what the Committee was faced with was a political problem, but he 39 pointed out that it was also a human problem. He held a profound and 40 personal belief that the staff employed by the Council of Europe were 41 both efficient and devoted. He could accept the recommendations 42 concerning the 1983 salary review as set out in the Co-ordinating 43 Committee's 196th report. With regard to its 195th report (application 44 of the levy) he said that he understood that no decision had yet been 45 taken on it by any of the Councils of the other Co-ordinated 46 Organisations, although they may have held exchanges of views thereon. 47 48 The Representative of the United Kingdom asked whether any of the 49 other Co-ordinated Organisations had yet approved the 196th report. 50 51 The Representative of Cyprus said that it was a fact that the 52 staff salary question was a serious problem facing the Organisation. 53 He felt that it would be imprudent of the Deputies to take hasty 54 decisions that might make matters worse. He agreed with what previous 55 speakers had said about the devotion and efficacy of the staff, and 56 the need to avoid decisions that might prevent the Organisation from 57 operating properly. On the other hand, this did not mean that the 58 Deputies must accept all of the staff's demands. The Chairman had 59 reported a veiled threat of the staff going on strike. The 60 Representative of Cyprus felt that they would be very unwise to do so. 61 The endeavour should be made to maintain good relations between the 62 Committee of Ministers and the staff of the Secretariat. 1 2 3 CONFIDENTIAL 4 5 - 9 - Misc(84)5 6 Draft Addendum II 7 Item 32 8 9 10 The Deputy Secretary General had a very firm negative reply to the 11 suggestion made by certain delegations that there were no new elements 12 for the Co-ordinating Committee to take into consideration. Certainly, 13 it may be that some governments felt that the new elements may not be 14 such as to justify a modification to the Co-ordinating Committee's 15 recommendations. He could understand them taking such a line, but the 16 new elements were nevertheless there. 17 18 It was true that there had been tripartite talks leading to agreement 19 on the recommendations made in the Co-ordinating Committee's 191st 20 report, which had been submitted in February 1983. However, the 21 Secretaries General had said at the time that they accepted the 22 package set out in the 191st report on the understanding that the 23 resulting modification to the salary adjustment procedure would not 24 have the effect of widening the salary gap. The Secretaries General 25 had been assured that the levy had been calculated in such a way that 26 it would not have that effect. Alas, this had not turned out to be the 27 case, the reason being the difference in the systems of calculating 28 the salary adjustments in the European Communities on the one hand and 29 the Co-ordinated Organisations on the other. That difference had once 30 again proved to be to the disadvantage of the staff of the 31 Co-ordinated Organisations. 32 33 The difficulties were there, and the purpose of the present discussion 34 was to seek to find solutions to them. 35 36 It was true, as had been pointed out during the discussion, that the 37 Secretary General had a responsibility to maintain order amongst the 38 staff of the Secretariat. The Deputy Secretary General pointed out, 39 though, that in other, different, employment situations, when 40 difficulties arose that were similar to the ones under consideration, 41 management and labour were able to get together to seek solutions. 42 That could not be done at the Council of Europe. 43 44 He appealed to all sides to make an effort of understanding. The staff 45 had now been waiting for eight months for payment of the arrears due 46 to them on the 1983 salary review. They had a right to that payment, 47 and he asked the Deputies whether they could not take a decision at 48 the present meeting that would make it possible for the Secretary 49 General to pay. 50 51 The Director of Administration and Finance suggested that 52 delegations might be willing to show understanding for the 53 junior staff (categories B and C) who were not concerned by the 54 contentious issue of the levy but had been waiting for payment of the 55 arrears due to them since 1 July 1983. 1 CONFIDENTIAL 2 3 Misc(84)5 - 10 - 4 Draft Addendum II 5 Item 32 6 7 8 Replying to points made during the foregoing discussion, he said 9 firstly that with regard to the Councils of the other Co-ordinated 10 Organisations: 11 12 - the Administrative and Financial Committee of the European 13 Space Agency had discussed the Co-ordinating Committee's 14 reports in January, but had deferred taking any decisions. 15 Consideration of the reports had resumed in the Restricted 16 Council of ESA that same day. 17 18 - the Council of the Western European Union was waiting to see 19 what would be the reaction of the larger Organisations; 20 21 - the NATO Council had not yet discussed the reports, nor had it 22 set a date for doing so; 23 24 - the OECD Council would be discussing the reports the following 25 week. 26 27 In reply to the points made by the Representative of Sweden, he 28 explained that the European Communities did have a levy system - it 29 had been introduced before the Co-ordinated Organisations levy had 30 been decided on and differed from it in its application. Apart from 31 the question of the levy, the Communities had the same system of 32 parallelism as the Co-ordinated Organisations. In the Communities they 33 took the average rise or fall in the relevant civil service salary 34 scales in all ten of their member countries to calculate the 35 percentage coefficient by which Community staff salaries should be 36 adjusted. That procedure turned out in practice to be more favourable 37 than the Co-ordinated Organisations' procedure which involved only 38 seven reference countries and a different method of calculating the 39 coefficient. The resulting divergence between the salaries paid in the 40 two groups of institutions was known as "drift". For a long time the 41 effect of the drift phenomenon had been very small, but when the 42 salary adjustments for the Co-ordinated Organisations at 1 July 1983 43 had been calculated it was found that the drift effect had suddently 44 become relatively considerable. The conclusion, he said, was that 45 responsibility for the salary gap could not be laid exclusively upon 46 the salary policy of the European Communities. 47 48 On the question of whether there was any new element to justify a 49 reference back to the Co-ordinating Committee, he said that when the 50 wage restraint measures had been introduced nobody had predicted that 51 the result would be as bad as it had in fact turned out. And it was 52 only at the end of December 1983 that the official Community figures 53 became available. He recalled that in his statement at the previous 54 meeting, the Deputy Secretary General had given figures for the losses 55 in purchasing power. Since 1979 the salaries of senior A grade 56 officials had already lost about 9% in real terms, and those of more 57 junior A grade officials, about 7%. The Co-ordinating Committee's 58 recommendations for the 1 July 1983 review would take these losses of 59 purchasing power up to 11.3% and 8.5% respectively. The effect of the 60 1.5% levey should be added in both cases, bringing the sum total of 61 losses to 12.8% and to 10% respectively. The levy would increase to 3% 62 from 1 July 1984 and to 4.5% a year later. It was in addition feared 63 that other purchasing power losses would result from the 159th report 64 procedure. 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 - 11 - Misc(84)5 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 It was because of these unexpectedly high losses in purchasing power 10 and also the simultaneous widening of the salary gap that the 11 Secretariat felt it was justified in proposing that the Co-ordinating 12 Committee should be asked to look at the matter again. 13 14 Referring to the point made by the Representative of Austria, he said 15 that it was hard to say whether an estimated movement in the national 16 salary index had proved to be incorrect for one country. It could be 17 said however that the index in one of the reference countries had 18 taken a drop sufficient to bring down the average across all seven of 19 the reference countries to a marked extent. He pointed out though that 20 this was not a new factor on which the Secretariat would rely to 21 justify a reference back to the Co-ordinating Committee. 22 23 Finally, he said that two of the Co-ordinated Organisations, OECD and 24 WEU, had paid an advance calculated on what would be owed to staff for 25 the period 1 July - 31 December 1983 if the recommendations made in 26 the 195th and 196th reports taken together were applied. NATO and ESA 27 had not so far paid any advance. 28 29 Summing up the debate so far, the Chairman observed that no-one 30 would dispute that the Council of Europe enjoyed the services of a 31 devoted and efficient staff. Delegations had also recognised that they 32 were faced with a very serious situation, and that therefore they 33 should avoid taking any hasty decisions. In this connection it had 34 been proposed that any decisions of substance be postponed to the next 35 meeting. 36 37 He recalled that the Deputy Secretary General had suggested that a 38 compromise should be sought. To that end, and if the Deputies decided 39 to postpone their substantive decisions until the next meeting, the 40 Chairman felt that it might perhaps be useful to set up a small group 41 of three Permanent Representatives to examine the question meanwhile. 42 He added that he would not himself be in a position to take part in 43 such a group as the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs had already 44 taken a public stand on one aspect of the question. 45 46 He invited delegations to consider his suggestion during an 47 intersessional break. 48 49 The Deputy Secretary General said that he had a further suggestion 50 which he hoped would be fully acceptable. It concerned the payment of 51 the arrears that would be due to staff of categories B and C on the 52 basis of the recommendations made in the 196th report. He pointed out 53 that there had been absolutely no contestation as to either the 54 amounts due or to the right of the staff concerned to receive them. He 55 therefore invited the Committee to agree to such arrears being paid to 56 categories B and C staff as a sort of advance pending approval of the 57 recommendations made in the 196th report concerning the 1983 annual 58 review of remuneration. CONFIDENTIAL Misc(84)5 - 12 - Draft Addendum II Item 32

The Chairman said that delegations would also think the latter suggestion over during the intersessional break.

When the discussion resumed after the intersessional break, the Chairman recalled that there were now three proposals to be decided on: - that category B and C staff be paid an advance on what would be due to them under the recommendations made in the 196th report; - that any decision on the substance of the 195th and 196th reports be postponed to the following meeting; - that a group of three Permanent Representatives be set up to look into the matter meanwhile with a view to finding a compromise solution. The Representative of the United Kingdom said that he very much appreciated the reasons behind the Deputy Secretary General's proposal concerning the payment of an advance to category B and C staff, even if he may not himself be in a position to vote for it. However, he could see no reason why the Council of Europe should be either ahead of or behind the other Co-ordinated Organisations in this respect, and therefore any such advance should be paid only in respect of the period up to February 1984. This would in any case alleviate the immediate problem. He had doubts about the need to set up a group of three Permanent Representatives to seek a solution. A number of delegations had spoken in favour of approving the recommendations made by the Co-ordinating Committee as they stood. If one started looking for compromises, there would be a risk of upsetting the whole Co-ordinated procedure; the Council of Europe might come up with one solution, and the Councils of the other Organisations may come up with different solutions. This would have the effect of unscrambling the whole delicate balance that existed. The Representative of France said that a way must be found to make a gesture to the staff. The Deputy Secretary General had proposed payment of an advance to category B and C staff only. The Co-ordinating Committee had itself said that it could envisage the payment of an advance. The Representative of France proposed that an advance should be paid to all categories of staff. As it would be only an advance, the exact figures could be adjusted later. 1 2 CONFIDENTIAL 3 4 - 13 - Misc(84)5 5 Draft Addendum II 6 Item 32 7 8 9 The Representative of Belgium pointed out that while the 10 Co-ordinating Committee had said that it could envisage the payment of 11 an advance, it had made this conditional upon the Councils' approval 12 of the recommendations it had made in its 195th and 196th report. That 13 condition could be met for category B and C staff, but not for 14 category A and L staff. 15 16 After further consideration of the possibility of paying an advance to 17 category A and L staff, the Deputy Secretary General said that any 18 risk of an overpayment could be avoided if the advance represented 19 only 80% of what would be due under the 195th and 196th reports. 20 21 The Chairman called for a vote on the Deputy Secretary General's 22 proposal that an advance be paid on the basis of the recommendations 23 made by the Co-ordinating Committee in its 195th and 196th reports for 24 the period July 1983 - February 1984 inclusive, representing 100% of 25 the sums that would be due to staff of category B and C and 80% of the 26 sums that would be due to staff of categories A and L. The result of 27 the vote was as follows: 10 for, 4 against, 6 abstentions (not 28 carried). 29 30 He then called for a vote on the proposal that an advance be paid to 31 staff of categories B and C only on the basis of what would be due to 32 them under the 196th report for the period July 1983 - February 1984. 33 18 delegations voted in favour of this proposal, and the Chairman 34 declared it carried. 35 36 The Chairman pointed out that there were now two possibilities open to 37 the Committee: either simply to adjourn all further consideration of 38 this item until the next meeting, or also to set: up a group of three 39 Permanent Representatives to try to seek compromise solutions in the 40 meanwhile. 41 42 A show of hands indicated that eleven delegations were in favour of 43 simple adjournment. The Chairman therefore concluded that there was no 44 majority in favour of setting up the group of three that he had 45 proposed. 46 47 At the conclusion of the discussion on this item of the agenda the 48 Chairman noted that there was agreement that he should himself 49 communicate its outcome to the Chairman of the Staff Committee. 50

CONFIDENTIAL - i - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

SUMMARY Page 1. Adoption of the Agenda 5 Political and General Policy Questions 2. Committee of Ministers - Preparation of the 74th Session - (10 May 1984) 7 3. Conference of Ministers responsible for Research 9 4. Election of the Secretary General - Procedure 13 5. Balanced development in Europe 15 6. European Music Year 1985 - Invitation to non-member States 17 7. Situation in Cyprus 21 8. Conferences of Specialised Ministers 23 9. Consultative Assembly - Third part of the 35th Ordinary Session (Strasbourg, 30 January - 3 February 1984) a. Texts adopted 25 b. Parliamentary questions for oral answer by the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers 27 Human Rights 10. C., Medway and Ball against the United Kingdom - Application of Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights 29 11. Draft Protocol to the Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms concerning the extension of the list of civil and political rights set forth in the Convention 31 12. European Convention on Human Rights a. Assembly Recommendation 970 33 b. Written Question No. 268 by Lord Northfield on cases brought under the Human Rights Convention 35 CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - ii - Page 13. Handbook on Human Rights and the Police 37 *14. Ad hoc Committee of Experts to exchange views on the draft Convention against Torture (CAHTT) - Meeting report (Strasbourg, 1-2 December 1983) 39 15. Draft Recommendation No. R(84).. on principles on television advertising 41 Legal Questions *16. Ad hoc Committee of Experts for the Protection of Animals (CAHPA) - Report of the 13th meeting (Strasbourg, 23-25 November 1983) 45 *17. European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) - Report of the 14th meeting (Strasbourg, 28 November - 2 December 1983) 47 *18. Draft Recommendation No. R(84)... on the Principles of Civil Procedure Designed to Improve the Functioning of Justice 51 *19. Conference on problems relating to the development and application of legislation on data protection - Proposal by the Spanish delegation 53 20. Ad hoc Committee of Experts on Genetic Engineering (CAHGE) - Report of the 1st meeting (Strasbourg, 13-16 December 1983) 55 Economic and Social Questions 21. 3rd Conference of European Ministers of Labour - Proposal of the Spanish authorities 61 22. 2nd Conference of European Ministers responsible for Health - Report of the first meeting of the Committee of Senior Officials (Strasbourg, 24-25 November 1983) 65 *23. European Health Committee (CDSP) - Report of the 14th meeting (Strasbourg, 21-24 November 1983) 67 *24. Public Health Committee (Partial Agreement) (CD-P-SP) (Meeting for the purposes of the European Pharmacopoeia) - Report of the 19th Session (Strasbourg, 23 November 1983) 69

(*) B level CONFIDENTIAL - iii - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Page *25. Steering Committee on Intra-European Migration (CDMG) - Report of the 9th meeting (Strasbourg, 29 November - 2 December 1983) 71 *26. European Social Charter - Appointment of five members of the Committee of Experts set up in pursuance of Article 25 of the Charter 75 *27. Cultural and social problems of populations of nomadic origin - Written Questions No. 267, 269, 270 and 271 by Mr. Ramirez 77 Education, Culture and Sport 28. Informal meeting of Community Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs (Athens, 28 November 1983) - Communication by the Working Party of the Ministers' Deputies on cultural co-operation 85 Youth 29. Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth 89 Environment and Local Authorities 30. Draft European Convention for the Protection of International Watercourses against Pollution 93 *31. Self-Help and community development in towns - Publication of the Activity report 95 Administrative questions 32. Staff salaries - 195th and 196th reports of the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts 97 33. Preparation of forthcoming meetings 99 34. Other business a. Dialogue with the Secretary General 101 *b. Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE) - Grants made by the Bureau of the CLRAE 109

(*) B level CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - iv -

Page c. Joint Committee - Meeting on 22 March 1984 111 d. Council of Europe relations with management and labour - Modalities for the implementation of the liaison system 113 e. Transmission of extracts from the Deputies' Conclusion to the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) 117 f. Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDDM) - Request for observer status by the Commission of the European Communities 119 *g. Assembly confrontation on "Aliens in Europe: a threat or an asset?" - Budgetary contribution 121 h. 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs (Berlin, May 1984) 123 APPENDIX I 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (A and B levels) (Strasbourg, 20-23 February 1984, A level, 27-28 February 1984, B level) - Agenda al APPENDIX II 368th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (A and B levels) (Strasbourg, 14-19 March 1984, A level, 20-21 March 1984, B level - Draft agenda a7 APPENDIX III Schedule of meetings for the period (item 33) September-December 1984 all APPENDIX IV Recommendation No. R(84)3 of the (item 15) Committee of Ministers to member States on principles on television advertising a13 APPENDIX V Recommendation No. R(84)4 of the (item *17) Committee of Ministers to member States on parental responsibilities a15

(*) B level CONFIDENTIAL - v - CM/Del/Concl(84)366

APPENDIX VI Recommendation No. R(84)5 of the (item *18) Committee of Ministers to member States on the principles of civil procedure designed to improve the functioning of justice a19 APPENDIX VII Resolution (84)1 on the continuation of (item *23) the financial support for the European Bank of Frozen Blood of Rare Groups, in Amsterdam a23 APPENDIX VIII Recommendation No. R(84)6 of the (item *23) Committee of Ministers to member States on the prevention of the transmission of malaria by blood transfusion a25 APPENDIX IX Recommendation No. R(84)7 of the (item *25) Committee of Ministers to member States on the maintenance of migrants' cultural links with their countries of origin and leisure facilities a27 APPENDIX X Decision No. CM/319/230284 - Ad hoc (item 29) terms of reference (CAHJE) a33 APPENDIX XI Agenda for the first meeting of the (item 34d) Liaison Committee between the Council of Europe and management and labour (Strasbourg, 12-13 March 1984) a35

(*) B level

CONFIDENTIAL - 1 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

The 367th meeting of the Deputies was opened at A level on Monday, 20 February 1984 at 3 pm, under the Chairmanship of Mr. K. Willumsen, Deputy for the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark; it continued at B level from 27 February 1984 under the Chairmanship of Mr. R. Doise, Deputy for the Minister for External Relations of France.

PRESENT AUSTRIA Mr. H.G. Knitel Mr. N. Scherk BELGIUM Mr. A. Vranken Mr. P. Jottard CYPRUS Mr. C. Papademas Mr. N. Yiannakis DENMARK Mr. K. Willumsen, Chairman Mrs. J. Rechnagel FRANCE Mr. R. Doise, Vice-Chairman Mr. B. Widemann Mr. D. Labrosse Mr. P.B. Arrighi FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY Mr. K.A. Hampe Mr. K. Timmermann Mr. P. Platte GREECE Mr. D. Constantinou Mrs. D. Mavroskelidi ICELAND Mrs. B. Asgeirsdottir IRELAND Mr. M. Flynn ITALY Mr. P.M. Antici Mr. A. Grafini Mr. G. Deodato Mr. L. Pivano LIECHTENSTEIN HSH Prince Nicholas of Liechtenstein LUXEMBOURG Mr. J. Hostert MALTA - CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 2 -

NETHERLANDS Mr. C. Schneider Mr. P.H. 1e Clercq NORWAY Mr. E. Winsnes Mr. L.A. Ulland PORTUGAL Mr. J. Pereira Bastos Mr. J. da Rocha Páris SPAIN Mr. F. Baeza Mr. E. Ibanez Lopez-Doriga Mr. N. Ferrer SWEDEN Mr. B. Arvidson Miss L. Karlsson SWITZERLAND Mr. T. Raeber Mrs. I. Apelbaum TURKEY Mr. S. Korkud Mr. S. Özsoy Mr. K. Gür UNITED KINGDOM Mr. C.D. Lush Miss A. Stoddart CONFIDENTIAL - 3 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

Opening the meeting at A level, the Chairman paid tribute to the memory of Mr. Victor de Pange, Deputy Director of Education, Culture and Sport, whose sudden death had grieved all those who had been privileged to meet him. He had spent nearly 30 years in the Council of Europe's service. A man of letters and a humanist, he had turned to account the spiritual heritage which he held from his family. His various cultural pursuits had brought him many a distinction. But it was not only to the public figure, but also to Mr. de Pange's human qualities that the Chairman wished to pay tribute. He asked the Deputy Secretary General to convey to Mrs. de Pange and her children the Committee of Ministers' deepest sympathy and sincere condolences. He then asked the Committee to observe a minute's silence in memory of Mr. de Pange. He was then pleased to welcome Miss Lillemor Karlsson, new Deputy Permanent Representative of Sweden, and Mr. Daniel Labrosse, who had joined the French delegation. In the course of the meeting, he also welcomed Mr. Paul Bernard Arrighi, a trainee from the Ecole Nationale d'Administration attached to the French delegation until the end of France's chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers. Lastly, he referred to the decision taken at the 366th meeting (January 1984, item 5) concerning the date of the next exchange of views with experts on the CSCE, subject to confirmation at the opening of this meeting. No reservations having been entered, the date of 5 April 1984 was confirmed. At the close of the meeting, the Chairman took leave of Ambassador Costas Papademas, who had won the admiration of all for the way in which he had defended his country's interests without losing sight of the European aspect of his function. All his colleagues appreciated his ability to reconcile national with European interests. The Chairman had himself learned a great deal from his predecessor's handling of the chairmanship. The new task awaiting him as ambassador in Bonn would surely not be easier, but there was no doubt that he would do it well. On behalf of all his colleagues, he expressed best wishes to him and his wife for the future. The Deputy Secretary General also expressed gratitude to Mr. Papademas, who had regarded his function as requiring him to serve the interests of his Government while at the same time taking the Organisation's interests into account. He was also grateful to him for the good relations he had always maintained with the Secretariat. On behalf of the whole Secretariat, he wished him and his wife success and happiness. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 4 -

Mr. Papademas thanked the Chairman and the Deputy Secretary General for their kind words. As was his wont, he had preferred not to prepare notes for his farewell address but to speak straight from the heart. He thanked his colleagues for their friendship and understanding, and all members of the Secretariat whose competence and devotion deserved recognition. This moment was a turning point both in his career and in his life. On arriving at the Council of Europe after serving his country for ten years at the United Nations, his entry to the club of the 21 which all shared the same culture had been a shock. The experience of this almost family circle had been a most enriching one. He had come to the Council of Europe aware of the cultural heritage it represented and out of a commitment to its aims and ideals, but had had to recognise how difficult it was to be his country's Permanent Representative to the Organisation. Cyprus was the country where Europe both began and ended, with behind her 8000 years of history which had formed the essence of what was Europe. For this reason that country was accutely aware of the need for a Europe that remained true to its origins and coherent in its actions and policies. Regrettably, Mr Papademas had often been disappointed because the Council of Europe had not managed to fulfil its share of obligations and responsibilities towards that Europe as a whole and Cyprus in particular; sometimes he had even been overcome by a feeling of injustice when things had reached the point of flouting morality. However, after spending these four years with the Council of Europe he was leaving Strasbourg with deep feelings for the Organisation. The memory he left behind him was one of devotion to the Council of Europe and he would keep his pride in having been able to defend his own country in it. He had also greatly appreciated the hospitality of the host country, France, and its culture. His future post in Bonn would be a fresh challenge which he was ready to take up. In leaving the Committee, he wished all every success in their endeavours. CONFIDENTIAL - 5 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 1

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

The Representative of Turkey said that as far as item 7 was concerned (Situation in Cyprus) the position of his delegation remained unchanged with regard to both the substance and the form. Decision The Deputies adopted the agenda for their 367th meeting (February 1984 - A and B levels) as it appears at Appendix I to these Conclusions.

CONFIDENTIAL - 7 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 2

2. COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS Preparation of the 74th Session (10 May 1984) (CM(84)35)

The Chairman referred to the proposals by the Secretary General for the provisional agenda of the 74th Session of the Committee of Ministers on 10 May 1984. These proposals were contained in CM(84)35. On behalf of his Minister he said that the list of items proposed should include one devoted to the North/South dialogue. In this context he recalled that an important conference would be organised by the Assembly in Lisbon from 9 to 11 April 1984 with the title "North/South: Europe's role". Selected aspects of this subject for the Ministers' discussions could be indicated in the annotated agenda when this was prepared. The Chairman recalled that he had suggested to hold a short ceremony lasting about a half an hour during the sitting of the Assembly of 9 May 1984 to mark the 35th anniversary of the Council of Europe. The ceremony could start at 5pm and the informal meeting of Ministers could follow at 6 pm. As far as the meeting of Political Directors scheduled for 9 May was concerned, he drew attention to the discussion at the Deputies' 366th meeting (January 1984, item 2) when it had been stated that delegations should bear in mind the importance of avoiding Ministers and Political Directors discussing simultaneously the same themes. Decision The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels).

CONFIDENTIAL - 9 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 3

3. CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS RESPONSIBLE FOR RESEARCH (Concl(83)365/2, CM(84)31 and Corr. and 57)

The Representative of France, recalling the genesis of the proposal to hold a Ministerial Conference on Research, said that the Senior Officials entrusted with examining the subjects which could be dealt with by such a Conference had completed its terms of reference and had adopted its second report which was contained in CM(84)31 and Corrigendum. That report was positive and recognised the fact that the Conference could give the necessary political impetus to developing co-operation and thus contribute to strengthening the European scientific and technological environment. The main theme of the Conference would focus on measures to facilitate and develop contacts and exchanges between scientists, laboratories and research institutes in Europe and he wished to stress the need to strengthen and build on existing scientific and research networks. The speaker recalled that the Ministers, at their 73rd Session on 24 November 1983, had referred the decision concerning the Conference to the Deputies and in his opinion that decision could be taken at the present meeting. The French Minister for Industry and Research, Mr. Fabius, had written to the Secretary General on 17 February 1984 to propose that the Conference be held in Paris on 17 September 1984 and he hoped that the Committee could take a decision on that proposal also. The Representative of the United Kingdom drew attention to differences between the text which had been adopted by the Committee of Senior Officials and the text which had been distributed in CM(84)31. In particular he noted that two important paragraphs had been omitted from Part II of the document; this had now been rectified by the distribution of a Corrigendum to the document at the last minute and only as a result of requests from delegations concerned. Furthermore, the first paragraph of the introduction to Part II differed in that the phrase "there was almost unanimity of view" had been changed to read "(The Committee of Senior Officials) recognised the fact that ...". Incidents of this nature hardly inspired confidence in the Council of Europe Secretariat being associated with such an important undertaking as the Ministerial Conference on Research. That being said, he would support the proposals made by the French delegation. The Representative of Italy considered the outcome of the meeting of Senior Officials most satisfactory and said that he supported the French proposals. However, he would like certain matters concerning financial implications and the redeployment of resources to be clarified before the Conference. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 10 - Item 3

The Representatives of Norway, Sweden, Portugal and Cyprus agreed with the conclusions of the Senior Officials and welcomed the French initiative. They agreed to the preparation of the Conference being entrusted to a Committee of Senior Officials and to the establishment of special working relations with the proposed Conference of Ministers. The Representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany and Sweden expressed their support but thought that in view of the date proposed the Senior Officials would have to work very fast. The Representative of Austria said that he was in favour of the French initiative and of holding the Conference of Ministers responsible for Research in Paris in September. In the view of the Austrian authorities, the aim of the conference was to improve concerted co-operation in the field of research and he was pleased to note that the fact had been emphasised in the Corrigendum to CM(84)31. The Austrian authorities would like that political consideration to figure in the wording of one of the themes of the Conference. He suggested that Theme II on "the preparation of new networks for scientific co-operation in Europe and the strengthening of existing networks" should be extended to include a reference to the importance of concerted research, in order to provide for a discussion of a programme of concerted research within the framework of the Council of Europe by the Ministers. The representative of the Secretariat said that he could only apologise for the discrepancy between the report adopted by the Committee of Senior Officials (MRS-HF(84)5) and the document submitted to the Committee of Ministers (CM(84)31), in which the first two paragraphs adopted by the Senior Officials at their meeting of 19 and 20 January 1984 had been omitted. With regard to the request made by the Representative of Italy, he said that the themes proposed by the Senior Officials for the Conference of Ministers were focused on measures to facilitate and develop contacts and exchanges between scientists, laboratories and research institutes in Europe. The first part of the proposals would deal with setting up new networks for scientific co-operation in Europe and strengthening existing networks. The budgetary implications of the project would be considerably alleviated for the intergovernmental budget of the Council of Europe by the fact that all the proposals were based on the budgetary principle of redeploying existing resources and using and optimising existing means and programmes of co-operation. It was intended in particular that full use should be made of existing co-operation programmes in the Commission of the European Communities, the European Science Foundation etc. The second part of the Senior Officials' proposals would deal with administrative measures to develop European scientific mobility. The implementation of the proposals would require an interministerial approach to the problems and their solution in individual countries, but would not have significant budgetary implications for the Council of Europe's intergovernmental budget. CONFIDENTIAL - 11 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 3

The Austrian proposal to add the concerted European research programmes as a theme of the conference should not meet with any difficulty, since it was precisely to facilitate scientific consultation and co-operation that the Senior Officials had proposed the notion of scientific co-operation networks as a sub-theme for the conference. The Senior Officials had proposed that in the preparatory, phase of the ministerial campaign the Committee of Senior Officials should hold a meeting on 5 and 6 April 1984 in Paris, then on 18 and 19 June in Paris and if necessary before the Conference of Ministers. The Representative of Portugal said that he was satisfied with the Secretariat's explanations and that there were no grounds for concern regarding finance since in any case the conclusions of the Specialised Ministers would be submitted in due course to the Committee of Ministers. The Chairman, summing up the discussion, noted that there was agreement on the decisions below. He also noted that there was agreement in the Committee for the Secretariat to ask the Senior Officials to resume consideration of the themes of the Conference in the light of the Austrian suggestion and other comments made during the present meeting. Decisions The Deputies i. noted, in accordance with paragraph 2 of the Appendix to Resolution (71)44 of the Committee of Ministers on Conferences of Specialised Ministers, that there was general agreement in the Committee of Ministers for the establishment of a special working relationship with the Ministerial Conference on Research; ii. agreed that the preparation of the Ministerial Conference on Research should be entrusted to a committee of senior officials; iii. agreed that the Ministerial Conference on Research should take place on 17 September 1984 in Paris.

CONFIDENTIAL - 13 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 4

4. ELECTION OF THE SECRETARY GENERAL Procedure (Concl(84)366/3, CM(83)147, 180, 181 and Add. and 224)

Decisions The Deputies i. agreed to invite the three candidates for the post of Secretary General to an interview by the Committee; (1) ii. agreed that the interviews would take place at A level during their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels).

(1) The following arrangements have been made for the Committee's interviews with the three candidates for the post of Secretary General: Mr. Ole Ålgård to attend an interview on Friday, 16 March at 4 pm, Mr. Marcelino Oreja Aguirre on Monday 19 March at 3 pm and Mr. Franz Karasek on Monday 19 March at 5 pm. Each candidate will express his views at the beginning of the interview; an exchange of views will follow.

CONFIDENTIAL - 15 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 5

5. BALANCED DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE (Concl(83)365/2, CM(83)198)

The Representative of Portugal said that he was satisfied with the proposals made by the former Chairman of the Committee of Ministers at the 73rd Session (24 November 1983) which he considered realistic and modest. As pointed out in CM(83)198, the proposals did not involve substantial new budgetary appropriations for the Council of Europe. He wondered if the Deputies could now consider the possibility of asking their Chairman to sound out delegations on the way in which the proposals made by the former Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, notably those set out in paragraph 11 of CM(83)198, could be implemented, taking into account the "summary of existing activities with a component of technical co-operation and assistance" which appeared at the Appendix to Notes No. 4825 on this item. The Representative of Switzerland said that his delegation was on the whole favourablly inclined towards the proposals set out in CM(83)198 and also to the use of the various schemes already in operation in the Council of Europe which provided for individual and collective fellowships, technical assistance and grants. Referring to paragraph 10(ii) of CM(83)198, he said that the Swiss authorities would wish the Council of Europe to initiate and act as a clearing house for not only "offers and requests emanating from member countries", but also those emanating from municipalities and local and regional authorities in the member States. It should in particular act as a documentation centre for all such offers, including offers of sponsorship. Decisions The Deputies i. asked their Chairman to sound out delegations on the way in which the proposals made by the former Chairman of the Committee of Ministers in CM(83)198 could be implemented, in particular those contained in para. 11 of that document; ii. agreed to resume consideration of this item at a forthcoming meeting.

CONFIDENTIAL - 17 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 6 6. EUROPEAN MUSIC YEAR Invitation of non-member States (Concl(84)366/9, CM(83)227)

1. Financing The Deputy Secretary General announced that the European Organising Committee of European Music Year 1985 (EMY) had decided at its meeting on 3 February 1984 that the Committee of Ministers' Representative, Ambassador Vranken, would also be sitting on the Committee's Bureau. At the European Organising Committee and Bureau meetings on 2 and 3 February, members had taken note of information concerning a possible contribution by the European Communities to the Special EMY Account for 1985. He also informed the Committee, although no final decision had yet been taken, of the Secretary General's intentions regarding a possible sum to be proposed as the Council of Europe's contribution to the Special Account. Finally, he said that a preliminary list of interstate projects for European Music Year 1985 had been adopted at the European Organisation Committee's meeting. However, the list was not yet final, as the Programme Working Party set up by the Organising Committee would be meeting at the end of the month to continue discussions. In reply to a question by the Representative of the Netherlands, the Deputy Secretary General said that the amount which the Secretary General was thinking of proposing did not cover the provision of material facilities, such as a secretariat, by the Council of Europe. The Representative of Switzerland wanted to know how the sum mentioned by the Deputy Secretary General had been arrived at. He asked whether it was based on any particular programme. Were some projects to be financed by the Council of Europe and others by the Commission or would all projects be financed jointly and without distinction? The Representative of Turkey wondered whether the list was limitative. The Representative of Italy asked whether the contributions of member States were restricted to the events included in the current programme or whether countries which were not organising any interstate events would be participating in other ways? CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 18 - Item 6

The Executive Secretary of European Music Year said that the Organising Committee had had to begin its discussions very early on since it was clear that the type of event involved could not be improvised at the last moment. It had of course been limited by the fact that only 10 months away from the beginning of 1985 it still had no sure indications regarding the resources which would be available for European Music Year. The list which had been drawn up represented a selection from among a hundred or so proposals put forward by national committees, institutions etc and it constituted only one of the categories of events planned for European Music Year. A first category consisted of the contribution of the committees of intergovernmental experts. Thus the Council for Cultural Co-operation (CDCC) would be organising a conference on music teaching in 1985, while the Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDMM) was considering the possibility of action against piracy of phonograms and encouraging the development of radio broadcasting by satellite. The European Organising Committee had also established co-operation with youth organisations through the Council of Europe's European Youth Centre and Youth Foundation. A second category of event would be situated in the framework of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) and its members, who were taking an active part in the organisation of European Music Year. A third category of events consisted of national, regional and, in the great majority, local projects. The list submitted to the Committee contained only multilateral projects, which were the fourth category of contributions to European Music Year. The Programme Working Party set up by the European Organising Committee had concentrated in particular on events which would not be taking place at all if they had not been part of European Music Year. It was also giving attention to the spectacular aspect of the events to be organised and to the long-term benefit which could be derived from them. The current list was of course not limitative and only provisional, since no financial decision had yet been taken either by the Ten or by the Twenty-One. Some countries did not appear as organisers on the list, since many national committees had indicated that they prefered to concentrate on national events rather than on interstate projects. Lastly, for the time being, the method of financing had not yet been decided but it was clear that projects would be financed jointly by the Commission and the Council of Europe. It was important for the time being that active preparations for events taking place in 1985 should be started without delay. CONFIDENTIAL - 19 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 6

2. Invitations to non-member States The Deputies exchanged views on this matter (see Addendum I to these Conclusions, circulated to Heads of Delegations only).

Decision The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels).

CONFIDENTIAL - 21 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 7

7. SITUATION IN CYPRUS (Concl(84)366/7)

No delegation wished to make a statement under this item.

CONFIDENTIAL - 23 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 8

8. CONFERENCES OF SPECIALISED MINISTERS (Concl(83)366/8, CM(78)62 and CM(84)30)

The Deputy Secretary General referred to the following conferences of specialised ministers: 1. The 3rd Conference of European Ministers responsible for Social Security will take place in Athens on 20-25 May 1985. The Committee of Senior Officials responsible for preparing this conference held its second meeting in Strasbourg on 24-26 January 1984; during that meeting it adopted the plan to be followed in preparing the reports on the first theme of the conference: "trends in social security legislation since 1974". It also adopted the terms of reference for consultants who would be drafting reports on the second theme, "the role of social security in a period of economic difficulties"; and lastly, it adopted the draft agenda and programme for the occasion. 2. The 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs will be held in Berlin on 23-25 May 1984. The Committee of Senior Officials responsible for preparing the conference met for the third time on 25 and 26 January 1984 in Berlin. After approving the Conference programme, the Senior Officials adopted the final text of the European Declaration of Cultural Objectives and also discussed a cover document for the declaration which had been prepared by an ad hoc group meeting in Strasbourg on 10 February 1984. In addition, the Senior Officials discussed five draft Resolutions which will be submitted to the Berlin Conference for discussion and adoption. These texts refer to the following subjects: - culture and communication technologies - the European Declaration of Cultural Objectives - European cultural co-operation - cultural development and migration. The fifth text is an expression of gratitude to the authorities acting as hosts for the 4th Conference and, if relevant, to the government which may offer to invite the European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs for their 5th conference. (This Conference was also discussed under item 34(h) of the agenda for the present meeting.)

CONFIDENTIAL - 25 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 9a

9. CONSULTATIVE ASSEMBLY THIRD PART OF THE 35TH ORDINARY SESSION (Strasbourg, 30 January - 3 February 1984) a. Texts adopted

Recommendation 976 (1984) on the Council of Europe's contribution to cultural co-operation with Latin America Decision The Deputies agreed to examine this Recommendation in conjunction with Resolution 814 on the same subject at A level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels). Recommendation 977 (1984) on air pollution and acid rain The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany said that his authorities preferrred this Recommendation to be examined by the Deputies before the Ministerial Conference of the signatory States to the United Nations Convention on long-range transboundary air pollution, to be held in Munich on 24-27 June 1984. Furthermore, Assembly Recommendation 977 should be forwarded to the governments of member States before that Ministerial Conference. Decision The Deputies agreed to examine this Recommendation at A level at their 372nd meeting (14-18 May 1984 - A and B levels). Recommendation 978 (1984) on forestry in Europe and the World Decision The Deputies agreed to examine this Recommendation at B level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels). CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 26 - Item 9a

Resolution 814 (1984) on cultural relations between Europe and Latin America Decision The Deputies agreed to consider this Resolution in conjunction with Recommendation 976 on the same subject at A level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels). Resolution 815 (1984) in reply to the 28th and 29th annual reports of the European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) Decision The Deputies took note of this Resolution. CONFIDENTIAL - 27 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 9b

b. Parliamentary questions for oral answer by the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers

Decision The Deputies agreed to bear in mind Question No. 11 by Mr. Giust and the reply given by the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers (71-78 of AS(35)CR 25) concerning the adoption of the 1984 budget when discussing item 34c of the agenda of the present meeting (Joint Committee - Meeting on 22 March 1984).

CONFIDENTIAL - 29 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 10

10. C., MEDWAY AND BALL AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM Application of Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Letter HD/C87 of 15.11.83)

The Representative of the United Kingdom said his government accepted the Commission's opinion that there had been violation of Article 5 of the Convention in these three cases. A vote to decide whether or not there had been a violation of the Convention produced the following results: - in the case of C. Violation: 20; no violation: 0; abstaining: none. - in the Medway case. Violation: 20; no violation: 0; abstaining: none. - in the Ball case. Violation: 20; no violation: 0; abstaining: none. The Representative of the United Kingdom observed that the antecedents of these three cases were identical to those in the two previous cases, X and B against the United Kingdom, and had to do with detention under mental health legislation. The United Kingdom legislation, as amended subsequent to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of X had now entered into force, and the new legislation eliminated the circumstances which had given rise to these cases. Decision The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels) on the basis of three draft Resolutions to be prepared by the Secretariat.

CONFIDENTIAL - 31 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 11

11. DRAFT PROTOCOL TO THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF THE LIST OF CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS SET FORTH IN THE CONVENTION (Concl(84)366/16, CM(82)230 Addendum I, CM(84)37 and Add and Assembly Opinion No. 116)

The Chairman said that various amendment proposals were set out in CM(84)37 and the Dutch proposal in the Addendum thereto. He invited the Deputies to consider them. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany wondered whether discussion of this item ought not to be deferred to a later meeting; the Dutch proposal had arrived too late to be studied by his authorities, who wished to state their views on the subject. Moreover, the European Court of Human Rights had just given judgment in the Oztürk case and was preparing to do so in the Sutter case, and the German authorities wished to see how the Court interpreted Article 6 of the Convention before deciding on their position concerning the draft Protocol. The Representative of the Netherlands thought that it would be preferable to consider his authorities' observations at the same time as the other amendment proposals; he was accordingly in favour of deferment until the next meeting. The Representative of Belgium said that his authorities would find it difficult to accept the Dutch proposal; Article 2 of the draft Protocol had to be taken in conjunction not only with Article 4 of the draft, but also with Article 6 of the Convention. Paragraph 17 of the explanatory report (page 15 of the Addendum to CM(82)230) read "As compared with the wording of the corresponding provisions of the United Nations Covenant (Article 14.5), the word 'tribunal' has been added to show clearly that this provision does not concern offences which have been tried by bodies which are not tribunals within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention". The Director of Human Rights agreed with the Representative of Belgium. Furthermore, the Dutch proposal was not new; it had been considered several times by the experts, who had seen fit to reject it. He drew attention on this point to the following: CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 32 - Item 11

Up until the 14th meeting of the Committee of Experts for the Extension of the Rights Embodied in the European Convention on Human Rights (DH-EX) in February 1982, the draft version of this Article (then Article 3) had contained the phrase "convicted of a criminal offence/coupable d'une infraction". For the purpose of bringing the two language versions into line, the Committee had then had two proposals for the French text to consider, viz "déclarée coupable dans une procédure pénale par un tribunal" and "déclarée coupable d'une infraction pénale par un tribunal". It had chosen the second. At the 15th meeting of DH-EX (June 1982), the Dutch expert had proposed restricting the reference to "criminal proceedings". In their written comments submitted to the CDDH (CDDH(82)34 Add), the Netherlands had made the same remarks as were now being put to the Deputies. Discussion in the CDDH (November 1982) had focused on the explanatory report, particularly on the passage mentioned by the Belgian Representative. The explanatory report adopted at the 14th meeting of DH-EX had read "...to show clearly that this provision only concerns offences which have been tried by tribunals, and not disciplinary sanctions". At the 15th meeting of the DH-EX, this passage of the explanatory report had been altered to read: "to show clearly that this provision does not concern offences which have been tried by administrative bodies". In the CDDH, the Netherlands expert proposed adding "by administrative or disciplinary bodies". The CDDH had found that the most satisfactory course was to specify that "tribunal" was to be understood in the same sense as in Article 6 of the Convention. He added that acceptance of the Dutch proposal could give rise to a translation problem. "In criminal proceedings" ought normally to be rendered by "dans une procédure pénale" but in Article 4 (to which the Netherlands referred in their comments), it had been translated by "pénalement". After taking soundings, the Chairman noted that there was a preference in favour of deferring this item to the next meeting rather than to the April meeting. Decision The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels). CONFIDENTIAL - 33 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 12a 12. EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS a. Assembly Recommendation 970 (Concl(83)366/20 and CM(84)4 and 44)

Decision The Deputies adopted the following reply to Recommendation 970 on cases brought under the European Convention on Human Rights: "The Committee of Ministers has examined Recommendation 970 on cases brought under the European Convention on Human Rights and wishes to reply as follows: Ad paragraph 12(i): 1. The Committee of Ministers has itself already recognised the need to give high priority to improving the procedure under the European Convention on Human Rights and to the efficiency of the Secretariat. It has kept these matters under review over the years as the workload has increased and it continues to encourage action aimed at solving these problems. 2. With regard to the staffing and organisation of the Secretariat of the Commission, when adopting the budget for 1984 the Committee of Ministers agreed to a proposal that the work on applications should henceforth be organised in two Divisions rather than one. Ad paragraph 12(ii): 3. The Committee of Experts for the improvement of the procedure under the European Convention on Human Rights (DH-PR), a subordinate committee of the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH), is studying as a matter of priority ways of assisting the organs of the Convention to cope with their increasing workload. The Committee of Ministers has previously provided information on the progress of the DH-PR's work in its replies to Written Questions Nos. 240, 248 and 261 by Lord Northfield. 4. During its last few meetings the DH-PR has concentrated on the examination of medium-term measures for improving and in particular expediting the procedure of the European Commission of Human Rights. Certain of the measures considered would entail amendments to the Convention. Consequently, a draft amending Protocol was drawn up, on which both the Commission and Court were consulted. At its most recent meeting, held from 6 to 10 February 1984, the DH-PR completed work on the draft amending Protocol. It will now be considered by the CDDH. 5. The attention of member States' governments has been drawn to the concern of the Assembly reflected in paragraph 12(iii) of the Recommendation."

CONFIDENTIAL

- 35 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 12b

b. Written Question No. 268 by Lord Northfield on cases brought under the Human Rights Convention (Concl(84)366/21, CM(83)190 and Add. and CM(84)45)

Decision The Deputies adopted the following reply to Written Question No. 268 by Lord Northfield on cases brought under the Human Rights Convention: "1. Since the reply of the Committee of Ministers to Written Question No. 261 by the author of the present Question, the Committee of Experts for the improvement of the procedure under the European Convention on Human Rights (DH-PR) has held three further meetings. At its most recent meeting (6-10 February 1984), the DH-PR completed work on a draft amending Protocol to the Convention concerning the procedure of the Commission of Human Rights and, to a lesser extent, that of the Court. Both the Commission and Court were consulted in the course of the preparation of this text. The DH-PR has submitted the draft Protocol to the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) for consideration. 2. With regard to point 2 of Written Question No. 268, it is pointed out that the latter was tabled before the Deputies discussed and adopted the budget for 1984. The Committee of Ministers has now agreed to a proposal that the work on applications in the Secretariat of the European Commission of Human Rights should henceforth be organised in two Divisions rather than one. 3. As stated in the draft budget for 1984 (CM(83)152, page 33), the Commission's requirements for additional staff are greater than could realistically be presented in that draft budget given the difficult budgetary situation, but they will be examined again in the context of the 1985 and 1986 draft budgets. 4. The reply of the Committee of Ministers to Assembly Recommendation 970 on cases brought under the European Convention on Human Rights supplements this reply."

CONFIDENTIAL - 37 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 13 13. HANDBOOK ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE POLICE

The Representative of Belgium requested that no decision be taken at this meeting on the draft handbook on human rights and the police, since the draft had reached his authorities too late for them to examine it. The Representative of France agreed with the Representative of Belgium. He also asked when the French version of the handbook would be ready. The Representative of Italy supported what the two previous speakers had said and asked whether the appropriation of FF 50,000 frozen for the handbook covered only the French and English versions. The Representative of Denmark said that her authorities hoped that the handbook, for which there was a need in her country, would be published as soon as possible; she accordingly favoured releasing the appropriation. The Representative of Austria agreed with the Representative of Denmark and requested that, if discussion of the handbook had to be postponed, a decision nonetheless be taken as soon as possible. Answering the questions put to him, the Director of Human Rights said that the French version of the handbook should be ready towards the end of February. The appropriation of FF 50,000 covered only the French and English versions. However, at meetings on the project, several experts had expressed a wish to have the handbook translated into other languages, possibly in collaboration with the Council of Europe. In reply to the Representative of Ireland, who had asked whether the handbook would be published under the authority of the Committee of Ministers or the Secretary General, the Director of Human Rights said that this was a Council of Europe publication under the Secretary General's authority. As the preface indicated, the author of the handbook had followed the instructions of the Committee of Experts for the Promotion of Education and Information in the field of Human Rights (DH-ED) in preparing it, but the views expressed did not commit the Organisation. It was a practice generally followed in international organisations and in the Council of Europe to indicate that the opinions expressed in publications did not necessarily reflect those of Governments or of the organisation as such. He gave the example of a recent ILO publication and suggested that this line should be followed. CONFIDENTIAL

CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 38 - Item 13

In answer to a comment by the Representative of Austria, the Director of Human Rights said that the author's name usually appeared, not on the cover but on the first page. He proposed that this practice be followed in the handbook. Decision The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels). CONFIDENTIAL - 39 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *14

*14. AD HOC COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS TO EXCHANGE VIEWS ON THE DRAFT CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE (CAHTT) Meeting report (Strasbourg, 1-2 December 1983) (CM(84)1)

The Representative of Greece stated that his government firmly believed that Articles 19 and 20 of the draft United Nations Convention against Torture, dealing with the supervisory machinery, should be compulsory. The representative of the Human Rights Directorate said that almost all the countries in the "Western Europe and others" group in the United Nations supported the Greek delegation's position. The proposal to make Articles 19 and 20 optional had been made by the Soviet delegation in the Working Party on the draft Convention set up by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Decision The Deputies took note of the report of the ad hoc Committee of Experts to exchange views on the draft Convention against torture (CAHTT) (CM(84)1) and agreed to forward it to governments for information.

CONFIDENTIAL - 41 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 15 15. DRAFT RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84).... ON PRINCIPLES ON TELEVISION ADVERTISING (Concl(84)366/23, CM(83)220 and Add.)

The Chairman drew attention to the comments and proposals which the Secretariat had included in the Notes on the agenda for this item (Notes No. 4835) in response to certain points that had been made during the discussion at the previous meeting (Concl(84)366/23). The Representative of Liechtenstein felt that the Secretariat's proposed modification to the explanatory memorandum to the draft Recommendation represented an improvement to the definition of its scope. However, he would nevertheless have to make a statement of interpretation in this connection when the draft Recommendation, which his authorities could accept, was adopted. The Representative of Austria fully supported the Secretariat proposal, which replaced the one he himself had made at the previous meeting, to include in the preamble to the Recommendation a paragraph reading: "Considering the importance of the portrayal of women and men by the media, particularly in television advertisements". The Secretariat's proposal had been welcomed by the Chairmen of both the Committee on Equality between Women and Men (CAHFM) and the Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDMM). The Representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany and the United Kingdom said that they had not yet received instructions concerning the proposals made by the Secretariat in the Notes on the agenda, which had been issued only on 15 February 1984. The former added, however, that he was already in a position to approve the draft Recommendation itself, but that he still had difficulties as to the question of approving publication of the explanatory memorandum. The Representative of France said that the Deputies appeared to be close to agreement on the text of the draft Recommendation. It was a very important text, and would be the first Recommendation to the governments of the member States on this subject, which was of burning topicality. He would like to see it adopted as soon as possible. The Representative of Spain shared the French view. The draft Recommendation was fully in line with a statement his government had issued on the subject on 2 February 1984. The Chairman appealed to delegations which had not yet received instructions to seek to obtain them, at least on the text of the draft Recommendation itself, before the end of the present meeting. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 42 - Item 15

Adoption of the Recommendation At a later stage of the meeting, the Representative of the United Kingdom announced that the text of the draft Recommendation incorporating the new preambular paragraph proposed by the Secretariat was acceptable to his authorities. The Chairman ascertained that all delegations were now in a position to accept the draft Recommendation as amended and declared the text adopted unanimously. The Representative of Liechtenstein said that his authorities were prepared to accept the Recommendation. They interpreted it in the sense that the principles set out therein applied irrespective of medium of transmission, the words "especially when transmitted by satellite" being purely explanatory. The Representative of Luxembourg said that his authorities considered that the existence of a wide variety of media was necessary in the interest of freedom of expression and information. Accordingly there was a need for independent television stations, which in turn needed advertising revenue for their financing. Thus freedom of expression in this field depended on economic independence. If television were a State monopoly throughout there would be a risk (it was only a risk, not an ineluctable consequence) that governments might achieve a monopoly over what was broadcast to the consequent detriment of freedom of expression and information. Hence the importance of independent television stations, and he recalled in this connection the Declaration on the Freedom of Expression and Information adopted by the Committee of Ministers at its 70th Session, on 29 April 1982, in paragraph II.d of which the member States had declared that among the objectives they sought to achieve in the field of information and mass media was "the existence of a wide variety of independent and autonomous media, permitting the reflection of a diversity of ideas and opinons". The Representative of Austria said that the existence of a State monopoly with regard to broadcasting did not in itself constitute a risk for the freedom of expression and information in Council of Europe member countries. Furthermore, if it was felt that independent television stations needed advertising revenue, it was also the case that in Austria the State television service relied on advertising revenue for 40% of its financing. The Chairman noted that there was no objection to the Secretariat issuing an immediate press communiqué announcing the adoption of the Recommendation. Publication of the explanatory memorandum The Representative of Luxembourg said that the introductory section of the explanatory memorandum, ie the text from page 7 to the end of the third paragraph on page 10 of the Addendum to CM(83)220, represented lengthy and unnecessary historical background material that was not of direct relevance to the text of the Recommendation itself. He proposed that that section should be deleted, which would leave in the explanatory memorandum only the passages which did in fact explain the text of the Recommendation. CONFIDENTIAL - 43 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 15

The Representative of Austria could not see what the grounds for objecting to the introductory section might be. It simply recalled certain undisputed facts, and indeed even quoted or drew upon final communiqués adopted at Ministerial sessions of the Committee of Ministers. The Representative of Switzerland shared the views of his Austrian colleague. He added that although it may be felt that the introductory section was not absolutely necessary for an understanding of the text of the provisions of the Recommendation, this would in itself be no justification for deleting it. The Secretariat representative recalled that it was standard practice to include in the explanatory memoranda to Recommendations of this type an introductory section giving not only the historical background to the Recommendation, ie the steps that had led up to its adoption, but also, and more importantly, explaining the context into which it fitted and in which it should be seen. This was often useful for the understanding of a Recommendation. However, the Secretariat was prepared to review the text of the explanatory memorandum in question in the light of the comments made by the Luxembourg delegation. The Representative of Sweden welcomed the Secretariat's offer to review the text. He suggested that in doing so it might usefully enter into informal contact with members of the CDMM which would be meeting in Strasbourg from 13-16 March 1984. The Chairman noted that there was agreement on the Swedish proposal. In practical terms it would mean that the Secretariat would not be able to report the outcome of its review in writing before the opening of the Deputies' next meeting. Meanwhile, he also noted that the modifications to the explanatory memorandum proposed by the Secretariat following points made by delegations at the previous meeting were acceptable. Decisions The Deputies i. adopted Recommendation No. R(84)3 to member States on Principles on Television Advertising, as it appears at Appendix IV to these Conclusions; CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 44 - Item 15 ii. instructed the Secretariat to review the text of the explanatory memorandum to Recommendation No. R(84)3 in the light of the points made during the discussion of the present item of the agenda and of informal contacts with members of the Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDMM) meeting in Strasbourg from 13-16 March 1984; iii. agreed to resume consideration of the question of publication of the said explanatory memorandum at A level at their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels). CONFIDENTIAL - 45 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *16

*16. AD HOC COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANIMALS (CAHPA) Report of the 13th meeting (Strasbourg, 23-25 November 1983) (CM(83)225)

The Representative of the United Kingdom, noting the decision taken by the Ad hoc Committee for the Protection of Animals (CAHPA) regarding the continuation of its work (CM(83)225, para 9), was not convinced of the usefulness of drafting one or more instruments on the protection of pet animals and accordingly could not guarantee that the United Kingdom would take part in this work. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany made the following statement: "The German authorities welcome the decision of the CAHPA (Ad hoc Committee for the Protection of Animals) to continue its work by drawing up one or more instruments on the protection of pet animals. However, the German authorities contend (as did the German expert in the CAHPA) that they still have very great interest in resolving or completing other major problems in the animal protection field. For instance, the German authorities hope that the CAHTA (Ad hoc Committee for the Transport of Animals) may soon complete its work on the transport of horses for slaughter, once the Commission of the European Communities has reported its own findings. Also concerning transport, but this time the transport of wild animals and national transport in general, the German authorities still maintain that it is necessary to resolve the problems still outstanding in this area. The German authorities accordingly propose that these two points be dealt with by the CAHPA experts. For reasons of efficiency and money-saving, they should not be dealt with by the CAHTA but by working parties answerable to the CAHPA. The German authorities wish to take this opportunity of suggesting that all new problems of animal protection be handled by working parties and their findings submitted to the CAHPA for approval and adoption. At a time of budgetary restrictions, it is not desirable to set up cumbersome machinery or to extend the terms of reference of expert committees if the same results can be achieved more quickly and cheaply by more flexible, more economic working parties including only the member states interested in the subject. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 46 - Item *16

To conclude, in the German view, the CAHPA alone (ie without any help from the CAHTA) could supervise work on drawing up one or more instruments on the protection of pet animals at the same time as work on transport problems." The Representatives of France and Spain were in favour of drafting one or more instruments on pet animals. The Chairman suggested that the Secretariat pass on the German delegation's comments to the CAHPA. The Director of Legal Affairs agreed with the Chairman's suggestion. The CAHPA was aiming mainly at producing one or more Recommendations on the protection of pet animals. Where animal transport was concerned, paragraph 6 of the CAHPA's report said that there were enough binding international instruments already in this field and there was no point in adding to them. A CAHTA meeting appeared only as a token entry in the 1984 budget. It could not in fact be convened until the outcome of work at present being done by the Commission of the European Communities was known. It was perhaps worth mentioning that that committee's attendance expenses were paid by governments. The CAHTA had been set up in 1981 to enable Poland and other East European countries to take part, since their help was needed for solving these problems, while keeping them separate from the work of the CAHPA. On the subject of working methods, the CAHPA had already considered using working parties and made budgetaray proposals accordingly, which the Committee of Ministers had agreed to for 1984. The CAHPA could obviously take this line further in 1985 if the Deputies thought it desirable. Summing up, the Chairman said that the Deputies interpreted the CAHPA's decision as referring to the drawing up of one or more Recommendations. Decisions The Deputies i. took note of the decision reached by the ad hoc Committee of Experts for the Protection of Animals (CAHPA) to continue its activities with the preparation of one or more instruments on the protection of pet animals (CM(83)225, paragraph 9); ii. took note of the report of the 13th meeting of the CAHPA (CM(83)225) as a whole. CONFIDENTIAL - 47 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *17 *17. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON LEGAL CO-OPERATION (CDCJ) Report of the 14th meeting (Strasbourg, 28 November - 2 December 1983) (CM(84)8 and Add. I, II and Corr. and III)

The Representative of Italy proposed that the title of the Recommendation on parental responsibilities should be changed to "Recommendation on the responsibility of parents towards their children", on the ground that the existing title might give rise to certain ambiguities. It might be thought, for example, that the Recommendation also referred to the problems of civil or other liability of parents for the acts of their children. The Representative of the Netherlands made the following statement: "1. In the opinion of my authorities the third sentence of paragraph 36 of the explanatory memorandum which concerns Principle 9 of the draft Recommandation on parental responsibilities (see page 18 of Add. I to CM(84)8) should read as follows: "An example of other measures could be a decision by the competent authority or legislation providing, where appropriate, for the exercise of these responsibilities to be conditional on the decision of a competent authority, or to be granted to a third person". Thus we propose the addition of the words underlined. This would make it clear in the explanation that where the parent who exercises alone parental responsibility dies the possibility exists for national law to stipulate that the surviving parent will be entitled to exercise these responsibilities only by decision of a judge. Such a situation is typical after a divorce. Under Netherlands law a decision of a judge is always necessary to entitle the surviving parent to the responsabilities. Sometimes these parents have not seen their children for years. The possibility for exception as it stands now in the explanation is not sufficient to defend the Netherlands system, which means a decision from a judge in every case. 2. With regard to Principle 11 of the draft Recommendation itself (page 8), we propose that the word "normally" be replaced by "in principle". The same applies to paragraph 15 of the explanatory memorandum (page 12). This principle stipulates that a parent will normally be informed of the exercise of responsibilities which he does not have. This if he so wishes and in any case if it concerns matters of importance to the child. The principle was formulated only at the last stage of the discussion and is much broader than earlier formulations. We propose this amendment because it would not be in the interest of the child CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 48 - Item *17

for there to be a general right of information as results from Principle 11. It should be possible to exercise such a right only in certain cases. In the Netherlands there are plans to regulate by law the right to information of the parent who does not exercise parental responsibilities. This especially in the case of a divorce." The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs, referring to the Netherlands delegation's proposal to amend paragraph 36 of the explanatory memorandum concerning the Recommendation, explained that that paragraph had been drafted to cover all the systems obtaining in Europe in the event of death of one parent where parental responsibility was shared by both parents. In one group of countries a judicial decision was always necessary to assign parental responsibility to the surviving parent. Legislation in another group of countries made the assignment of responsibility to the surviving parent automatic, except in the event of judicial intervention if the interests of children dictated some other decision. He accordingly proposed that the existing wording of paragraph 36 should be retained or that the example should be deleted but that the Netherlands amendment should not be adopted since it covered only some of the European legal systems. The second amendment proposed by the Netherlands was also unacceptable as Principle 11, and indeed the entire Recommendation, tended to make both parents equally concerned by the fate of the child although duties towards the child were shared by them. The Recommendation thus obliged parents to co-operate for the good of the child, unless there were objective factors to prevent this. The word "normally" expressed this situation well, since the duty to inform would cease when objective factors (eg geographical distance of the other parent, the impossibility of finding that parent, repeated requests for information simply to bother the parent with whom the child lived) justified such cessation. The phrase "in principle" proposed by the Representative of the Netherlands would introduce a subjective discretionary power to decide whether a duty to provide information existed in a particular case. It was for this reason that the CDCJ had preferred the word "normally" to the phrase "in principle". The Italian proposal would have the effect of limiting the scope of parental responsibilities only within the parent-child relationship. It would therefore be contrary to the basic idea of the Recommendation that the accomplishment of certain acts with respect to the children would entail a duty to accomplish acts with respect to third parties. The proposal should therefore not be accepted if it was desired that the actual scope of the Recommendation be indicated in the title. CONFIDENTIAL - 49 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *17

Decisions The Deputies i. noted that the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) had executed the terms of reference assigned to it by Decision No. CM/305/230683 and agreed to examine at A level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels) Assembly Recommendation 951 on the voting rights of nationals of Council of Europe member States; ii. authorised publication of the proceedings of the XIIIth Colloquy on European Law on the "protection of cultural property under international law" (Delphi, 20-22 September 1983); iii. authorised publication of the proceedings of the Colloquy on "insider trading" (Milan, 16-18 November 1983) (paragraphs 8-9 of CM(84)8); iv. adopted Recommendation No. R(84)4 of the Committee of Ministers to the member States on parental responsibilities, as it appears at Appendix V to these Conclusions, and authorised publication of the explanatory memorandum on the Recommendation as it appears at Appendix II to Addendum I to CM(84)8; v. taking into account decisions i to iv above and the decisions taken at their 366th meeting (January 1984, Items 24 and 27), took note of the report of the 14th meeting of the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) (Strasbourg, 28 November - 2 December 1983) as a whole (CM(84)8 and Add. I, II and Corr. and III). When Recommendation No. R(84)4 was adopted (decision iv above), in application of Article 10.2.C. of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, - the Representatives of Denmark, Liechtenstein, Norway and the United Kingdom reserved the right of their governments to comply or not with the first paragraph of Principle 9 as set out in the Appendix to the Recommendation; - the Representative of the Netherlands reserved the right of his government to comply or not with Principle 11 as set out in the Appendix to the Recommendation.

CONFIDENTIAL - 51 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *18

*18. DRAFT RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84)... ON THE PRINCIPLES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE: FUNCTIONING OF JUSTICE (Concl(83)362/22, 364/11, CM(83)146 and Add II)

The Representatives of Belgium and the Netherlands stated that they were now able to accept the draft Recommendation on the principles of civil procedure designed to improve the functioning of justice (Appendix I to Addendum II to CM(83)146) subject to a reservation concerning the second sentence of Principle 5. The Representative of the United Kingdom said she would abstain when the draft Recommendation was put to the vote. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany made the following statement: "The German authorities maintain their position that the draft Recommendation is acceptable to them. They are in favour of adopting it in spite of the reservations and abstentions of some delegations, because they think that it is better to adopt a Recommendation under such circumstances than to have no Recommendation at all. With regard to the criticism of the British delegation during the 364th meeting of the Deputies (November 1983, item 11) that the text of the draft Recommendation contained only general statements, the importance of which was not obvious, my authorities feel that this opinion is perhaps a little too critical taking into account the fact that a Recommendation, in contrast to a Convention, is meant to give only political guidelines. On the other hand, the German authorities share the view implied in the British criticism that it is questionable whether the future work of the Committee of Experts on the working of the judicial system (CJ-FJ) can produce fruitful results if it was not realised that more critical yardsticks would have to be applied to this work. The German delegation indicated this necessity already during the last session of the CDCJ when it pointed out that the evaluation of replies to a comprehensive questionnaire by the Secretariat did not at all provide a suitable basis for further action." Decisions The Deputies i. adopted Recommendation No. R(84)5 on the principles of civil procedure designed to improve the functioning of justice, as it appears at Appendix VI to these Conclusions; CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 52 - Item *18 ii. authorised publication of the explanatory memorandum relating to the Recommendation as it appears at Appendix II to Addendum II to CM(83)146.

When Recommendation No. R(84)5 was adopted (decision (i) above), the Representatives of Belgium and the Netherlands, in application of Article 10.2.c of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, reserved the right of their government to comply or not with the second sentence of Principle 5 as set out in the Appendix to the Recommendation. CONFIDENTIAL - 53 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *19

*19. CONFERENCE ON PROBLEMS RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF LEGISLATION ON DATA PROTECTION Proposal by the Spanish delegation (CM(84)33)

The Representative of the United Kingdom had no objection to raise to the Spanish proposal to organise a conference in Madrid on problems relating to the development and application of legislation on data protection. She was more concerned about: the organisation of such conferences mushrooming in the future as various countries prepared their own legislation on this subject. There seemed no point in assembling the same experts repeatedly at short intervals to discuss the same topics. This kind of conference should not be allowed to become a habit. The Director of Legal Affairs said that the Convention for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal date had already been ratified by four States. It would enter into force upon deposit of the 5th ratification, which would enable the consultative committee provided for in Article 18 to be set up. That committee would provide the experts with a forum in which to discuss their problems and might obviate the need for any further conferences in the data protection field. The Representative of the Netherlands had some misgivings about the usefulness of the conference under examination. He agreed with some of the arguments put forward by the British delegation. He hoped that the conference would at least be well prepared. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany agreed with the Representatives of the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Decisions The Deputies i. authorised the Secretariat to provide the secretariat for the Conference on problems relating to the development and application of legislation on data protection (Madrid, April 1984) along the lines indicated in CM(84)33 and within the limits of the appropriations open under the 1984 budget; CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 54 - Item *19

ii. authorised the following amounts to be charged to the appropriation under Sub-head 78 of the budget (technical assistance in the framework of balanced development in Europe): a. the amount necessary to cover the travelling and subsistance expenses of one expert from Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Turkey for three days; b. the amount necessary to cover the travelling and participation expenses of three scientific experts. CONFIDENTIAL - 55 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 20

20. AD HOC COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON GENETIC ENGINEERING (CAHGE) Report of the 1st meeting (Strasbourg, 13-16 December 1983) (Concl(83)360/13, CM(84)10) a. Amendment to the CAHGE's title The Representatives of Switzerland and Denmark agreed with the proposed amendment to the CAHGE's title. The Representatives of Norway, Liechtenstein and Sweden could agree to the proposed amendment, but thought that the committee's terms of reference should also be modified accordingly. The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs explained that, in the opinion of the CAHGE, the term "genetic engineering" was too restrictive because it did not cover embryology (embryo manipulations in the case of in vitro fertilisation). On the other hand, the term placed undue emphasis on the problems of safety in recombinant DNA research: the guidelines adopted by most States on biological and physical containment appeared to be satisfactory. The CAHGE thought that the proposed new title would better describe the subject matter and, by stating that ethical and legal problems were dealt with, avoid overlapping with work done elsewhere. If a modification of the terms of reference was considered necessary, this might consist in inserting the same wording of the title in the terms of reference. The Chairman suggested amending the title only, in the light of explanations given by the CAHGE in document CM(84)10 para 7. This would avoid the complicated procedure for amending terms of reference. The CAHGE would of course be informed at its next meeting of the Deputies' discussion on this point. b. CAHGE's programme of future activities The Representative of Norway considered that, for the very reasons expressed by the CAHGE, the matter of the safety of recombinent DNA research should be dropped from the programme. The Representative of the United Kingdom shared the above view and added that the CAHGE should concentrate on genetic screening and the manipulation of human embryos in vitro, under the general title of human genetics. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 56 - Item 20 c. CAHGE's composition The Representative of Sweden noted that the CAHGE had not itself expressed any complaint about its composition, and insisted on the freedom of governments to designate whomever they wish, it being also difficult to define who was an authority on ethics. He was therefore satisfied with the present composition of the CAHGE, supported in this by the Representative of the Netherlands. The Representative of Switzerland said that the present composition of the CAHGE was not satisfactory, and that a greater number of authorities on ethics was desirable, though he was aware of the difficulties facing the governments. Since there was not one single infallible expert on ethics, several authorities should be present in the committee to represent the ethical spectrum of the basic values on which our society was founded. The Representative of France said several authoritative voices on ethics would be welcome in the CAHGE. The Representative of Denmark shared the concern of the Secretariat on the composition of the CAHGE and suggested that a smooth solution should be found by way of informal contacts among the bureau of the CAHGE, the governments and the Secretariat. The Representative of the United Kingdom was surprised to hear that nobody, apart from the observer from the Holy See, was considered to be an authority on ethics, and this in spite of the presence of a university professor of law and two senior judges. The real nature of the problem being medical, he was satisfied with the present composition; he even thought there were too many lawyers. The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs, answering a question from the Representative of Switzerland, recalled that the Deputies had established a procedure for the convocation of the CAHGE, under which the governments were to be invited to appoint their experts well before the date of the meeting and informed of the Deputies' decision that the Secretariat would then suggest possible modifications to the delegations in order to keep a fair balance of the three categories of participants (biologists, lawyers and authorities on ethics). Out of the seventeen member States which had actually appointed experts, six had done so two weeks before the meeting and seven during the week preceding it, making it impossible for the Secretariat to carry out the second step of the envisaged procedure. This had resulted in an overwhelming majority of biologists attending the meeting, against a minority of lawyers and only one authority on ethics. The CAHGE had not raised the question of its composition because it was natural that a committee composed of a large majority of biologists was unlikely to say that there were too many biologists, especially when they believed that they were those principally concerned with the problem. Moreover, the unbalanced composition of the committee had not caused any difficulty at the first meeting since the task had been essentially to identify the questions to be included in the work programme. Divergencies in opinions among the three groups might become more apparent in the future when the committee would be called upon to propose possible solutions to the problems. CONFIDENTIAL - 57 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 20

Concerning the definition of "moraliste", the best French dictionary indicated that they were people who wrote on moral subjects and not persons who, like any individual, had moral principles. The presence of authorities on ethics was indeed necessary, to take account of the various facets of the matter. For example, at its next meeting the CAHGE would discuss the legal status of the embryo. In order to establish whether, from a normative point of view, an embryo was a "person" the CAHGE had to examine the biological aspects of the problem (from which moment did life begin?), as well as the legal aspects (legal protection of the embryo, from the point of view both of existing law and of the law as it ought to be) and the moral implications (is an embryo a human being?). The responsibility for the composition of the Committee had always been considered to belong to the Committee of Ministers. On the other hand, it is very difficult to conceive that experts already appointed could be changed. Therefore, the Secretariat would like to put forward proposals which, without modifying the present composition of the Committee, would ensure a more balanced representation of the three interested groups (biologists, lawyers, specialists in ethics). As far as the lawyers were concerned, the Secretariat would make an appeal to Portugal (which had not yet appointed any expert) to appoint a lawyer and to Austria, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden to consider the possibility of appointing a lawyer as a second expert at their own expense. As for the authorities on ethics, the question could be solved thanks to the appointment of three consultant experts to assist the committee. Since the Catholic point of view was already represented by the Holy See, the Secretariat suggested the choice of a well-known Strasbourg Rabbi (who had taken part in the Copenhagen hearing organised by the Assembly), the President of the Directory of the Augsbourg Confession in Strasbourg, and a University Professor from Copenhagen to represent secular ethics (he had also participated in the Copenhagen Assembly's hearing). Since the first two resided in Strasbourg, the expenses of only the third should be borne by the Council of Europe without additional charges for the Budget since the DAJ would endeavour to cover them by using existing allocations. The Chairman recalled that at a previous meeting, in his capacity as Representative of Denmark, he had proposed that sociologists should participate in the CAHGE, because it was the ethics of society rather than the ethics of the individual which mattered. The Representative of Belgium held the view that the composition of the CAHGE should be changed along the lines expressed by the Deputy Director of Legal Affairs; to that end, Belgium was ready to change its own delegation to the CAHGE. The Representative of Switzerland said that the CAHGE did not need "professional" moralists of whatever category, but people who, being authorities in their own field, had made their opinion on ethical matters known through publications and the like. By way of example, he mentioned the German physician C.F. von Weizsäcker and the Anglo-Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski. Only personalities of that calibre could usefully contribute the general ethical point of view of our society. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 58 - Item 20

The Representative of Turkey wished to tackle this question only from a secular point of view. If however it was thought that the ethical point of view had to include the religious one, it would be necessary then not to forget that in the member States of the Council of Europe other religions did exist which ought to be equally represented. The Representative of Greece said that if authorities on ethics were to include representatives of religions, all religions should be represented. The Representative of the United Kingdom, who was also against the idea of experts being chosen and appointed by the Secretariat, supported these views. The Representative of Sweden said his government might be ready to appoint a lawyer as a second expert, if really necessary, but the opinion of the CAHGE should be sought first. He noted that eight lawyers were already members of the committee. The Deputy Director of Legal Affairs admitted that his proposal did not cover the whole range of religious beliefs, but this was due to the fact that, for budgetary reasons, it was thought expedient to propose personalities who were resident in Strasbourg. The Representative of Liechtenstein welcomed the presence of an observer of the Holy See, who was an expert on ethics. But he agreed with the Secretariat that more members of the CAHGE should be authorities on ethics. In most countries, neither the studies of medicine nor of law include moral or ethics as an own subject. The Representative of Portugal expressed appreciation for the practical approach of the Secretariat. He also recalled his previous remark on the presence of an observer from the Holy See on the proposed work of the CAHGE: for the Holy See in fact an embryo was a human being; for the Council of Europe (notably under the Convention on Human Rights) it was not. The only values, culture and traditions which should guide the work of the CAHGE were those common to all the member States as embodied in the Human Rights Convention and notably in its preamble. Decisions The Deputies i. amended CAHGE's title to read as follows: "Ad hoc Committee of Experts on Ethical and Legal Problems relating to Human Genetics (CAHGE)"; CONFIDENTIAL - 59 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 20 ii. agreed to resume consideration at A level at their 375th meeting (September 1984 - A and B levels) of the question of the CAHGE's terms of reference, programme of future activities and composition in the light of the opinions which the CAHGE may express at its next meeting (12-15 June 1984) on the points raised by the Deputies at their present meeting; iii. having regard to the above decisions, took note of the report on the first meeting of the CAHGE (CM(84)10) as a whole.

CONFIDENTIAL - 61 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 21

21. 3RD CONFERENCE OF EUROPEAN MINISTERS OF LABOUR Proposal of the Spanish authorities (CM(84)22)

The Representative of Switzerland said that in the view of his authorities the date suggested by Spain for the 3rd Conference of European Ministers of Labour (late November or early December 1985) did not fall within the most favourable period; it came at a very busy time for Swiss Ministers. He accordingly proposed considering whether the Conference could not be held at the beginning of 1986 or even later in that year. The Representative of Spain said that 1986 would be an election year in his country. The Representative of Sweden asked at what intervals such a conference ought to be held. The Conferences of Ministers of Social Security, for example, were held at least three years apart. The Representative of the United Kingdom also said that a three-year interval should be adhered to. If the Spanish authorities could not agree to the Conference being held in 1986, could they postpone it to 1987? There were a considerable number of ministerial conferences planned for 1985. The Representative of Switzerland shared the concern expressed as to the frequency of ministerial conferences although his authorities were not opposed to the holding of this Conference as such. The Representative of Portugal said that the present economic crisis and the extent of the unemployment which it entailed fully justified making an exception in this case to the rule governing the frequency of ministerial conferences, supposing such a rule existed. The Representative of Spain said that the Conference could be envisaged for the end of 1985 or the beginning of 1986 and proposed that the Committee of Senior Officials be entrusted with proposing a precise date. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 62 - Item 21

The Representative of France was in agreement with the Spanish Government's proposals and stressed the extent and topical interest of the crisis, as his Portuguese colleague had done. He observed that neither the same Ministers nor the same national officials, nor the same Council of Europe departments, were concerned by the various ministerial conferences. The Representative of Austria fully agreed with the Representative of France. The Representative of the Netherlands agreed with the proposal to entrust preparation of the Conference once again to a committee of senior officials. Where Conference themes were concerned, his authorities considered that the Conference might also usefully discuss questions of unemployment among the young as well as the "third labour circuit" with its new forms of work. The Representative of Denmark said that she would prefer the Conference to deal exclusively with unemployment among the young. The Representative of Portugal welcomed the Dutch and Danish proposals. The 2nd Conference had been partly devoted to the relationship between training and employment, more particularly discussing young people's transition to working life. It was also important to avoid duplication with the activities of other conferences of specialised ministers. The Representative of Switzerland proposed that the Steering Committee for Social Affairs (CDSO) be brought in on preparations for the Conference, which should begin without delay. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, in agreement with the Representative of Switzerland, said that the question of the Conference theme should be referred to the CDSO. He also emphasised the need to avoid duplication. The Representative of Ireland was in favour of the Conference being prepared by a committee of senior officials but thought that the CDSO could play a useful part as a "clearing house". He also drew attention to the holding in 1985 of the Conference of Ministers reponsible for Youth, which might also wish to deal with questions of youth unemployment. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs referred to the decision taken at the Deputies' 346th meeting (April 1982, item 21(d)) concerning the 2nd Conference and thought that the preparation of the 3rd Conference could well be tackled in the same way. This decision had included arrangements for liaison between the committee of senior officials and the CDSO. CONFIDENTIAL - 63 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 21

Following a suggestion by the Director, the Chairman said that the content of the Deputies' discussion on this item of their agenda would be forwarded to the committee of senior officials for their guidance. The Representative of Sweden drew attention to a preliminary draft Recommendation concerning the future Conference of Ministers of Labour adopted recently by the Assembly's Committee on Economic Affairs and Committee on Social and Health Questions. Those committees should also be informed of the Deputies' discussion on this item. Decisions The Deputies i. noted that the 3rd Conference of European Ministers of Labour would take place in Madrid at the invitation of the Spanish Minister of Labour at the end of 1985 or at the beginning of 1986; ii. agreed that the preparation of the 3rd Conference should be entrusted to a committee of senior officials, it being understood that the Steering Committee for Social Affairs (CDSO) should be consulted in an appropriate way on the preparatory work for the Conference; iii. authorised the Secretary General, whom paragraph 5 of Resolution (71)44 already authorises to provide secretarial services for the Conference of Ministers of Labour, to furnish the necessary administrative, operational and technical assistance for the 3rd Conference and for the preparatory work.

CONFIDENTIAL - 65 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 22 22. 2ND CONFERENCE OF EUROPEAN MINISTERS RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTH Report of the first meeting of the Committee of Senior Officials (Strasbourg, 24-25 November 1983) (CM(84)26)

With reference to decision (iv) below, the Representative of Belgium drew the Committee's attention to the advisability of limiting the number of Conferences of Specialised Ministers to which Monaco would be invited as an observer, while recognising that Monaco had attended the first Health Ministers' Conference as an observer in 1981. In respect of decisions (iv) and (v) below, the Representative of Sweden reminded the Committee that the necessary soundings would be carried out before invitations were issued to the non-member States and other international organisations mentioned, as to their wish to attend the Conference as observers. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs confirmed that the Senior Officials had considered that OECD would not be particularly concerned with a conference of which the themes would concentrate on mental health. Decisions The Deputies i. took note of the draft agenda of the 2nd Conference of European Ministers of Health (CM(84)26 Appendix III); ii. noted that the Conference would be held in Stockholm on 16-18 April 1985; iii. noted that the Assembly would be invited to send representatives to the Conference; iv. noted that there existed general consent within the Committee of Ministers as to the advisability of inviting Finland, the Holy See, Monaco, San Marino and Yugoslavia to participate as observers in the Conference; v. noted that there existed general consent within the Committee of Ministers as to the advisability of inviting the World Health Organisation (WHO) Regional Office for Europe, the European Communities (Commission and Council), the League of Red Cross Societies and UNICEF (Europe) to participate as observers in the Conference.

CONFIDENTIAL - 67 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *23

*23. EUROPEAN HEALTH COMMITTEE (CDSP) Report of the 14th meeting (Strasbourg, 21-24 November 1983) (CM(84)5 and Add)

The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs, in reply to a question from the Chairman, thought it would be preferable not to decide at that stage on the meeting to which approval of the revised Protocol to European Agreement No. 84 on the exchange of tissue-typing reagents would be deferred. Formal consultation of the European Economic Community might take some time, even though the presence of an observer from the Commission of the European Communities in the European Health Committee (CDSP) during the drafting of the revised protocol could be regarded as a positive sign. Decisions I. The Deputies i. adopted Resolution (84)1 on the continuation of the financial support for the European Bank of Frozen Blood of Rare Groups in Amsterdam, as it appears at Appendix VII to these Conclusions; ii. adopted Recommendation No. R(84)6 on the prevention of the transmission of malaria by blood transfusion, as it appears at Appendix VIII to these Conclusions; iii. took note of the Final Activity Report on Programmes of Education for Health aimed at Preventing Dependence and Addiction (SP-R-ET) (CM(84)5 Add. I); iv. authorised publication of the final report of the Select Committee of Experts on Programmes of Education for Health aimed at Preventing Dependence and Addiction (SP-R-ET) and of the appendices thereto (CDSP (83)20, Add. I and II) (see CM(84)5 Add. I); v. took note of the decision of the CDSP to set aside a small proportion of the total individual medical fellowship allocation for a maximum of three fellowships of an important and urgent nature which would be submitted by national health administrations during the budgetary year; CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 68 - Item *23 vi. took note of the CDSP's proposal to publish, every year, under the aegis of the Council of Europe, a strictly selected number of the best reports prepared by medical fellowship holders considered to be of exceptional technical interest at European level; vii. took note of the CDSP's proposal to the Secretary General for the draft Intergovernmental Programme of Activities for 1985 aiming at increasing the number of participants in the European Histocompatibility courses from 14 to 22 (subject to the facilities available in the receiving laboratory) so as to allow all member states and Finland to have one place at their disposal in these courses, and agreed to consider this proposal within the framework of the discussions on the said draft programme; viii. having regard to decisions (i)-(vii) above, took note of the report of the 14th meeting of the CDSP as a whole (CM(84)5 and Add.)- II. The Representatives of Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, Contracting Parties to European Agreement No. 84 on the Exchange of Tissue-typing Reagents, agreed to defer consideration of the revised Protocol to that Agreement until a future meeting of the Ministers' Deputies. CONFIDENTIAL - 69 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *24

*24. PUBLIC HEALTH COMMITTEE (PARTIAL AGREEMENT) (CD-P-SP) (Meeting for the purposes of the European Pharmacopoeia) Report of the 19th session (Strasbourg, 23 Novembre 1983) (CD-P-SP(83)48)

The Representative of the United Kingdom referred to draft Resolutions AP-CSP(83)3-5 (see CD-P-SP(83)48, Appendices B-D) fixing dates for the implementation of certain texts of the second edition of the European Pharmacopoeia, which had been circulated by the Secretariat for adoption by correspondence and stated that her authorities had been unable to approve those fixing 1 March 1984 as date of implementation owing to the short time avaibalble for completing the necessary procedure. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that several other States Party to the European Pharmacopoeia Convention had for various reasons been unable to approve the dates proposed. The European Pharmacopoeia Commission would reconsider the matter. He then referred to the discussion during the 365th meeting (Nov./Dec. 1983, item 23) on a proposed contingency fund for the replacement of technical equipment of the European Pharmacopoeia and recalled the decision taken to resume consideration of this subject and to invite Prof. Moreau, Chairman of the European Pharmacopoeia Commission for a hearing on that occasion. He understood that Prof. Moreau could be given a hearing at the 371st meeting of the Ministers' Deputies (May 1984 - A level). Decisions The Representatives on the Committee of Ministers of the 15 member States of the Council of Europe (*) which are Parties to the Convention on the elaboration of a European Pharmacopoeia i. took note of Resolutions AP-CSP(83)3 and 5, adopted by the Public Health Committee (Partial Agreement) (CD-P-SP), fixing dates for the implementation of revised and new texts of the European Pharmacopoeia (see item 3.1.1, Appendices B and D to CD-P-SP(83)48);

(*) - Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Finland is also a Party to the Convention. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 70 - Item *24 ii. took note of Resolution AP-CSP(83)4, adopted by the Public Health Committee (Partial Agreement) (CD-P-SP), fixing the date for the deletion of the monographs on "INSULINS" of the European Pharmacopoeia (see item 3.1.1, Appendix C to CD-P-SP(83)48); iii. noted that the CD-P-SP intended to adopt by correspondence five further Resolutions fixing dates for the implementation of texts in Fascicules 5 an 6 and of other texts of the second edition of the European Pharmacopoeia (see item 4); iv. taking into account decisions (i)-(iii) above, took note of the report of the 19th session of the Public Health Committee (Partial Agreement) (CD-P-SP) as a whole (CD-P-SP(83)48). CONFIDENTIAL - 71 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *25 *25. STEERING COMMITTEE ON INTRA-EUROPEAN MIGRATION (CDMG) Report of the 9th meeting (Strasbourg, 29 November - 2 December 1983) (CM(84)23)

Specific terms of reference of the Committee of Experts on the admission to employment of the spouses and children of migrant workers (MG-AE) The Representative of Denmark said that her country attached great importance to the work of the MG-AE and wondered whether it would be possible to add Denmark to the list (see CM(84)23 and Appendix III) of States whose experts' travel and subsistence allowances would be borne by the Council of Europe budget. The Chairman noted that the Deputies had taken note of Denmark's interest in the work of that committee and asked the Secretariat to invite the CDMG to consider the possibility of reviewing paragraph 9c of the specific terms of reference of the MG-AE accordingly. Draft Recommendation on the maintenance of migrants' cultural links with their country of origin and leisure facilities The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany made the following statement: "The German authorities can agree to the adoption of the draft Recommendation on the maintenance of migrants' cultural links with their countries of origin and leisure facilities (CM(84)23, Appendix IV). Certain reservations about the general idea of the Recommendation were set aside in view of the fact that - with one exception - the situation in Germany is already to a large extent in line with the specific requirements of the Recommendation. The exception concerns paragraph 5.2 where governments are asked to facilitate the reception of radio and TV programmes of countries of origin by means of, for example, the latest communication systems. The realisation of this request would cause not only political reservations but also technical problems regarding radio and TV frequencies etc. The German authorities therefore propose that this paragraph be deleted. If a majority were in favour of maintaining this paragraph, my delegation would have to make a reservation according to article 10.2.c. of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies. Regarding paragraph 6.3 the German authorities wish to state that co-operation to facilitate the creation of cultural centres should not be interpreted as an obligation to participate in the financing of these centres. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 72 - Item *25

In the English version two errors in the phrasing of the text should be corrected: In paragraph 3, last line, the words "and the" should be replaced by "can be". In paragraph 7.1, 2nd line, the word "co-operation" should be deleted." The Representative of Ireland said that his delegation approved the draft Recommendation. However, bearing in mind the particular resources and circumstances, including legislative, educational and socio-cultural factors, there might be certain provisions which would not lend themselves to practical implementation in the context of the Irish situation. However, all practical possibilities would be explored with a view to examining their feasibility. Moreover, he had no objection to the German proposal to delete paragraph 5.2. The Representative of the United Kingdom said that her authorities shared the views expressed by the Representative of Ireland. The Representative of Turkey said that her authorities fully supported all the provisions of the draft Recommendation and considered that paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4 in particular broke new ground. The Representative of Italy was pleased that the CDMG had been able to adopt the draft Recommendation after lengthy discussions. However, he would like to maintain paragraph 5.2 which corresponded to one of the main emphases of Italian policy towards migrants. The Representatives of Spain and Portugal shared this view. The Representative of Italy proposed deletion from paragraph 3 of the preamble the words "the entire environment contributes continuously to everyone's education and that". After some discussion, the Chairman noted that there was agreement to delete the words "entire" and "continuously" from paragraph 3 of the preamble. 2nd Conference of European Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs - illegal migration Referring to paragraph 32 of CM(84)23, the Representative of Switzerland observed that, following the Committee of Ministers' subsequent decision to make ad hoc arrangements for work by the Council of Europe on illegal migration, the CDMG would presumably not start any work of its own on this matter. The Secretary to the Committee recalled that at their 366th meeting (January 1984, item 30) the Deputies had agreed to examine, at one of their forthcoming meetings, the question of convening a first meeting of Senior Officials on the problem of illegal immigration and that they had further asked the CDMG to make proposals (in the course of the latter's examination of the conclusions of the 2nd Conference of European Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs) on the practical arrangements for organising meetings of Senior Officials on the problem of illegal migration. CONFIDENTIAL - 73 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *25 Vocational training Concerning the 1985 vocational training grants programme for student-instructors, to which he attached great importance, the Representative of Cyprus expressed his authorities' gratitude to Italy for accepting to be designated as host country. The Representative of Italy informed the Deputies that the programme would be carried out at the Pro Venetia Viva Centre. Decisions The Deputies i. adopted Recommendation No. R(84)7 on the maintenance of migrants' cultural links with their countries of origin and leisure facilities, as it appears at Appendix IX to these Conclusions; ii. took note of the indications given by the CDMG, in particular following the Second Conference of European Ministers responsible for Migration Affairs, as regards the implementation of its Programme of Activities and the possibility of proposals for modification of this Programme within the budgetary appropriations voted; iii. designated Italy as the host country and Cyprus, Greece, Portugal and Turkey as beneficiary countries for the implementation of the 1985 student/instructor programme in the light of the proposal made by the CDMG; iv. taking into account decisions (i)-(iii) above, took note of the report of the 9th meeting of the CDMG as a whole (CM(84)23).

When Recommendation No. R(84)7 was adopted (decision (i) above), the Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, in application of Article 10.2.c of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, reserved the right of his Government to comply or not with paragraph 5.2 of the Recommendation.

CONFIDENTIAL - 75 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *26

*26. EUROPEAN SOCIAL CHARTER Appointment of five members of the Committee of Experts set up in pursuance of Article 25 of the Charter (CM(84)21)

The Representative of Greece said that he wished to take this opportunity to inform the Deputies that on 23 February 1984, the Greek Parliament had agreed to the ratification of the European Social Charter. The instrument of ratification would soon be deposited with the Secretary General. He asked the Directorate of Press and Information Services to make an announcement about Greece's forthcoming ratification of the European Social Charter. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs expressed the Secretariat's pleasure with the information given by the Representative of Greece and said that he would contact the Directorate of Press and Information Services about making an announcement. Decision The Deputies adopted the following procedure for the appointment of five members of the Committee of Independent Experts to fill the five seats which will fall vacant on 18 September 1984: a. every member State will be entitled to communicate to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe by 1 April 1984 at the latest the names of five persons at most whom that State considers suitable for election, having regard to paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Charter and to the agreed rules concerning nationality; b. the Secretary General will then communicate the names he has received to the Parties to the Social Charter, asking each to nominate, before 15 May 1984, five candidates at most from the list of names with a view to filling the five vacancies in the Committee of Independent Experts, bearing in mind the agreed rules concerning nationality; c. the list of candidates nominated by the Parties to the Social Charter will then be communicated to the member States of the Council of Europe by the Secretary General, after which the Committee of Ministers will proceed, at A level at the Deputies' 374th meeting (June 1984 - A and B levels), to an election by secret ballot, each delegation being entitled to vote for five candidates at most; CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 76 - Item *26 d. the candidate or candidates having obtained an absolute majority of the votes cast and the highest number of votes will be declared elected; e. if one, or several of the seats remain vacant after the first ballot, a second ballot will be held among the remaining candidates, each governmental delegation being entitled to vote for a number of candidates equal to or less than the number of seats vacant, and the candidate or candidates having secured the highest number of votes will be declared elected; f. in pursuance of Article 25(4) of the Social Charter, the five new members will be elected for a term of six years beginning on 19 September 1984. CONFIDENTIAL - 77 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *27

*27. CULTURAL AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS OF POPULATIONS OF NOMADIC ORIGIN Written Questions No. 267, 269, 270 and 271 by Mr. Ramirez (Concl(83)366/32, CM(83)161 and Add., 187, 188, CM(84)11, 12 and 58)

General questions and status of nomads (CM(84)11, paragraph 19) The Representative of Belgium said that his delegation was able to approve the Secretariat's proposals. Belgium saw the matters raised by Mr. Ramirez as a human problem which had a typically European dimension, and would welcome any concrete contribution that the Council of Europe might be able to make towards improving the situation of that minority and also that of the underprivileged of the European "fourth world". This general social problem of nomads and social misfits which all our societies faced and which so far had been largely ignored by the Council of Europe should in future be taken into account in the intergovernmental programme along with other concerns and activities such as those in favour of migrants where the Council of Europe already had major achievements to its credit. Such a change of emphasis in the social field of the intergovernmental programme should lead, his delegation felt, to a more balanced use of resources and their progressive reallocation in favour of nomads and the European "fourth world". Gypsies were not recognised as a minority in Belgium, as the Belgian constitution did not refer to the concept of "ethnic minority". The Representative of the Netherlands said that his authorities were of the opinion that it was necessary to come to an international co-ordination of the national policies concerning gypsies. Several proposals in the docouments submitted to the Deputies and concerning an "Information Centre", a "European map of caravan sites for travelling people", and a "Mediator" would fit into such an international co-ordinated policy. However, from their point of view, any possible initiative ought to be neutral for the budget. In the Netherlands gypsies were recognised as a minority group as stated in the Minority Note which was presented to the Netherlands Parliament on 15 September 1983. Concerning Written question No. 269 submitted by Mr Ramirez, for the Netherlands' Government it was important to avoid prejudice and discrimination against gypsies. The Netherlands authorities tried to contribute to this through information from schools and local populations of those communities where there were gypsies. In the framework of an anti-discrimination policy the Netherlands Government recently decided to establish an "Anti-discrimination Institute" at national level. The activities of this institute would be aimed at all minorities. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 78 - Item *27

The Representative of Sweden suggested that Mr. Ramirez's questions as well as all the documentation relating thereto be passed on to Mr. J.P. Liégeois, a consultant who had been commissioned by the Council for Cultural Co-operation (CDCC) to produce two studies for 1984 - one on the socio-cultural characteristics of gypsies, another on the situation of gypsies in member States. The Representative of Norway emphasised the need for European co-operation in favour of nomads. Their problems were similar wherever they were living and had the same impact on European social structures. The Council of Europe should be able to help to improve the situation of all disadvantaged populations in Europe and take action along the lines suggested by the Representative of Belgium. Norway, for its part, recognised gypsies as a minority group. The Representative of Italy said that his Government attached great importance to improving the situation of nomads. Improvements had been made in Italy over a period of many years, notably through the elimination of obstacles in the way of the integration of gypsies into Italian society. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany agreed with the approach suggested by the Secretariat in the matter. The Representative of Cyprus, while specifying that there were no nomads in his country, also agreed with the Secretariat's suggestion. The Representative of Austria made the following statement: "1. There are no special laws or regulations in Austria concerning gypsies, who are thus protected in the same way as all other Austrians or foreigners, as the case may be. In particular, gypsies are afforded protection under the European Convention on Human Rights and the relevant Austrian constitutional laws. 2. Gypsies are not recognised as an ethnic minority or ethnic group under the Austrian Act on ethnic groups. According to this Act, only a group of persons 'residing' in or 'originating' from Austria, that is to say established in Austria for about three generations, can be recognised as an ethnic group. Moreover, no request for recognition as an ethnic group has been made by gypsies in Austria; in other words, the question of their recognition has not yet arisen in practice." The Representative of Greece said that nomads raised no particular problems in his country: they were Greek nationals, and there were no ethnic minorities in Greece that were recognised as such. CONFIDENTIAL - 79 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *27

The Representative of France said that the principle of equality before the law applied to all citizens without distinction. There was not therefore any particular status for nomads, nor could there be any. The Representative of the United Kingdom said that there were no officially recognised minorities in the United Kingdom; everyone was equal before the law. Although she did not yet have any precise instructions on the various proposals in CM(84)11, she could nevertheless state that her authorities did not regard these matters as priority ones and could not agree to funds being allocated to them. The Representative of Switzerland said that in her country there was no special status for nomads, nor any special measures applying to them. The Representative of Turkey said that gypsies had no special status in his country. They were equal before the law and were not subjected to any discrimination. The Representative of Portugal read out the Portuguese constitution's provisions on the equality of citizens before the law and the rights of aliens and stateless persons in Portugal. The Representative of Spain said that the Spanish constitution resembled other States' constitutions on this point. He was in favour of action being taken for the benefit of nomads along the lines suggested by the Secretariat. Proposal to hold a pluridisciplinary colloquy on nomads (CM(84)11, paragraphs 28, 18, 23 and 33) The Representative of Norway was in favour of holding such a colloquy, which would enable the questions raised by Mr. Ramirez to be discussed. In Norway the "Mediator" scheme had generally proved a success. The Steering Committee on Intra-European Migration (CDMG) should be made responsible for co-ordinating action in favour of nomads within the Council of Europe. The Representatives of Austria and Switzerland thought that a colloquy would be a means of identifying the real problems and ways of solving them. The Representative of Belgium thought that the colloquy should also serve to alert public opinion to the problems of nomads. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 80 - Item *27

The Representatives of Greece and Turkey thought that the suggestion to hold a colloquy should not be considered until the studies commissioned from Mr. J.P. Liégeois by the CDCC had been completed. The Deputy Director of Economic and Social Affairs thought that the CDMG might be made responsible for organising the colloquy. The Representative of the Netherlands said that as the gypsies in the Netherlands were not organised, the fundamental question of who could be considered as their representative had to be raised if a colloquy was proposed in which "representatives of nomads" had to participate. The Netherlands authorities tried to stimulate the gypsies to set up their own organisation. Before that a colloquy as proposed would be difficult to realize. He added that the necessity for an information centre at European level should be part of the study to be requested from the Steering Committee for Regional and Municipal Matters (CDRM) and the Steering Committee for Regional Planning (CDAT). He thought the proposal to appoint a "Mediator" a good one if it meant an official who followed and evaluated the developments in the Council of Europe countries and informed the interested parties. However, this should also be part of the proposed study. As far as the establishment of a "solidarity fund" (CM(84)11, paragraph 11) was concerned, the Netherlands authorities were studying the financial support of gypsies at national and local level. However, this question should be placed in a broad international framework and a study in this field should also concern the question of quotas. Resolution (75)13 on the social situation of nomads in Europe (CM(84)11, paragraph 7) The Representative of Austria suggested that a decision on whether Resolution (75)13 should be chosen for the review of follow-up action by governments be postponed to autumn 1984. The Representative of Greece did not think that the Secretariat was authorised to change the negative opinion expressed by the Steering Committee for Social Affairs (CDSO) on this subject. The Secretariat representative pointed out that the Secretariat had thought it appropriate to raise the possibility of a decision by the Deputies on the subject (CM(84)11, paragraph 7) in the light of the questions asked by Mr. Ramirez. The Representative of Switzerland did not think that Resolution (75)13 was a priority text. The danger of overburdening national administrations should also be borne in mind. CONFIDENTIAL - 81 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *27

The Representative of Norway was not convinced that Resolution (75)13 was very relevant in this context in view of its highly general terms. The Representatives of the Netherlands, Italy and Spain said that they could provide information on the action taken by their governments on Resolution (75)13. Request to the Steering Committee on Population (CDDE) for an opinion on Written Question No. 270 (CM(84)11, paragraph 23) The Representative of the Netherlands said that his authorities were convinced of the importance of demographic data for any policy. They could therefore support Mr. Ramirez's proposals and were ready to supply the information in their possession, even though it was not yet very extensive. The Representative of the United Kingdom could agree to this request on the understanding that the CDDE was being asked for an opinion on the feasibility of providing answers to the questions raised by Mr. Ramirez. In reply to a question by the Representative of Switzerland concerning the reliability of the figure advanced by Mr. Ramirez concerning the size of the gypsy population in Europe (12 million), the Secretariat representative expressed the view that Mr. Ramirez was referring to gypsy populations of European origin living in Europe or elsewhere. This could be inferred from paragraph 11 of Question No. 270, where Mr. Ramirez emphasised the need for a serious attempt by the CDDE to obtain all the statistical data necessary in order to ascertain "the size of the gypsy population in America, a majority of whom are of European origin." Reproduction of a European map of caravan sites for travelling people (par. 17 of CM(84)11) The Representative of Netherlands said in his view the question was too limited. It suggested that only travelling gypsies were concerned, while no attention was given to the related problem of sedentary people. The proposal to create facilities for travelling gypsies was based on assumptions which needed further study. It was his impression that gypsies did not travel out: of free will but were forced to do so because they were admitted in one place for a short time only. These remarks led to the conclusion that it would be useful to give a broader instruction to the steering committees involved, i.e. to undertake a study of the typical difficulties in the living situation of gypsies, whether they travel or not. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 82 - Item *27

The Representative of Switzerland recommended not overloading the CDRM and CDAT with a matter that was not yet quite clear and should be studied further. The Chairman suggested that the Deputies leave aside, for the time being at least, the proposal in paragraph 17 of CM(84)11. Seminar on problems of community relations in areas with populations of mixed ethnic origin and on alerting the public to the problems of migrant workers (autumn 1984) (Question for oral reply put to the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers by Mr. Ramirez during the Assembly Session on 1 February 1984) The Representatives of Greece, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Turkey did not consider it advisable to confuse issues by equating nomads with migrant workers and increasing the number of discussion forums. The Representatives of Belgium and Portugal thought that the above-mentioned seminar would provide a good opportunity to raise the question of nomads as well; this would meet the wishes expressed on all sides. Written Question No. 274 on the exclusion of gypsies from among the ethno-linguistic minorities in Italy The Secretary to the Committee proposed that the Secretariat deal with Written Question No. 274 in the draft reply to Mr. Ramirez's various questions in the light of any information it received from the Italian delegation in the meantime. The Representative of Italy expressed his agreement with this procedure. *

* * During the adoption of decision (i) below, the Representative of Greece asked the Secretariat not to report on ways and means of organising a pluridisciplinary colloquy until the studies being prepared by Mr. Liégeois at the CDCC's request were available. The Secretary to the Committee said that, in carrying out the task just assigned to it by the Deputies, the Secretariat would naturally take account of all aspects of the subject and all sources of information available to it, including Mr. Liégeois' studies. These studies were part of the CDCC's Project No. 7, on the education and cultural development of migrants, and constituted an extension to CONFIDENTIAL - 83 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *27 gypsies of the activity on the training of teachers concerned with migrants. Such matters were undoubtedly of great interest in the context of a possible colloquy on nomads. The colloquy would nevertheless cover various other aspects, such as the social situation, movement and residence of nomads as well as their cohabitation with sedentary populations, including their possible integration into those populations. In particular, stress should be laid on the pluridisciplinary nature of such an undertaking, which would inevitably be of less value if confined to particular aspects of the subject. In any case, in view of the complexity of the problems, it would no doubt be impossible for the Secretariat to refer the subject to the Deputies again before the second half of the year. Decisions The Deputies i. instructed the Secretariat to study, taking into account the views expressed at the present meeting, the prospects and practical arrangements for the holding of a pluridisciplinary colloquy bringing together, within the Council of Europe, representatives of nomads and the persons responsible for questions of concern to nomads at national, regional and local levels and to report on this matter at one of their subsequent meetings; ii. agreed to resume consideration, in the framework of their annual selection of Committee of Ministers' Recommendations on which governments are invited to report, of Committee of Ministers' Resolution (75)13 on the social situation of nomad populations in Europe; iii. instructed the Secretariat to ask the Steering Committee on Population (CDDE) for a detailed opinion on the request contained in Written Question No. 270 by Mr. Ramirez concerning the demographic characteristics of gypsy populations; iv. instructed the Secretariat to prepare a draft reply to the various Written Questions concerning nomads tabled by Mr. Ramirez (Nos. 267, 269, 270, 271 and 274) in the light of information contained in CM(84)11 and of comments and decisions made at the present meeting, and agreed to resume consideration of this item at B level at their 370th meeting (April 1984 - A and B levels).

CONFIDENTIAL - 85 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 28

28. INFORMAL MEETING OF COMMUNITY MINISTERS RESPONSIBLE FOR CULTURAL AFFAIRS (Athens, 28 November 1983) Communication by the working party of the Ministers' Deputies on cultural co-operation (CM(84)34)

The Deputy Secretary General welcomed the proposal by the Deputies' working party on cultural co-operation for instituting co-operation at political level between the Council of Europe and the Community. At the Deputies' 365th meeting (November/December 1983), the Secretary General had also suggested taking a close look at the activities of the Ten in the cultural field and he could not but be gratified by the proposal to make contact in this respect with the President of the Council of European Communities. At another level, the Secretary General of the Commission of the European Communities, Mr Emile Noël, had written to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe asking, following a suggestion by the French Minister of Culture, Mr Lang, that a comparative study be made of cultural policies in the ten member states of the Community, or even in the 23. The Representative of Switzerland, Chairman of the Deputies' working party on cultural co-operation, added that Mr Noël had suggested in his letter that such a study could be extended to include the 23 Signatory States to the European Cultural Convention and indeed that this could only be advantageous. He welcomed this approach from the Ten which was bound to be an encouragement to the working party. The Swiss authorities approved of the draft letter prepared by the working party (CM(84)34) and thought that the Council of Europe ought not to remain on the defensive but should express a firm intention to co-operate with the Ten, particularly as, at the informal meeting of Ministers of Culutre in Athens, the Chairman had emphasised the important role of the Council of Europe in this field. The Representative of Austria thanked the working party on cultural co-operation for the draft letter, which reflected one of his government's main concerns. His authorities appreciated that the natural tendency of the European Communities was to seek closer integration, but the Ten's cultural co-operation ought also to reach outwards and not jeopardise cultural co-operation among the 21. His authorities agreed with the working party that constructive measures must be taken to establish a closer link between the cultural activities of the two institutions. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 86 - Item 28

The Representative of Norway unreservedly supported the working party's proposal. His authorities thought that it was of fundamental importance to establish good working relations with the Commission of the European Communities. The Representative of the Netherlands, supported by the Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, appreciated the working party's approach and the reasons behind the draft letter in CM(84)34. However, their authorities thought that it would be premature to send such a letter, as the Ten were as yet at an entirely preliminary, uncertain stage in their cultural co-operation. It would be preferable to raise the subject either formally or informally at the Conference of Ministers of Cultural Affairs of the 21 which was to be held in Berlin in May 1984. The Representative of Belgium said that in his authorities' view it was essential to send the proposed letter before the Berlin Conference in order that the discussions there might be as fruitful as possible. The Representative of France said that his authorities were anxious to avoid cultural co-operation in the Ten and in the 21 taking different directions; they wished to encourage complementarity but without any rigid division of responsibilities, which could be achieved by means of flexible but concerted efforts. He would accordingly be proposing some amendments to the draft letter. The Representative of Italy, although he had been involved in the drafting of the letter in the working party, admitted that he now had some misgivings. Sending the letter to the President-in-Office of the Council of the European Communities would be somewhat equivocal since part of the cultural activities of the Ten were developing outside the strictly Community framework. Perhaps it might be better to draw attention in general terms to the complementary relationship between the cultural programme of the Council of Europe and the cultural activities of the Ten, either at the meeting of Ministers of Culture in Berlin, or at the 74th session of the Committee of Ministers on 10 May 1984. The Representative of Portugal supported his Italian colleague and pointed out that at the first informal meeting of Ministers of Culture of the Ten in Naples, the Ministers had emphasised that the Council of Europe remained the primary instrument of cultural co-operation in Europe. The Representative of the United Kingdom admitted that, although not against sending the letter, it raised procedural difficulties for the Community member states. In a way the Ten who were included among the 21 would be writing, as it were, to themselves. Moreover, he would like to know what kind of representative the working party had had in mind in the last paragraph of the draft letter. CONFIDENTIAL - 87 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 28

The Director of Education, Culture and Sport thought that it would indeed be very helpful to send the proposed letter before the Berlin Conference, the agenda for which included discussion of a draft resolution on cultural co-operation in Europe. He referred also to Article 3 of the Cultural Convention which stipulated that "The Contracting Parties shall consult with one another within the framework of the Council of Europe with a view to concerted action in promoting cultural activities of European interest". The Representative of Switzerland said that, to the working party's way of thinking, it was by no means a question of influencing the development of cultural co-operation in the Ten but rather of making the most of the fact that among the 23 states Parties to the Cultural Convention there were 10 who engaged in separate cultural activities within the Community. He also agreed with the Representative of Belgium that for the letter to have maximum effect it must be sent to the Council of Ministers before the Conference of Ministers of Culture in Berlin. With regard to what the Representative of Italy had said, it was still possible to add an item on co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Communities in the cultural field to the agenda for the 74th session of the Committee of Ministers, which would be taking place before the Berlin Conference. With regard to the representatives to be appointed by the Council of Europe to examine the concrete implications of co-operation between the Council of Europe and the Communities, the working party had no firm ideas as yet, but a possible arrrangement might include some members of the Bureau of the CDCC, representatives of the Directorate of Education, Culture and Sport, and some members of the Committee of Ministers at Deputy level. The Chairman emphasised that this was a very important proposal. However, his Minister had not yet had time to reach a decision as to whether such a letter ought to be sent. He accordingly proposed returning to the matter at a forthcoming meeting. Meanwhile the working party and all members of the Committee could give the question further thought. Decision The Deputies agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels).

CONFIDENTIAL - 89 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 29

29. CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUTH (Concl(83)365/2, CM(84)6 and 32)

The Representative of France made the following statement: "Permit me first of all to confirm the invitation extended by the French Minister-Delegate for Leisure, Youth and Sport, to hold a Conference of Ministers responsible for Youth in the member States of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg in 1985, as notified to the Secretary General by my delegation in a letter of 28 December 1983 and passed on to all delegations on 4 January of this year under reference CM(84)6. This invitation is a logical consequence of the immediate interest aroused in the French delegation by the section on youth in the report on the progress of European co-operation presented by the Secretary General, Mr Karasek, at the 73rd Session of the Committee of Ministers on 24 November 1983. I would remind you that at the time, my delegation, preceded by the German delegation, indicated that it would be in favour of enabling the European Ministers responsible for Youth to meet at a conference in 1985 which, as you know, is to be International Youth Year. Several other delegations - Portugal in particular - having since spoken up in favour of such a project, my country hopes that its invitation will be well received and that the Ministers' Deputies will be able to agree speedily on the holding of this conference, leaving the arrangements to be considered by the preparatory committee which will need to be set up. In her letter of 28 December - which you have before you - the French Minister, Mrs Edwige Avice, suggested that the Conference be held in Strasbourg. For my country, this is a way of emphasising the importance of the Council of Europe's role in youth matters and of recognising the work done by the European Youth Centre and the European Youth Foundation, both of which are in Strasbourg. Naturally, if the Conference could be held in the premises of the European Youth Centre, where young Europeans meet regularly to join in our shared efforts towards European unification, the symbolic significance of the meeting would be brought out all the more clearly - not forgetting all the advantages that would accrue in addition to this symbolism in terms of both preparations and technical facilities. As regards the date, my delegation believes that the Conference should take place in 1985, which is - I repeat - International Youth Year. Not that any miracles should be expected of the Year, but we must be realistic, recognise the facts and have the Council play the role that befits it. International Youth Year is giving rise to any number of proposals elsewhere at all levels and it would be unfortunate if the Council of Europe were not to make its own specific and timely CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 90 - Item 29 contribution, based on the Year's general theme of participation by the young, but also on its own constant message of protection of human rights and parliamentary democracy, leading on to original action towards the young. In proposing 1985, my delegation is seeking maximum impact for the conference. It is convinced that, if a decision is taken quickly and if the ad hoc Committee of Experts on Youth Questions (CAHJE) is entrusted with the preparations, as the Secretariat suggests in CM(84)32, it should be possible to hold the Conference in 1985 - at least towards the end of the year. While I have the floor, let me take this opportunity of warmly thanking the Secretariat for the paper it has prepared for us. To our mind, that document shows convincingly that the preparatory work is already under way, thanks in particular to our own experts who make up the CAHJE. The document before us under reference CM(84)32 ought to enable us to draw a distinction between the decisions which seem to be to be for us to take and those which fall within the province of the experts. It seems to me - and this will be my conclusion - that we ought to be able to take a decision quickly, with the information we have, on whether or not to reply favourably to the invitation from one of the member countries. If - as I very much hope - the reply is in the affirmative, we should also be able at the same time to reach a decision concerning the committee which we shall entrust with the preparations and which in our view - I repeat - should be the CAHJE, which is already in existence and doing valuable work on youth questions. At this stage, all other questions could, it seems to me, be left to that committee, since the experts are beyond doubt better qualified than we are to deal with the themes and practical arrangements for the Conference." The Representatives of the Netherlands, Italy, Ireland and Portugal welcomed the French delegation's initiative and agreed to the preparations for the Conference being entrusted to the CAHJE. Where the date for the Conference was concerned, the Director of the European Youth Centre said that it was important for the Council of Europe that it should take place before the end of International Youth Year in 1985. He had already contacted the CAHJE experts to make sure that there was sufficient time for the preparations. The CAHJE could meet quite soon, in April or May 1984. A second meeting would probably be needed in 1984 and the Secretary General would make, if necessary, any proposals to enable it to be held in the autumn with the expenditure charged to the Council of Europe budget. However, another possibility might be for one or other delegation to invite the CAHJE to hold a second meeting in 1984 according to the same arrangements as for certain committees of Senior Officials (accommodation paid for by the host country, experts paid by their governments). CONFIDENTIAL - 91 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 29

The Chairman proposed that it be left to the CAHJE to make precise proposals for the date of the Conference. He noted that there was agreement on the three decisions below. Where the second decision was concerned, there was agreement on holding the Conference in the European Youth Centre, but this in no way prejudged the question of participants' accommodation. With regard to the themes of the Conference, the Representative of Belgium said that his authorities attached absolute priority to the first two topics mentioned in para 5.2.3 of CM(84)32: the situation of youth in the member States, especially with regard to the problems posed by integration into society and working life, and preparation for life in society which is now international and intercultural; and youth information and international youth mobility (analysis of the situation, proposals to develop mobility and youth exchanges in both volume and quality). The Representative of Portugal mentioned that some aspects concerning the theme of mobility had already been investigated by the Council for Cultural Co-operation (CDCC) and the U-2000 Conference. Decisions The Deputies i. noted, in accordance with paragraph 2 of the Appendix to Committee of Ministers' Resolution (71)44 on Conferences of Specialised Ministers, that there was general agreement within the Committee of Ministers on establishing a special working relationship with the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth; ii. agreed that the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth would take place in Strasbourg at the European Youth Centre during the second half of 1985; iii. adopted Decision No. CM/319/230284 assigning ad hoc terms of reference to the ad hoc Committee of Experts on Youth Questions (CAHJE), as it appears at Appendix X to these Conclusions.

CONFIDENTIAL - 93 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 30

30. DRAFT EUROPEAN CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF INTERNATIONAL WATERCOURSES AGAINST POLLUTION (Concl(83)362/48, CM(81)72, 83 Add II, CM(82)106, CM(84)27 and 28)

The Director of Legal Affairs said that the Secretariat had carried out a revision of the wording of the draft European Convention for the Protection of International Watercourses against Pollution and Appendix IV thereto concerning arbitration (CM(84)27). For the purpose of bringing the three technical appendices (CM(81)72) up to date the Secretariat had contacted the relevant department of the Commission of the European Communities in order to ascertain changes in Community standards for the areas covered by these appendices. It appeared that no change was needed for Appendix I (minimum values for international watercourses referred to in Article 13.3). Some minor changes would need to be made to Appendix II (dangerous or harmful substances referred to in Article 5) and the first part of Appendix III (quality objectives, Article 16). The Secretariat proposed compiling and circulating to delegations and to the Commission a consolidated document containing both the revised draft Convention and the four revised or up-dated appendices. Delegations and the Commission could then be asked to let their comments be known by June 1984. In September 1984 the Deputies could resume consideration of the matter and decide whether a further meeting of the committee of technical experts (CAHPP) need be convened (CM(84)28). The Representative of the Netherlands expressed his authorities' gratitude to the delegations which had enabled work on this important instrument to be resumed. He thanked both the CAHPP, particularly its Chairman, Mr Diez (Switzerland), and the Council of Europe Secretariat for the work they had done. The Netherlands authorities hoped that the draft could be adopted at an early date. They were able to agree to the procedure proposed by the Secretariat. The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany said that his authorities would be agreeable to re-convening the committee of experts for two meetings: the first to deal with the technical appendices and the second to give the draft a final revision in the light of developments. The German authorities also wished the Convention to be opened for signature at Ministerial level. The Representative of Switzerland was gratified by the progress that had been made. The procedure proposed by the Secretariat seemed realistic and he was able to agree to it. The Representative of Austria shared this view. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 94 - Item 30

The Representative of France was able to agree to the procedure proposed by the Secretariat, although his authorities had already said they were in favour of a meeting of the committee of experts. The proposed procedure left open the possibility of convening the experts if necessary. The Head of Environment Division said that there had been only minor - if any - developments in the Community since the Convention had been drafted, in the areas covered by the technical appendices. It was accordingly very probable that a further meeting of the committee of experts would not be necessary. Decisions The Deputies i. instructed the Secretariat to provide them as soon as possible with an overall document containing the draft European Convention for the Protection of International Watercourses against Pollution and of Appendix IV on arbitration (CM(84)27), as well as updated versions of the technical Appendices I-III; ii. set 30 June 1984 as the deadline for the submission of comments by delegations on the above-mentioned document; iii. agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 375th meeting (September 1984 - A and B levels); iv. adopted the following reply to Written Question No. 249 by Mr. Grieve: "After being informed that the obstacles in the way of a resumption of the deliberations on the draft European Convention for the Protection of International Watercourses against Pollution had been removed, the Committee of Ministers has agreed on a procedure by which this important instrument can be updated and completed as soon as possible. It will keep the Assembly informed of the outcome of the work thus put in hand." CONFIDENTIAL - 95 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *31

*31. SELF-HELP AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN TOWNS Publication of the Activity Report (Concl(83)360/28, Add. I to CM(83)59 and CM(84)19)

The Representative of the United Kingdom proposed the following amendments to the final report on Activity 17.4.2, self-help and community development in towns: i. in the fourth paragraph on page 4 of CM(84)19 amend "deprived areas of London" to "deprived areas of British cities" and amend "from" to "in" before the reference to Belgium, France, etc. ii. on page 13 add the whole of Section 5 of the former draft in CDUP(83)11 headed "Some concluding points". The Chairman noted that there was agreement on these proposals. Decision The Deputies authorised publication of the final report on Activity 17.4.2 - Self-help and community development in towns (CM(84)19) taking into account the amendments made at the present meeting.

CONFIDENTIAL - 97 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 32

32. STAFF SALARIES 195th and 196th reports of the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts (Concl(84)366/45 and 46, CM(84)7 and 18)

This item was discussed in restricted session (see Addendum II to these Conclusions, which has been distributed to Heads of Delegation only). Decisions The Deputies i. authorised the Secretary General to pay to staff of categories B and C an advance on the 1983 annual salary adjustment on the basis of the recommendations made by the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts in paragraph 17 of its 196th report (CM(84)18, Appendix II) and the salary scales annexed thereto, and covering the period July 1983 - February 1984 inclusive; ii. released the appropriations frozen under Sub-heads 12 and 85 of the ordinary budgets and Sub-head 4 of each of the Partial Agreement budgets for 1983 and 1984 to the extent necessary for the implementation of the foregoing decision; iii. agreed to resume consideration of this item at A level at their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels).

CONFIDENTIAL - 99 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 33

33. PREPARATION OF FORTHCOMING MEETINGS

The Secretary to the Committee pointed out that the scheduled dates for the 368th meeting (mid-March 1984) partly coincided as far as the A level part of the meeting was concerned, with the "Confrontation" organised by the Assembly in Strasbourg on "Aliens: a threat or an asset?" on Tuesday 20 and Wednesday 21 March 1984. In order to enable Heads of Delegation who so wished to attend the "Confrontation" the order of the A level and B level meetings could be reversed. The Representative of Belgium referred to the interviews planned for that meeting with the candidates for the post of Secretary General and proposed that the A level sittings be lengthened, beginning at 3 pm on Wednesday 14 March, with the possibility of resuming them if need be on either Tuesday 20 or Wednesday 21 March. After consultations, the Chairman noted that there was agreement in favour of arranging the 368th meeting as indicated in decision (ii) below. The Secretary to the Committee said that the 374th meeting (June 1984), as planned at present, partly coincided with the Assembly's mini-session in Oslo during the week of 25 June, which several Heads of Delegation, particularly the Chairman of the Deputies, might wish to attend. This problem could be overcome by bringing forward the dates of the meeting. The 369th (late March 1984) and 373rd (late May 1984) meetings had been provisionally set for the consideration of reports by working parties of the Deputies, subject to these being available in time. As the reports would be circulated shortly, the Deputies might wish to confirm these two meetings. With regard to the agenda for the 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984), the Representative of Ireland requested the inclusion under "Other business" of an item entitled "Documentation of the Committee of Ministers". CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 100 - Item 33

Decisions The Deputies i. approved the draft agenda for their 368th meeting (14-21 March 1984 - A and B levels), as it appears at Appendix II to these Conclusions; ii. decided to modify as follows the arrangements for their 368th and 374th meetings: 368th meeting A level: Wednesday 14 March (opening 3 pm) to Monday 19 March 1984 (continuing if necessary on 20 or 21 March at a time to be decided) B level: Tuesday 20 March (opening 3 pm) and Wednesday 21 March 1984 374th meeting A level: Wednesday 13 June (opening 3 pm) to Friday 15 June 1984 B level: Monday 18 June (opening 3 pm) and Tuesday 19 June 1984 A level: Wednesday 20 June (opening 3 pm) to Friday 22 June 1984; iii. confirmed that their 369th and 373rd meetings would take place as provisionally envisaged on Monday 26 March (opening 3 pm) and Tuesday 27 March 1984 and from Monday 28 May (opening 3 pm) to Wednesday 30 May 1984 respectively; iv. provisionally approved their schedule of meetings for the period September-December 1984, as it appears at Appendix III to these Conclusions. CONFIDENTIAL - 101 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34a

34. OTHER BUSINESS a. Dialogue with the Secretary General (1)

1. Conference of European Regions (Strasbourg, 25-27 January 1984) The Deputy Secretary General said that a Conference of European Regions had been held in the Palais de l'Europe from 25 to 27 January 1984, at the invitation of the European Parliament. It had been attended by representatives of the regional authorities of the ten Community countries, and also Spain and Portugal. He mentioned this Conference because follow-up action on it might well have important consequences for the Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE). The CLRAE had been associated by the European Parliament with preparation of the Conference. In the person of Mr Pancheri, President of the Regional Council of Trentino-Alto-Adige, it had appointed a co-rapporteur (with Mrs Fuillet, the European Parliament's rapporteur) on the theme "Regional autonomy and decentralisation - keys to European integration". Many members of the CLRAE had also been included in delegations to the Conference. Moreover, Mr Bernard Dupont, first Vice-President of the CLRAE, had spoken on the President's behalf at the inaugural session. In his address, Mr Dupont had spoken of the nature and powers of the CLRAE, particularly respecting relations with the European Communities, as laid down in Article 1 of its Charter. The Deputy Secretary General said that at the end of its work, the Conference had adopted a Final Declaration, the most important provision of which read as follows: "The Conference resolves that a second Conference may be held within a period of two years to establish a framework and conditions for organised, permanent participation of the regions in the formulation of Community policies". Among the bodies contributing to this association of the regions with the process of Community integration, the Conference had emphasised "the importance of the activities of the Consultative Committee of the local and regional authorities of the member countries of the European Community, in which the following bodies participate at the present time: the Council of European Municipalities (CEM), the International Union of Local Authorities (IULA), the Liaison Bureau on the European Regional Organisations (BLORE) and the CLRAE". The Conference had

(1) The record of other matters dealt with under this item appears in Addendum III to these Conclusions, which has been distributed to Heads of Delegation only. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 102 - Item 34a expressed a wish that the Consultative Committee be duly enlarged and reformed. In this connection, it had considered that "increased representation of the regions" was becoming "a necessity in the national delegations of the CLRAE, and this will also make it possible to achieve more adequate representation of the regions in the Consultative Committee". The Deputy Secretary General informed the Deputies that Mr Antonio Giolitti, the member of the Commission of the European Communities responsible for regional policy, had spoken at the end of the Conference and had declared his intention of developing his present contacts with the representatives of the regional authorities, pending convocation of the next Conference. In view of these developments, the Deputy Secretary General had taken the initiative of writing on the Secretary General's behalf to Mr Giolitti. In his letter, he had welcomed the progress made within the Community towards greater participation and consultation of the European regional authorities. He had also stressed the necessity of respecting the principle that the membership of the national delegations to the CLRAE and that of the delegations consulted by the Commission of the European Communities should be the same. This principle, which had been consistently upheld by the CLRAE and supported by the Committee of Ministers had so far been applied only imperfectly within the Consultative Committee. The Deputy Secretary General had proposed that he and Mr Giolitti should discuss these matters in greater detail in the near future. He would inform the Deputies of the outcome of these discussions and of any further developments in this area. The Deputies would be interested to hear that the Finnish Provinces had invited the Standing Committee of the CLRAE to hold its annual meeting away from Strasbourg in Finland. This invitation was a logical outcome of the working relations which had existed for a long time with the Finnish association of local authorities, which had observer status with the CLRAE. It reflected the wish of the Finnish officials to strengthen their ties with the Council of Europe, particularly in the field of local and regional authorities. The Representative of Belgium thanked the Deputy Secretary General for the information he had given on the Conference of European Regions. He wondered if he could obtain a copy of the Deputy Secretary General's letter to Mr Giolitti. The Representative of Luxembourg also expressed his gratitude to the Deputy Secretary General for the information he had given and wondered what the consequences of the Conference would be for the CLRAE. The Representative of Switzerland referred to the matter raised by the Deputy Secretary General when he had spoken about the "necessity of respecting the principle that the membership of national delegations to the CLRAE and that of the delegations consulted by the Commission of the European Communities should be the same". He recalled that national delegations to the CLRAE were appointed by CONFIDENTIAL - 103 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34a national governments on the proposal of local authorities; on the other hand if the member States of the Communities were to appoint their representatives on a region by region basis then it would be difficult to respect the principle referred to by the Deputy Secretary General. The Deputy Secretary General, referring to the question put by the Representative of Belgium, said that a copy of the letter he had written to Mr Giolitti would be made available to him. Referring to the statement made by the Representative of Luxembourg he expressed the fear that if a new ad hoc Conference of European Regions were to be held successively in the coming years, one day it would become institutionalised and result in duplication of work with that of the CLRAE. As for the question raised by the Representative of Switzerland, the Deputy Secretary General said that the principle he had referred to earlier should be applied to the membership of the national delegations to the CLRAE and to the delegations consulted by the Commission of the European Communities, but not necessarily to the members of the Conference of European Regions organised by the European Parliament. 2. Visit of the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers (31 January 1984) The Deputy Secretary General said that, on the occasion of the presentation of the Statutory Report to the Assembly, the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, Mr Ellemann-Jensen, had also met the Secretary General. The main point in their discussion had been preparation of the next session of the Committee of Ministers in May 1984 (ie the 74th Session) and particularly consideration of the various items which the Secretary General would suggest in his draft agenda. Other questions had been raised, such as European Music Year 1985 and the possibility of inviting non-member States to participate in it. 3. Visit by Mr Rui Amaral, Portuguese Secretary of State for Employment and Vocational Training The Deputy Secretary General said that Mr Rui Amaral, a former member of the Assembly and now Portuguese Secretary of State for Employment and Vocational Training, had visited Strasbourg on 9 February 1984 to discuss prospects for co-operation in the vocational training field with the Secretariat. This visit was in line with the efforts made by the Committee of Ministers to promote more balanced development in Europe. He thanked the Portuguese Ambassador for making it possible to organise this visit, which had been highly instructive and useful to both sides. The Representative of Portugal thanked the Deputy Secretary General for the information given. He said that the talks which Mr Amaral had had with the Secretariat, in particular on matters concerning the North/South dialogue, had been most useful. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 104 - Item 34a

4. Ratification by France of the European Outline Convention Transfrontier Co-operation The Deputy Secretary General informed the Deputies that, on 14 February 1984, Mr Roland Dumas, French Minister responsible for European Affairs, had deposited the French Republic's instrument of ratification of the European Outline Convention on transfrontier co-operation between territorial communities or authorities. This first visit to Strasbourg of the new French Minister responsible for European Affairs had given the Deputy Secretary General an opportunity to discuss with him the prospects for France's forthcoming chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Ratification by France brought to 10 the number of Council of Europe member States which had ratified this important legal instrument, which provided a basis for genuine European co-operation between local authorities. The Deputy Secretary General took this opportunity of urging the Permanent Representatives of member States which had not yet ratified the Convention to remind their authorities of the importance of this legal instrument for genuine European co-operation. The Representative of France thanked the Deputy Secretary General for the kind words which he would not fail to transmit to his authorities. 5. European Art Exhibition in Japan The Deputy Secretary General said that the Deputies would recall that the Japanese press group, Yomiuri Shimbun/Nippon Television Network Corporation, had proposed that it should organise, entirely at its own expense, a major exhibition of European art. At their 355th meeting (January 1983, item 37(a)), the Secretary General had informed the Deputies that he had been approached by the initiators of the project and had agreed to sponsor an exhibition of this kind; on the Japanese side, Prince Takamatsu, the Emperor's brother, had also agreed to sponsor the exhibition. The Deputy Secretary General said that this initiative might be regarded as an important contribution to the development of cultural relations between Europe and Japan, of the kind specifically advocated by the Assembly in Recommendation 954. It might be followed by an exhibition of Japanese art in several European capitals. As he had already told the Deputies, a Euro-Japanese committee, consisting of leading experts from the art and museum worlds, had been set up. That committee had held its first meeting in Paris in November 1983 and had decided to build the exhibition round the theme "space in European art through the ages". Other specialists had joined the members of the committee in advancing the project. Pending the committee's next meeting in May 1984, he would like to urge all the delegations to give the project their political support by bringing it to the attention of the relevant ministries and authorities in their own countries. In fact, the exhibition could be successfully organised only with the effective support of all the relevant organisations and authorities in the member States. CONFIDENTIAL - 105 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34a

The Chairman welcomed the information given by the Deputy Secretary General. He wondered if one could not envisage a system of co-operation between the embassies of member States of the Council of Europe in Tokyo whereby the embassy of the member State holding the chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers could be entrusted with the task of co-operating with the organisers of the exhibition. The Deputy Secretary General welcomed the Chairman's idea. The Representative of Belgium asked when the exhibition would be organised and who would choose the exhibits. Would there be exhibits from all member States of the Council of Europe? The Representative of the Netherlands thought that the invitations to be sent to artists and other people concerned with the event should be channelled through the Governments of member States. The Representative of Switzerland believed that the European art exhibition in Japan would no doubt be of great value. He wondered if the same exhibition could also be mounted in Europe after Japan. The Director of Education, Culture and Sport recalled that the exhibition would be held in Japan in 1986. Exhibits would be chosen by the directors of the important museums in the member States of the Council of Europe. As regards the question raised by the Representative of Switzerland, he said that it would be a pity if the exhibition were not also mounted in a European country after Japan. However, the problem was one of a financial nature and he would welcome it if a member State would undertake to organise such an exhibition. The Chairman wondered if a concise document could be prepared by the Secretariat which would then be brought to the attention of delegations. The Director of Education, Culture and Sport said that he would submit a paper to delegations. The Representative of the United Kingdom said that the Secretariat document should also deal with financial aspects of the European art exhibition in Japan. 6. Contribution of the European Pharmacopoeia to anti-doping tests at the Olympic Games The Deputy Secretary General said that the problem of the doping of athletes was one of the constant concerns of the Committee for the Development of Sport (CDDS), since it made fair and healthy competition impossible. This was why the CDDS had prepared a draft Charter on doping in sport, which would be submitted to the European Ministers responsible for Sport at their Conference in Malta in May 1984. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 106 - Item 34a

In this connection, attention had been given to the possibility of establishing, in close liaison with the Secretariat of the European Pharmacopoeia, a centre to supply the reference substances needed for anti-doping tests. He was pleased to say that a first step had been taken in connection with 23rd Olympic Games. In fact, the laboratories responsible for tests at the Winter Olympics in Sarajevo and at the Los Angeles Games had asked the technical Secretariat of the European Pharmacopoeia for the reference substances which they required. Thanks to its many contacts with pharmaceutical laboratories, the Secretariat of the European Pharmacopoeia has been easily able to meet these requests. The Council of Europe had thus helped to provide a practical solution to this problem. 7. Work Stoppage of Freelance Interpreters The Deputy Secretary General, referring to the work stoppage of freelance interpreters that had taken place on 2 February 1984 during the 3rd part session of the Assembly, said that it had not been a political strike. He wished to inform the Deputies of what had happened. On Monday, 30 January 1984 he had heard rumours about a possible work stoppage by the freelance interpreters in the course of the week when the Assembly's part session was being held. On Wednesday 1 February 1984 a delegation of freelance interpreters had gone to see the President of the Assembly and informed him about their decision to stop work. The Deputy Secretary General who had been formally informed of this decision by the President of the Assembly had ensured the latter that an emergency plan would be implemented and permanent interpreters of the Council of Europe would replace freelance interpreters during the work stoppage. The emergency plan would have enabled the parliamentarians to speak, as usual, in the four working languages but the interpretation would have been provided only into French and English. In view of the "cas de force majeure" one could have expected that in other circumstances this could have been acceptable to the Assembly. However, the solution offered by the emergency plan had been turned down by parliamentarians on Thursday morning (2 February 1984). The Bureau of the Assembly had held an emergency meeting on Thursday. The Deputy Secretary General himself, as well as other officials, had had a meeting with freelance interpreters during lunch. The discussions in order to find an interim agreement were long and very difficult; however, the freelance interpreters had agreed to resume work at 3 pm on Thursday afternoon and assured the Deputy Secretary General that they would work the whole day Friday. However, there was some uncertainty as regards the following day owing mainly to the fact that the freelance interpreters desired to consult the leaders of AIIC in Paris and London. In the light of these developments, at about 4 pm on Thursday, the President had suspended the sitting of the Assembly. The decision to resume work had been taken by the freelance interpreters a few hours later. As far as the present situation was concerned, the Deputy Secretary General said that the interim agreement which helped to re-establish confidence and permitted the work to continue had been signed in the meantime. Negotiations with AIIC would soon resume in Paris among the Co-ordinated Organisations. The Council of Europe would needless to say be firm in these negotiations but it would show proof of its good will in order to reach a reasonable new agreement. CONFIDENTIAL - 107 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34a

In reply to a question by the Representative of Belgium the Deputy Secretary General said that the negotiations would probably resume on 24 February 1984 in Paris. The Representative of Greece recalled that the agreement which had previously been reached with the freelance interpreters had expired on 31 December 1983 and wondered what had happened between then and the beginning of the part session of the Assembly. The Deputy Secretary General confirmed that the agreement had expired on 31 December 1983, but its clauses continued to be applied with a reservation, however, concerning Social Security matters which were the subject of an appeal lodged with the Appeals Board. The Representative of Cyprus said that one often heard criticisms that there was not adequate publicity for the Council of Europe nor for its activities. The work stoppage of the freelance interpreters, however, had provided negative publicity for the Council of Europe. The Administration of the Council of Europe had failed to foresee the work stoppage of the freelance interpreters and to take measures in order to avoid the events that had taken place during the part session of the Assembly. 8. Staff Appointments Under this item, the Deputies held an informal exchange of views with the Deputy Secretary General (in the absence of the Secretary General) in application of Article 25(2) of the Regulations on Appointments, during which the Deputy Secretary General made known the intention of the Secretary General to appoint Mr. John F. Smyth to the post of Director of Economic and Social Affairs (grade A7). 9. Forum The Representative of the United Kingdom, referring to the latest issue of Forum (4/83), said that he did not wish to lodge a complaint against this Quarterly. However, he wished to draw attention to the following: First, on page 4, reference had been made by Mr Milan Ruzicka, an Associated Press correspondent, to "Turkish vote, xenophobia, torture" where the correspondent said "...After a lengthy debate, largely condemning the regime of General Kenan Evren for his government's blatant manipulation of the impending elections, disqualification of hundreds of potential candidates, and imprisonment of political foes, the Assembly gave Turkey its penultimate warning: either improve your human rights record by next January or face expulsion from the democratic club". Such unfortunate wording should not have appeared in a magazine like Forum. Secondly, reference was also made in that article to the local elections held in Dreux (France) where mention was made of an ultra-rightist group winning a sizeable share of the vote and criticising them as representatives of the xenophobia condemned by the Council of Europe. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 108 - Item 34a

Thirdly, a photograph appeared on page 5 where a banner could be seen with the following words on it: "Campaign Against Racist Laws". Evidently this was a photograph taken in the United Kingdom. This too was an unfortunate caption which might lead the reader to think the Council of Europe assumed that the United Kingdom had racist laws. Fourthly and lastly, the speaker referred to the brief biography of Orwell where it was said that while writing his book "The Road to Wigan Pier" in North of England "Orwell experienced something of British Fascism and he became a committed, though by no means uncritical, Socialist". In fact George Orwell did not experience anything of British Fascism in the North of England. He had thought that the British Government would not fight against fascism and that many British intellectuals and the middle and upper classes would become fascist in the next few years. In his opinion Orwell's biography in Forum was a short one expressing one-sided views and misrepresenting others. He hoped that controversial views from the other side of the political spectrum would also be printed in Forum. The Representative of Turkey agreed with the Representative of the United Kingdom, on what the latter had said about the article written by Mr Ruzicka. He had already raised this matter with the Secretary General. To his mind, Forum should be a free tribune for all sorts of views to be expressed but unfortunately in its latest issue, it had offered a free tribune to only one-sided and biased views. The Director of Press and Information Services said that the views expressed by Mr Ruzicka in his article "Turkish vote, xenophobia, torture" were Mr Ruzicka's own; the title reflected the three main subjects debated by the Assembly. What Mr Ruzicka had said about the local elections in Dreux was an accurate account of what had actually happened. As regards the illustration of the article on migrant workers, all that could be legitimately inferred therefrom was that one section of the population within a country thought that there were racist laws in that country. As regards the brief biography of George Orwell, it could be argued that Orwell's experiences in Wigan had converted him to Socialism which in turn had led to his holding a certain view of Fascism. He agreed however that the phrase used in Forum was not strictly accurate, while considering the error of somewhat minor importance. The Director of Press and Information Services recalled that the Committee of Ministers had repeatedly insisted that Forum had to be controversial. This point had in fact been made by the working party of the Deputies in the late? 70s and subsequently confirmed by the Stimulating Committee on Information. If the Committee of Ministers wanted to change the nature of Forum by turning it into a "safe" official bulletin it of course had the authority to do so. But in that event he would advise the Secretary General to save the lm French francs now spent on the publication, for it would no longer meet the need for a tribune for fair comment and a vehicle for news and views CONFIDENTIAL - 109 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *34b

*b. Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE) Grants made by the Bureau of the CLRAE

Decision The Deputies approved, in accordance with Article 13 of the Financial Regulations, the transfer of the unexpended balance of the special account "Intermunicipal exchanges" ie, a sum of FF 431.30, to the special account "Working capital fund for CLRAE disaster relief".

CONFIDENTIAL - 111 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34c c. Joint Committee Meeting on 22 March 1984

In summing up the discussion on this item, the Chairman said that, in order to promote a real dialogue between delegations and parliamentarians at the forthcoming meeting of the Joint Committee, it would be most useful if the Secretariat could provide background information concerning the second and third themes proposed by the Assembly, namely "Budget of the Parliamentary Assembly" and "Conferences of Specialised Ministers within the Council of Europe". He suspected that the Assembly would wish to discuss the reply to Opinions No. 114 and 115 on the 1984 budget and in particular the letter which he had addressed to the President of the Assembly on 22 December 1983 (Appendix to CM(84)24). It should also be remembered that the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, Mr. Ellemann-Jensen, had replied to a parliamentary question by Mr. Giust at the last part-session of the Assembly about the adoption of the 1984 budget and referred to what Mr. Giust had said about the differences between the Assembly's work and intergovernmental activities as far as the need for expert advice was concerned (71-78 of AS(35)CR 25). As for the item dealing with Conferences of Specialised Ministers, it would not be possible to anticipate the Deputies' discussion on the working party's report on working methods which would deal with this subject in some detail. Decisions The Deputies i. agreed with the proposed themes for the agenda of the meeting of the Joint Committee on 22 March 1984: 1. Election of the Secretary General. 2. Budget of the Parliamentary Assembly. 3. Conferences of Specialised Ministers with which the Council of Europe has established a special working relationship; ii. agreed to continue their preparation for this meeting of the Joint Committee in the light of a Secretariat document furnishing background information about the second and third themes mentioned under (i) above.

CONFIDENTIAL - 113 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34d d. Council of Europe relations with management and labour - Modalities for the implementation of the 1iaison system (Concl(84)366/28, CM(83)182 and 229)

The Representative of Switzerland said that he was pleased to see that the Union of Industries of the European Community (UNICE) was prepared to take part in the first meeting of the Liaison Committee. He hoped that that could also be the case for future meetings of the Liaison Committee. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that the matter had not been raised in contacts with the UNICE. Date and place of the first meeting of the Liaison Committee The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs confirmed that the meeting could take place on 12 and 13 March 1984. In accordance with an earlier decision of the Deputies, it would be held in Strasbourg. Representatives of steering committees to be invited to the first meeting The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that the Secretariat, after examining the letter of 13 February 1984 of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) (see Appendix I to Notes No 4855), proposed to invite representatives of the Steering Committee for Social Security (CDSS), the Steering Committee for Social Affairs (CDSO) and the Steering Committee on Intra-European Migration (CDMG). Information concerning activities dealt with by other steering committees could be supplied at the meeting by the Secretariat. In reply to a question by the Representative of Austria, he said that there was no formal procedure for determining who should represent the steering committees. The Secretarit proposed inviting the Chairman of each committee and, if he were unable to attend, the Vice-Chairman or another member of the Bureau. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 114 - Item 34d

Agenda of the meeting of the Liaison Committee With regard to Item II of the draft agenda (see Appendix XI to these Conclusions): "Exchange of views on the terms of reference and the functioning of the Liaison Committee", the Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that the item was intended to clarify the scope of the terms of reference and certain procedural questions which could arise for participants at the first meeting of the Liaison Committee. In reply to the Representatives of Switzerland and Belgium, he confirmed that there was no question of modifying in any way decisions taken by the Committee of Ministers in that respect. In reply to the comments of the Representatives of Ireland and Belgium concerning the wish expressed by the ETUC in its letter of 13 February 1984 to participate in or be associated with the Conferences of the Ministers of Social Security and the Ministers of Labour, the Secretariat representative informed the Deputies of the arrangements made in that respect at previous conferences and those planned for the forthcoming Conference of Ministers of Social Security. The Secretary to the Committee said that the ETUC's wishes should be discussed by the Deputies in due course, according to the normal procedure, within the framework of preparing the particular conferences. Reports of the Liaison Committee's proceedings The Secretary to the Committee, referring to the Deputies' discussions at their 366th meeting (January 1984, item 28), recalled that two kinds of reports were involved: meeting reports on the proceedings and results of Liaison Committeee meetings, and especially on the preparation of the outline programme of hearings with committees of experts in the current year, and end-of-year reports covering the proceedings of hearings held during the past year, which would be useful from the point of view of preparing future committee meetings. The Representative of Italy said that the meeting report should clearly state any differences which arose in the course of a Liaison Committee meeting, so that, in the event, the matter could be left for the Deputies to decide. The Representative of Ireland agreed. In reply to a question by the Representative of Belgium, the Secretary to the Committee said that meeting reports and end-of-year reports would be circulated for information to management and labour as well as to the Ministers' Deputies, though not necessarily included on the agenda of a Deputies' meeting, unless a particular request were made to that effect. CONFIDENTIAL - 115 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34d

The Representative of Belgium said that in that case he whished to request that the report of the first meeting of the Liaison Committee should be included on the agenda of one of the forthcoming meetings of the Deputies, preferably the meeting in May or June 1984. The Representative of Ireland wished to know whether the meeting report would be adopted by the Liaison Committee at the end of its meeting or subsequently by correspondence. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that the actual decisions of the Liaison Committee could be adopted in summary form at the end of the meeting. A more detailed report would be drafted by the Secretariat, in consultation with the Chairman of the Liaison Committee, and submitted to the other participants for approval. Participation and right to speak of Ministers' Deputies at Liaison Committee meetings The Representative of Italy wished to know whether Deputies who were not members of the Liaison Committee but wished to attend its meetings would have the right to speak. The Chairman said that only members of the Deputies' Bureau were members of the Liaison Committee and he expressed concern at the possibility that Deputies who were not members of the committee might wish to speak there at will. The Representatives of Austria and Switzerland pointed out that any other Deputies could "attend" meetings of the Liaison Committee and they interpreted the term "attend" to mean that all Deputies present at a meeting would be entitled to speak, while adding that the right should be exercised with due moderation in order to avoid upsetting the meetings' proceedings. The Chairman reiterated that he was not in favour of Deputies who were not members of the Liaison Committee being entitled to speak. He was supported by the Representative of Belgium who said that the position adopted by the Chairman was in line with the generally accepted notion of a Liaison Committee. The Representative of Austria said that the objective of keeping informed would already be achieved with the circulation of the meeting report to Deputies. The right to attend should therefore imply more than just passive attendance and every Deputy present should be entitled to speak. The vote on the Swiss proposal to entitle Deputies who were not members of the Liaison Committee to speak at a meeting gave the following result: 4 votes in favour, 12 against. The Chairman noted that the Swiss proposal had not been accepted. The Acting Director of Economic and Social Affairs said that the Secretariat would endeavour to provide the Chairman and other members of the Liaison Committee as soon as possible with a document containing all the necessary information concerning the arrangements decided by the Deputies for the committee's terms of reference and procedure. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 116 - Item 34d

Decisions The Deputies i. decided that the first meeting of the Liaison Committee between the Council of Europe and management and labour would be held on 12-13 March 1984 in Strasbourg and that it would not last more than one and a half days; ii. adopted the agenda for the first meeting of the Liaison Committee, as it appears at Appendix XI to these Conclusions; iii. agreed that the Chairmen (or in their absence a member of the Bureau) of the - Steering Committee for Social Security (CDSS), - Steering Committee for Social Affairs (CDSO), - Steering Committee on Intra-European Migration (CDMG), would be invited to attend the first meeting of the Liaison Committee; iv. agreed that the Secretariat should prepare, and distribute to delegations, summary reports on the meetings of the Liaison Committee, and that it should also draw up a report at the end of each year on the conduct of hearings for transmission to the Committee of Ministers as well as to the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and the Union of Industries of the European Community (UNICE); v. instructed the Secretariat to place the report of the first meeting of the Liaison Committee on the agenda for their 374th meeting (June 1984 - A and B levels) for consideration at A level. CONFIDENTIAL - 117 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34e

e. Transmission of extracts from the Deputies' Conclusions to the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH)

Decision The Deputies authorised the Secretariat to communicate to the Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH) excerpts from their Conclusions concerning the examination, since 1976, of the question of the application of Article 57 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

CONFIDENTIAL - 119 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34f f. Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDMM) Request for observer status by the Commission of the European Communities

The Deputy Secretary General referred to the letter from the Secretary General of the Commission of the European Communities requesting observer status with the CDMM which was dated only 13 February 1984. He agreed that the Deputies were being asked to take a decision at very short notice. However, in that letter Mr. Noël had stated that the Commission would be glad if the final decision on the request could be taken before the next meeting of the CDMM, which would be opening on 13 March 1984. If the Deputies were in a position to take a decision at the present meeting, well and good. If not, the request could be referred to the CDMM itself for a decision. The Representative of France felt that the Deputies had not had time to be in a position to take a decision at the present meeting. Furthermore, there was the question of reciprocity which the CDMM had already raised in the past and which it may wish to come back to before a final decision was taken. The Representative of the United Kingdom supported the French position, and added that the Deputies should avoid giving the appearance of overriding the views of the members of the CDMM. In reply to a question put by the Representative of Liechtenstein, the Director of Legal Affairs said that questions related to the mass media had not as such been discussed at the latest meeting (15 December 1983) between members of the Council of Europe Secretariat and officials of the Commission of the European Communities. The meeting had been devoted primarily to consideration of Council of Europe Conventions (of which there were none in the media field) and other matters of direct concern to the legal services of the two institutions - in the Council of Europe media matters were dealt with by the Directorate of Human Rights and not the Directorate of Legal Affairs. However, he had raised with the Director General of the Commission's Legal Service the broader question of the lack of balance in the granting of observer status by each of the two institutions to the other. As a result there would be an improvement. In particular the Council of Europe would in future be represented at meetings of the Commission's Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 120 - Item 34f

The Representative of Italy sensed something highly political behind the present request from the European Commission. The question should also be considered from the point of view of reciprocity. Accordingly, he could agree to the matter being referred to the CDMM for a decision, but meanwhile Mr. Noël should be sent an interim reply referring to the reciprocity aspect and stating that the CDMM had been asked to look into it. The Representative of Switzerland also recognised the importance of the question from the points of view both of relations between the two institutions and of reciprocity. He warmly supported the idea of sending Mr. Noël an interim reply. The matter of reciprocity needed to be approached with some circumspection; the European Community was a grouping within the Council of Europe. It was unlike any other international organisation, and was almost like a member of the Council of Europe. The Representative of Sweden recalled that the question of reciprocity had been raised with Mr. Noël when the Deputies had exchanged views with him in June 1983, and he had not found his response very encouraging (cf. Addendum to Concl(83)361). The report by the Directorate of Legal Affairs on the 15 December 1983 meeting between members of the Council of Europe Secretariat and officials of the Commission of the Communities (confidential memorandum dated 2 February 1984) had confirmed that impression. He suggested that perhaps the governments of the member States of the Ten might use their influence within the Community to improve the situation. The Chairman noted that there was general agreement on the decisions below and said that the CDMM would be asked to consider in particular the question of reciprocity with regard to participation of representatives of the Council of Europe on corresponding Community bodies. Decisions The Deputies i. instructed the Secretariat to seek the opinion of the CDMM on the request of the European Communities, represented by the Commission, to be admitted as observers to the CDMM, and to report back with a view to the decision they will themselves be taking on the matter; ii. asked the Secretary General to send an interim reply to the letter dated 13 February 1984 from the Secretary General of the Commission of the European Communities, on the basis and in the light of the points made during the discussion under the present item of the agenda. CONFIDENTIAL - 121 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item *34g

*8. Assembly Confrontation on "Aliens in Europe: a threat or an asset?" Budgetary contribution (CM(84)52)

Decision The Deputies authorised the Secretary General to accept the French Government's contribution of FF50,000 for the Confrontation on the theme "Aliens in Europe: a threat or an asset?" (Strasbourg, 20-21 March 1984), which is to be paid into a treasury suspense account to be opened in the Organisation's books and used in the ways to be specified by the Assembly's Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is responsible for the organisation of the Confrontation.

CONFIDENTIAL - 123 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34h h. 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for cu1tura1 affairs (Berlin, May 1984)

The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany made the following statement: "The German authorities have instructed this delegation to make the following statement regarding document CMC-HF(83)15 of 5 December 1983 on the topic of 'Culture and Communication Technologies'. This document was prepared by a group of authors headed by Mr. Ingberg (Belgium) and in consultation with the Secretariat as one of the key documents for the 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs, to be held in Berlin from 23-25 May of this year. 1. In the course of the preparation of the Berlin Conference of Ministers of Culture, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany as well as the Federal States (Länder) - the latter having the major competence for cultural affairs and questions of media policy according to our constitution - jointly came to the conclusion that the above-mentioned document in its present form cannot be considered as an adequate basis for the discussions of the Ministers of Culture. This assessment is founded, among other aspects, on the following points: The competences of the Ministers of Culture are described in a way which is not compatible with the German constitution. The document contains axiomatic allegations which are at least questionable (eg the threatening of the cultural identity of smaller European countries through the new media). The result of this is an approach in the document which is not acceptable to the German authorities as it is also not in line with results of the work of the competent mass media committees of the Council of Europe, the Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDMM) and the Committee of Experts on Media Policy (MM-PO). 2. The German Government therefore is afraid that the German representatives who will be the hosts for the Conference in the particularly sensitive city of Berlin will not be in a position to accept one of the key documents of the Conference. In addition to this the German Government fears that on account of the fact that the CDMM was not involved in the preparation of this document the impression may be created among the public that the Council of Europe does not pursue a uniform line in its media policy. As the German Government attaches great importance to the work of the Council of Europe in this sector, which is at present delicate and controversial, it would like to prevent: such an impression in all circumstances. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 124 - Item 34h 3. The German Government has therefore tried to make use of the possibilities of co-operation and co-ordination inside the Council of Europe by asking the CDMM to take up the matter. This was consequently done by the MM-PO during its last session from 14 to 17 February 1984. The authors of the document in question, headed by Mr. Inagberg, were prepared to participate in this meeting; they were not however willing to enter into any discussion of the document. Originally the MM-PO was refused even to have a look at the document. This manifest reluctance to co-operate which is not in line with the spirit of Resolution (71)44 on Conferences of Specialised Ministers as well as the content of the document caused criticism from experts of various countries during the subsequent discussion in the MM-PO. 4. Without wishing to question the rights of a Specialised Ministers' Conference or those of the Committee of Senior Officials, the German Government proposes to the Committee of Ministers, in view of the information given, that the preparatory Committee of Senior Officials should be asked to contact the CDMM in order to obtain a mutually acceptable text of document CMC-HF(83)15 or to get an opinion of the CDMM on the present text. 5. Unfortunately this proposal, could not be submitted in accordance with the rules of procedure of this Committee regarding form and deadlines as the next meeting of the Committee of Ministers will last from 15 to 21 March 1984 whereas the next meeting of the CDMM will take place already from 13 to 16 March 1984." The Representatives of Belgium, Cyprus, Greece, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom shared the pre-occupations expressed by their German colleague on this matter. The Representative of Sweden drew attention to paragraph 37 of Resolution (76)3 on committee structures, terms of reference and working methods. In this paragraph, the Secretary General is instructed to "ensure that each committee is informed about any activities of other committees which may have implications for the execution of its own terms of reference". He wondered whether the Secretariat could not have taken steps to ensure that the CDMM was apprised of developments as regards the paper on "Culture and Communication Technologies" in the interests of efficiency. The Director of Education, Culture and Sport outlined the history of the way in which the draft paper had been drawn up in the Committee of Senior Officials preparing the Berlin Conference. All States taking part in the preparatory work, including an expert from the Federal Republic of Germany, had been fully aware of the content of the draft paper. Furthermore, at its meeting held in Berlin (25-26 January), under the chairmanship of the Federal Republic of Germany, the Committee of Senior Officials had welcomed unanimously the report presented by Mr Ingberg and had decided to give a mandate to a group of three of its members to establish the final version in the light of the disucssions. It was the express wish of the Senior Officials to submit to the Minisers of Culture a paper which reflected essentially cultural concerns. It might be possible for the Senior Officials to resume consideration on the paper at their next meeting, on the eve of the Conference itself. CONFIDENTIAL - 125 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Item 34h

The Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany said that as a member of the working party on cultural affairs he was familiar with the approach of the CDCC to problems of the "culture industries". Obviously a serious divergence existed with regard to the interpretation of the topic "Culture and Communication Technologies" between the authors of the paper and their cultural concerns and members of the MM-PO and their different way of evaluating the same topic. He therefore shared the Swedish view that the Secretariat should have taken steps at an early stage to ensure a participation of the CDMM regarding the preparation of the paper in question. In view of his instructions he felt unable to support the proposal of the Secretariat to leave the matter for consideration by the Senior Officials on the eve of the Berlin Conference but had to insist on seizing the CDMM of the paper at its next meeting. The Representative of Portugal, supported by the Representative of Spain, asked for further background information on this matter before decisions were taken. Interference with the work of an independent Conference of Specialised Ministers might set a dangerous precedent for the future. The Representatives of Greece and Belgium said that there were already precedents for action being taken by the Committee of Ministers with regard to Conferences of Specialised Ministers. They cited in particular co-ordinating action on the European Ministerial Conference on the Environment and the European Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (CEMAT). In reply to a question by the Representative of Austria, the representative of the Secretariat gave details of the exchange of views which had taken place on 15 February in the MM-PO with 3 members of the Committee of Senior Officials (see item 6a of MM-PO(84)5). On that occasion regret had been expressed that the CDMM or the MM-PO had not been apprised of the draft paper on culture and communication technology at an earlier stage especially as the philosophy contained in it seemed to be different from the general approach of the Council of Europe in media matters. It had also been stated that a separation between the cultural and the mass media sectors would be regrettable since it would lead to divergence rather than to greater unity. The Chairman called for a vote on the decision below. It gave the following result: 16 in favour; 2 against; 2 abstentions. The Representative of Portugal had serious doubts whether the decision taken was in conformity with the relevant texts adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning Conferences of Specialised Ministers. He reiterated his misgivings about undue interference in the work of these conferences which might have unfortunate consequences. He asked for a considered legal opinion to be drawn up on this matter. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - 126 - Item 34h

The Deputy Secretary General said that this would be done.

Further points relevant to this question were raised under item 34a of the agenda for the present meeting (Dialogue with the Secretary General - see Part 13 of Addendum III to these Conclusions, which has been issued to Heads of Delegation only). Decision The Deputies instructed the Secretariat to bring to the attention of the Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDMM), at its meeting from 13 to 16 March 1984, the draft text on "Culture and Communication Technologies" drawn up by the Committee of Senior Officials responsible for the Preparation of the 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs (Berlin, 23-25 May 1984) and, if appropriate, to convey to the Committee of Senior Officials, for its meeting on 22 May 1984, the views expressed by the CDMM on the aforementioned draft. CONFIDENTIAL - a1 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

APPENDIX I 367TH MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (A and B levels) (Strasbourg, 20 (3pm) - 23 February 1984, A level 27 (3pm) - 28 February 1984, B level)

AGENDA

1. Adoption of the Agenda (Notes No. 4820 of 20.2.84)

Political and General Policy Questions 2. Committee of Ministers - Preparation of the 74th Session (10 May 1984) - CM(84)35 of 7.2.84) (Notes No. 4822 of 6.2.84) 3. Conference of Ministers responsible for Research (Concl(83)365/2, CM(84)31 of 30.1.84 and Corr. of 20.2.84 and 57 of 20.2.84) (Notes No. 4823 of 7.2.84) 4. Election of the Secretary General - Procedure (Concl(84)366/3, CM(83)147, 180, 181 and Add. and 224) (Notes No. 4824 of 3.2.84) 5. Balanced development in Europe - (Concl(83)365/2, CM(83)198) (Notes No. 4825 of 14.2.84) 6. European Music Year 1985 - Invitation to non-member States (Concl(84)366/9, CM(83)227) (Notes No. 4826 of 7.2.84) 7. Situation in Cyprus - (Concl(83)366/7) (Notes No. 4827 of 3.2.84) CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a2 - Appendix I

8. Conferences of Specialised Ministers - (Concl(83)366/8, CM(78)62 and CM(84)30 of 17.2.84) (Notes No. 4828 of 8.2.84) 9. Consultative Assembly - Third part of the 35th Ordinary Session (Strasbourg, 30 January - 3 February 1984) a. Texts adopted (Notes No. 4829 of 15.2.84) b. Parliamentary questions for oral answer by the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers (Notes No. 4830 of 9.2.84)

Human Rights 10. C., Medway and Ball against the United Kingdom - Application of Article 32 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Letter HD/C87 of 15 November 1983) (Notes No. 4818 of 25.1.84) 11. Draft Protocol to the Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms concerning the extension of the list of civil and political rights set forth in the Convention - (Concl(84)366/16, CM(82)230 Addendum I, CM(84)37 of 8.2.84 and Add. of 13.2.84 and Assembly Opinion No. 116) (Notes No. 4831 of 9.2.84) 12. European Convention on Human Rights a. Assembly Recommendation 970 (Concl(83)366/20 and CM(84)4 and CM(84)44 of 16.2.84) b. Written Question No. 268 by Lord Northfield on cases brought under the Human Rights Convention (Concl(84)366/21, CM(83)190 and Add. and CM(84)45 of 16.2.84) (Notes No. 4832 of 9.2.84) 13. Handbook on Human Rights and the Police (Notes No. 4834 of 9.2.84) *14. Ad hoc Committee of Experts to exchange views on the draft Convention against Torture (CAHTT) - Meeting report (Strasbourg, 1-2 December 1983) - (CM(84)1) (Notes No. 4821 of 26.1.84)

(*) B level CONFIDENTIAL - a3 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix I

15. Draft Recommendation No. R(84).. on principles on television advertising - (Concl(84)366/23, CM(83)220 and Add.) (Notes No. 4835 of 15.2.84)

Legal Questions *16. Ad hoc Committee of Experts for the Protection of Animals (CAHPA) - Report of the 13th meeting (Strasbourg, 23-25 November 1983) - (CM(83)225) (Notes No. 4836 of 1.2.84) *17.(1) European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) - Report of the 14th meeting (Strasbourg, 28 November - 2 December 1983) (CM(84)8 and Addenda I, II and Corr. and III) (Notes No. 4837 of 3.2.84) *18. Draft Recommendation No. R(84)... on the Principles of Civil Procedure Designed to Improve the Functioning of Justice (Concl(83)362/22, 364/11, CM(83)146 and Add II) (Notes No. 4838 of 3.2.84) *19. Conference on problems relating to the development and application of legislation on data protection - Proposal by the Spanish delegation - (CM(84)33 of 1.2.84) (Notes No. 4839 of 3.2.84) 20. Ad hoc Committee of Experts on Genetic Engineering (CAHGE) - Report of the 1st meeting (Strasbourg, 13-16 December 1983) (Concl(83)360/13, CM(84)10) (Notes No. 4840 of 6.2.84)

Economic and Social Questions 21. 3rd Conference of European Ministers of Labour - Proposal of the Spanish authorities - (CM(84)22) (Notes No. 4841 of 3.2.84) 22. 2nd Conference of European Ministers responsible for Health - Report of the first meeting of the Committee of Senior Officials (Strasbourg, 24-25 November 1983) - (CM(84)26) (Notes No. 4842 of 3.2.84)

(*) B level (1) Including a draft Recommenation on parental responsibilities. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a4 - Appendix I

*23.(2) European Health Committee (CDSP) - Report of the 14th meeting (Strasbourg, 21-24 November 1983) - (CM(84)5 and Add.) (Notes No. 4843 of 2.2.84 and Corr. of 16.2.84) *24. Public Health Committee (Partial Agreement)(CD-P-SP) (Meeting for the purposes of the European Pharmacopoeia) - Report of the 19th Session (Strasbourg, 23 November 1983) (CD-P-SP(83)48) (Notes No. 4819 of 20.1.84) *25.(3) Steering Committee on Intra-European Migration (CDMG) - Report of the 9th meeting (Strasbourg, 29 November - 2 December 1983) (CM(84)23) (Notes No. 4844 of 13.2.84) *26. European Social Charter - Appointment of five members of the Committee of Experts set up in pursuance of Article 25 of the Charter - (CM(84)21) (Notes No. 4845 of 3.2.84) *27. Cultural and social problems of populations of nomadic origin Written Questions No. 267, 269, 270 and 271 by Mr. Ramirez (Concl(83)366/32, CM(83)161 and Add., 187, 188, CM(84)11, 12 and 58 of 21.2.84) (Notes No. 4762 of 13.1.84 and Add. of 10.2.84)

Education, Culture and Sport 28. Informal meeting of Community Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs (Athens, 28 November 1983) - Communication by the Working Party of the Ministers' Deputies on cultural co-operation - (CM(84)34 of 2.2.84) (Notes No. 4847 of 7.2.84)

(*) B level (2) Including a draft Resolution on the continuation of the financial support to the European Bank of frozen blood of rare groups in Amsterdam, and A Draft Recommendation on the prevention of the transmission of malaria by blood transfusion. (3) Including a draft Recommendation on the maintenance of migrants' cultural links with their countries of origin and - leisure facilities. CONFIDENTIAL - a5 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix I Youth 29. Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth (Concl(83)365/2, CM(84)6 and 32 of 1.2.84) (Notes No. 4848 of 9.2.84)

Environment and Local Authorities 30. Draft European Convention for the Protection of International Watercourses against Pollution - (Concl(83)365/25, CM(81)72, 83 Add II, CM(82)106, CM(84)27 and 28 of 30.1.84) (Notes No. 4849 of 9.2.84) *31. Self-Help and community development in towns - Publication of the Activity report - (Concl(83)360/28, Add I to CM(83)59 and CM(84)19) (Notes No. 4850 of 3.2.84)

Administrative questions 32. Staff salaries - 195th and 196th reports of the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts (Concl(84)366/45 and 46, CM(84)7 and 18) (Notes No. 4851 of 16.2.84) 33. Preparation of forthcoming meetings (Notes No. 4852 of 22.2.84) 34. Other business a. Dialogue with the Secretary General *b. Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE) - Grants made by the Bureau of the CLRAE (Notes No. 4853 of 1.2.84) c. Joint Committee - Meeting on 22 March 1984 (Notes No. 4854 of 10.2.84) d. Council of Europe relations with management and labour Modalities for the implementation of the liaison system - (Concl(84)366/28, CM(83)182 and 229) (Notes No. 4855 of 20.2.84) e. Transmission of extracts from the Deputies' Conclusion to the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) (Notes No. 4856 of 15.2.84)

(*) B level CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a6 - Appendix I

f. Steering Committee on the Mass Media (CDDM) - Request for observer status by the Commission of the European Communities (Notes No. 4857 of 20.2.84) *g. Assembly confrontation on "Aliens in Europe: a threat or an asset?" - Budgetary contribution - (CM(84)52 of 17.2.84) (Notes No. 4858 of 17.2.84) h. 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs (Berlin, May 1984)

(*) B level CONFIDENTIAL - a7 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 APPENDIX II 368TH MEETING OF THE MINISTERS' DEPUTIES (A and B levels) (Strasbourg, 14 March (3pm) - 19 March 1984, A level 20 March (3pm) - 21 March 1984, B level) DRAFT AGENDA

1. Adoption of the agenda (Notes No. 4866 of ...) Political and general policy questions 2. Committee of Ministers - Preparation of the 74th Session (Concl(84)367/2, CM(84)35) (Notes No. 4867 of ...) 3. Election of the Secretary General - Hearings of candidates (Concl(84)367/4, CM(83)147, 180, 181 and Add and 224) (Notes No. 4868 of ...) 4. Joint Committee (22 March 1984) - Preparation (Concl(84)367/34c) (Notes No. 4869 of ...) 5. Situation in Cyprus - (Concl(84)367/7) (Notes No. 4870 of 29.2.84) 6. 2nd Medium-Term Plan 1981-1986 - Revision (CM(84)47) (Notes No. 4871 of ...) 7. Conferences of Specialised Ministers (Concl(84)367/8, CM(78)62 and CM(84)30) (Notes No. 4846 of 29.2.84) 8. Informal meeting of Community Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs (Athens, 28 November 1983) - Communication by the Working Party of the Ministers' Deputies on cultural co-operation - (Concl(84)367/28, CM(84)34) (Notes No. 4872 of ...)

NB In accordance with the deadline rules for despatch of reference documents and Notes on the Agenda, the date limits are 15 and 24 February 1984 for A level items, and 21 February and 2 March 1984 for B level items. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a8 - Appendix II

9. European Music Year 1985 - Invitation to non-member States (Concl(84)367/6, CM(83)227) (Notes No. 4873 of ...) 10. Liaison Committees of the Council of Europe and the OECD a. Joint Session of 12 December 1983 - Report drawn up by the Chairmen of the two Liaison Committees (CM(84)49) (Notes No. 4861 of ...) b. Council of Europe/ OECD Liaison Committee - Membership (CM(84)50) (Notes No. 4862 of ...)

Human Rights 11. Draft Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the Extension of the List of Civil and Political Rights set forth in the Convention - (Concl(84)367/11, CM(82)230 Addendum I, CM(84)37 and Add and Assembly Opinion No. 116 (Notes No. 4863 of 29.2.84) 12. Recommendation No. R(84)3 on principles on television advertising - Explanatory memorandum (Concl(84)367/15, CM(83)220 and Add) (Notes No. 4874 of ...)

Legal Questions 13. Draft Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental and other Scientific Purposes and Appendices A and B - (Concl(83)362/29, Add. I, II and III, CM(83)100 and CM(84)53) (Notes No. 4875 of ...) *14. Fourth Colloquy on the use of Computers in the Administration of Justice - (CM(84)62 of 1.3.84) (Notes No. 4864 of 29.2.84)

Economic and Social Questions 15. Sale of European pharmaceutical products in the countries of the Third World - Assembly Recommendation 969 (Concl(84)366/29, CM(84)15) (Notes No. 4860 of ...) CONFIDENTIAL - a9 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix II

*16. Draft Recommendation No. R(84)... on second generation migrants - (Concl(83)362/33, CM(82)119 Addendum, CM(83)115) (Notes No. 4859 of ...) *17. Third Conference of European Ministers responsible for Social Security - Committee of Senior Officials - Report of the 2nd meeting (Strasbourg, 24-26 January 1984) - (CM(84)46) (Notes No. 4833 of ...)

Education, Culture and Sport 18. 4th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Sport (Malta, 15-16 May 1984) (Notes No. 4865 of ...) *19. Draft Recommendation prepared by the CDDS on the reduction of spectator violence at sporting events and in particular at football matches (Notes No. 4876 of ...)

Environment and Local Authorities 20. Toxic Waste - (Concl(84)366/40, CM(84)20) (Notes No. 4877 of ...) *21. Exhibition on contemporary architecture - Assembly Recommendation 975 and Resolution 813 (Concl(83)365/26c) (Notes No. 4878 of ...) Administrative Questions 22. Staff salaries - 195th and 196th reports of the Co-ordinating Committee of Government Budget Experts (Concl(84)367/32, CM(84)7 and 18) (Notes No. 4879 of ...) 23. Preparation of forthcoming meetings (Notes No. 4880 of ...) 24. Other business a. Dialogue with the Secretary General b. Documentation of the Committee of Ministers

* B level

CONFIDENTIAL - all - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

APPENDIX III (item 33) SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER 1984

No. Level Month Date Days 375 A and B September 13-14 (B) Thursday-Friday 17-21 (A) Monday-Friday 376 A and B October 18-23 (A) Thursday-Tuesday 24-26 (B) Wednesday-Friday 377(1) A November 6-8 Tuesday-Thursday [Colloquy (2) November 21 Wednesday] 75th Session of the Committee of Ministers [November 22 (3) Thursday] 378(4) A and B November 26-30/ Monday-Friday December 3-7 Monday-Friday

(1) Preparation of the 75th Session of the Committee of Ministers (2) Still to be agreed to with the Assembly (3) Date provisionally fixed, to be confirmed at the 74th Session on 10 May 1984 (4) Budgetary Meeting at A level from Monday 26 November to Friday 30 November 1984. Meetings at B and A levels during the week 3-7 December 1984.

CONFIDENTIAL - a13 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

APPENDIX IV (item 15) RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84)3 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON PRINCIPLES ON TELEVISION ADVERTISING (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 23 February 1984 at the 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies) The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15 (b) of the Statute of the Council of Europe, Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve a greater unity between its members for the purpose of safeguarding and promoting the ideals and principles which are their common heritage; Bearing in mind the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; Recalling its commitment to the freedom of expression and the free flow of information and ideas as embodied, inter alia, in its Declaration of 29 April 1982; Conscious that the electronic media enable a contribution of growing importance to be made towards communication and better understanding between individuals and peoples; Aware that the development of new technologies, particularly involving the use of satellites, has made it more urgent to arrive at common European principles in the field of advertising on television; Noting that member States adopt different attitudes towards advertising on television; Conscious of the importance which advertising may have for the financing of the media; Aware of the impact of television advertising on the attitudes and behaviour of the public; Considering the importance of the portrayal of women and men by the media, particularly in television advertisements; Mindful of the importance of securing the interests of the public in relation to advertising; Welcoming the fact that codes of ethics and good advertising practice have been adopted on a voluntary basis by advertising organisations and professionals both on a national and an international basis; Taking into account the independence of broadcasting organisations in matters of programming, CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a14 - Appendix IV RECOMMENDS that the Governments of member States a. Satisfy themselves that the principles set out below concerning advertising on television are respected, and b. To that end give these principles the widest possible circulation both to the competent bodies and to members of the public. PRINCIPLES The following principles apply to television advertising, especially when transmitted by satellite: I. General principle 1. Advertisements should be prepared with a sense of responsibility towards society, and give particular attention to the moral values which form the basis of every democratic society and are common to all member States such as individual liberty, tolerance and respect for the dignity and equality of all human beings. II. Content 2. All advertisements should be fair, honest, truthful and decent. 3. Advertisers should comply with the law applicable in the country of transmission and, depending on the proportion of the audience which is in another country, should take due account of the law of that country. 4. Utmost attention should be given to the possible harmful consequences that might result from advertisements concerning tobacco, alcohol, pharmaceutical products and medical treatments and to the possibility of limiting or even prohibiting advertisements in these fields. 5. Advertisements addressed to or using children should avoid anything likely to harm their interests and should respect their physical, mental and moral personality. III. Form and presentation 6. Advertisements, whatever their form, should always be clearly identifiable as such. 7. Advertising should be clearly separated from programmes; neither advertisements nor the interests of advertisers should influence programme content in any way. 8. Advertisements should preferably be grouped and scheduled in such a way as to avoid prejudice to the integrity and value of programmes or their natural continuity. 9. The amount of time allowed for advertising should neither be excessive nor detract from the function of television as a medium of information, education, social and cultural development and entertainment. 10. No subliminal advertisements should be permitted. CONFIDENTIAL - a15 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 APPENDIX V (item *17)

RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84)4 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES (1) (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 February 1984 at the 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15(b) of the Statute of the Council of Europe, Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve a greater unity between its member States, inter alia, by promoting the adoption of common rules in legal matters; Considering that it is possible to make improvements to the legal systems relating to parental responsibilities in order to promote the development of the personality of the child and to protect his person and his moral and material interests while guaranteeing legal equality between parents, Recommends governments of member States to adapt, where necessary, their legislation to comply with the principles concerning parental responsibilities set out in the Appendix to this Recommendation.

(1) When this Recommendation was adopted, and in application of Article 10.2.C of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, - the Representatives of Denmark, Liechtenstein, Norway and the United Kingdom reserved the right of their governments to comply or not with the first paragraph of Principle 9 as set out in the Appendix to the Recommendation; - the Representative of the Netherlands reserved the right of his government to comply or not with Principle 11 as set out in the Appendix to the Recommendation. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a16 - Appendix V

Appendix to Recommendation NO. R(84)4 Principle 1 For the purposes of this Recommendation: a. Parental responsibilities are a collection of duties and powers which aim at ensuring the moral and material welfare of the child, in particular by taking care of the person of the child, by maintaining personal relationships with him and by providing for his education, his maintenance, his legal representation and the administration of his property. b. The terms "father", "mother", "parents" refer to persons having a legal filiation link with the child. Principle 2 Any decision of the competent authority concerning the attribution of parental responsibilities or the way in which these responsibilities are exercised should be based primarily on the interests of the child. However, the equality between parents should also be respected and no discrimination should be made in particular on grounds of sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status. Principle 3 When the competent authority is required to take a decision relating to the attribution or exercise of parental responsibilities and affecting the essential interests of the children, the latter should be consulted if their degree of maturity with regard to the decision so permits. Principle 4 When the persons having parental responsibilities exercise them in a way which is detrimental to the essential interests of the child, the competent authority should take, of its own motion or on application, any appropriate measures. Principle 5 Parental responsibilities for a child of their marriage should belong jointly to both parents. CONFIDENTIAL - a17 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix V Principle 6 In the case of a dissolution of the marriage or of a separation of the parents, the competent authority requested to intervene should rule on the exercise of parental responsibilities. It should accordingly take any appropriate measures, for example by dividing the exercise of the responsibilities between the two parents or, where the parents consent, by providing that the responsibilities should be exercised jointly. In taking its decision, the authority should take account of any agreement concluded between the parents provided it is not contrary to the interests of the children. Principle 7 1. Where the child is born out of wedlock and a legal filiation link is established with regard to one parent only, the parental responsibilities should belong to that parent. 2. Where the child is born out of wedlock and a legal filiation link is established with regard to both parents, national law may provide that the parental responsibilities should be exercised: a. subject to the provisions of Principle 8: i. by the mother alone ii. by the father alone, when a decision has been taken by the competent authority or when an agreement has been concluded between the two parants; b. according to the division between the two parents decided by the competent authority; c. jointly by both parents if they live together or if an agreement has been concluded between them. Principle 8 In all cases both parents should be under a duty to maintain the child. The parent with whom the child does not live should have at least the possibility of maintaining personal relationships with the child unless such relationships would be seriously harmful to the interests of the child. Principle 9 1. Where the parental responsibilities are exercised jointly by both parents and one of them dies, these responsibilities should belong to the surviving parent. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a18 - Appendix V

2. Where the parent who exercises alone some parental responsibilities dies his responsibilities should be exercised by the surviving parent unless the interests of the child require any other measures. 3. Where there is no longer any parent living, the competent authority should take a decision concerning the attribution of parental responsibilities. National legislation may provide that these responsibilities may be given to a member of the family or to a person designated by the last parent to die unless the interests of the child require any other measures. Principle 10 1. Where parental responsibilities are exercised jointly by both parents, any decision affecting the interests of the child should be taken by the agreement of both. 2. Where there is a disagreement and the matter is referred to the competent authority by one of the parents, this authority should, insofar as the interests of the child so require, try to reconcile the parents, and, if this fails, take the appropriate decision. 3. With regard to third parties the agreement of both parents should be presumed except in cases where national law, having regard to the importance of the interests at stake, requires an express agreement. Principle 11 Each parent should normally be informed of the exercise of the responsibilities which have not been given to him, to the extent desired by him and in any event when the essential interests of the child are affected. CONFIDENTIAL - a19 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 APPENDIX VI (item *18) RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84)5 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON THE PRINCIPLES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE FUNCTIONING OF JUSTICE (1) (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 February 1984 at the 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15(b) of the Statute of the Council of Europe, Whereas the right to justice guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is an essential feature of any democratic society; Whereas implementation of the measures and principles laid down in Committee of Ministers Resolutions (76)5 and (78)8 on legal aid and Recommendation No. R(81)7 on measures facilitating access to justice would make it easier for citizens to exercise their right to justice; Whereas, however, some rules of civil procedure used in member States may prove an obstacle in obtaining effective justice because, first, they may no longer meet the needs of modern society and, secondly, they may sometimes be abused or be manipulated to cause delay; Whereas civil procedure should be simplified and made more flexible and expeditious, while at the same time maintaining the guarantees provided for litigants by the traditional rules of procedure and maintaining the high level of justice required in a democratic society; Whereas in order to attain these objectives, it is necessary to make available to the parties simplified and more rapid forms of proceedings and to protect them against abusive or delaying tactics, particularly by giving powers to the court to direct the proceedings more efficiently; Taking into account the discussions held and the resolutions adopted by the European Ministers of Justice at their twelfth Conference, held in May 1980 in Luxembourg, Recommends that the governments of member States adopt or reinforce as the case may be, all measures which they consider necessary to improve civil procedure, being guided by the principles set out at the Appendix to this Recommendation.

(1) When this Recommendation was adopted, the Representatives of Belgium and the Netherlands, in application of Article 10.2.c of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, reserved the right of their government to comply or not with the second sentence of Principle 5 as set out in the Appendix to the Recommendation. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a20 - Appendix VI

Appendix to Recommendation No. R(84)5 Principles of Civil Procedure Designed to Improve the Functioning of Justice

Principle 1 1. Normally, the proceedings should consist of not more than two hearings, the first of which might be a preliminary hearing of a preparatory nature and the second for taking evidence, hearing arguments and, if possible, giving judgment. The court should ensure that all steps necessary for the second hearing are taken in good time, and in principle no adjournment should be allowed except when new facts appear or in other exceptional and important circumstances. 2. Sanctions should be imposed when a party, having perhaps received notice to proceed, does not take a procedural step within the time-limits fixed by the law or the court. Depending on the circumstances such sanctions might include declaring the procedural step barred, awarding damages, costs, imposing a fine and striking the case off the list. 3. The Court should be able to summon the witnesses and appropriate sanctions (fines, damages, etc) should be applied in cases of unjustified non-attendance of such witnesses. When a witness is absent, it is for the the court to decide whether the case should continue without his evidence. To facilitate the taking of evidence, provision should be made for the use of modern technical means, eg the telephone or video, in appropriate circumstances. 4. If an expert appointed by the court fails to communicate his report or is late in communicating it without good reason, there should be appropriate sanctions. These might take the form of reduction of fees, payment of costs or damages, as well as disciplinary measures taken by the court or by a professional organisation, as the case may be. Principle 2 1. When a party brings manifestly ill-founded proceedings, the court should be empowered to decide the case in a summary way and, where appropriate, to impose a fine on this party or to award damages to the other party. 2. When a party fails to observe the duty of fairness in its conduct of the proceedings and clearly misuses procedure for the manifest purpose of delaying the proceedings, the court should be empowered either to decide immediately on the merits or to impose sanctions such as fines, damages or declaring the procedure barred; in special cases it should be possible to require the lawyer to pay the cost of the proceedings. CONFIDENTIAL - a21 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix VI

3. Professional associations of lawyers should be invited to make provision for disciplinary sanctions in cases where one of their members has acted in the manner described in the foregoing paragraphs. Principle 3 The court should, at least during the preliminary hearing but if possible throughout the proceedings, play an active role in ensuring the rapid progress of the proceedings, while respecting the rights of the parties, including the right to equal treatment. In particular, it should have proprio motu powers to order the parties to provide such clarifications as are necessary; to order the parties to appear in person; to raise questions of law; to call for evidence, at least in those cases where there are interests other than those of the parties at stake; to control the taking of evidence; to exclude witnesses whose possible testimony would be irrelevant to the case; to limit the number of witnesses on a particular fact where such number would be excessive. These powers should be exercised without going beyond the object of the proceedings. Principle 4 The court should, at least at first instance, be empowered to decide, having regard to the nature of the case, whether written or oral proceedings, or a combination of the two, should be used except in cases expressly prescribed by law. Principle 5 Except where the law prescribes otherwise, the parties' claims, limitations or defences and in principle their evidence, should be presented at the earliest possible stage of the proceedings and in any event before the end of the preliminary stage, if there is one. On appeal, the court should not normally admit facts which were not presented at first instance unless: a. they were not known at first instance; b. the person presenting them was not a party to the proceedings at first instance; c. there is some special reason for admitting them. Principle 6 Judgment should be given at the conclusion of the proceedings or as soon as possible thereafter. The judgment should be as concise as possible. It may invoke any rule of law but it should with certainty resolve, expressly or impliedly, all claims raised by the parties. Principle 7 Steps should be taken to deter the abuse of post-judgment legal remedies. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a22 - Appendix VI

Principle 8 1. Moreover, particular rules or sets of rules should be instituted in order to expedite the settlement of disputes: a. in urgent cases; b. in cases relating to an undisputed right or an established liquidated claim and in cases involving small claims; c. in the field of road accidents, labour disputes, landlord and tenant issues and certain questions of family law, in particular the fixing and reassessment of maintenance. 2. To this end, one or more of the following measures could be utilised: simplified methods of commencing litigation; no hearing or convening of only one hearing or, as the occasion may require, of a preliminary preparatory hearing; exclusively written or oral proceedings, as the case may be; prohibition or restriction of certain exceptions and defences; more flexible rules of evidence; no adjournments or only brief adjournments; the appointment of a court expert, either ex officio or on application of the parties, if possible at the commencement of the proceedings; an active role for the court in conducting the case and in calling for and taking evidence. 3. These particular rules or set of rules might, according to the circumstances, be compulsory, available on the application of any of the parties or be subject to the consent of all parties. Principle 9 The most modern technical means should be made available to the judicial authorities so as to enable them to give justice in the best possible conditions of efficiency, in particular, access to the various sources of law and speeding up the administration of justice. CONFIDENTIAL - a23 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

APPENDIX VII (item *23) RESOLUTION (84)1 ON THE CONTINUATION OF THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR THE EUROPEAN BANK OF FROZEN BLOOD OF RARE GROUPS, IN AMSTERDAM (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 February 1984 at the 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15(a) of the Statute of the Council of Europe, Considering that the Central Laboratory of the Netherlands Red Cross Transfusion Centre established a European Bank of Frozen Blood of Rare Groups in Amsterdam in 1969; Considering that, in accordance with Resolution (68)32, an annual subsidy was granted by the Council of Europe towards the running and maintenance costs of the said European Bank for a period of five years, namely 1969 to 1973; Considering that, in accordance with Resolutions (73)26, (78)45 and (81)7, the Council of Europe renewed the annual subsidy of 11,000 guilders for a further period of eleven years, namely from 1974 to 1984; Considering that in accordance with Resolution (75)5, the Council of Europe increased the said subsidy to 14,300 guilders from 1975 onwards; Considering that at the 207th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, in February 1972, the Committee of Ministers decided that the Council of Europe should pay the costs incurred by each contributor sending blood to the bank, up to a total of 5,000 guilders per year; Noting that national blood banks of a similar type which have already been established cannot take over all the functions of the European Bank for a number of years, as it would still be impossible for them to collect a sufficient number of units of blood from the different kinds of very rare donors, CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a24 - Appendix VII

Resolves: i. to continue to grant an annual subsidy of 14,300 guilders towards the running and maintenance costs of the European Bank of Frozen Blood of Rare Groups plus 5,000 guilders for postal expenses for a new period of three years, namely 1985, 1986, 1987, to be provided for in the budgets for the said years and to be paid to the Central Laboratory of the Netherlands Red Cross Blood Transfusion Centre in Amsterdam; ii. to invite Finland to share in the above-mentioned expenses on the same basis as for the period 1974-1984. CONFIDENTIAL - a25 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 APPENDIX VIII (item *23) RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84)6 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON THE PREVENTION OF THE TRANSMISSION OF MALARIA BY BLOOD TRANSFUSION (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 February 1984 at the 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15(b) of the Statute of the Council of Europe, Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve a greater unity between its members and that this aim may be pursued, inter alia, by the adoption of common regulations in the health field; Having regard to the Protocol to the European Agreement on the exchange of therapeutic substances of human origin, Part II, by which "the blood shall not be obtained from a human subject (...) who is not, as far as can be ascertained after medical examination and the study of his antecedents, free from disease transmissible by blood transfusion"; Recalling its Resolution (78)29 on harmonisation of legislations of member States relating to the removal, grafting and transplantation of human substances; Recalling also its Recommendations No. R(80)5 concerning blood products for the treatment of haemophiliacs and No. R(81)14 on preventing the transmission of infectious diseases in the international transfer of blood, its components and derivatives; Conscious of the fact that an increasing number of people travel to areas where malaria is endemic, with the consequent risk of contracting this disease; Conscious of the need to ensure both the best possible protection of donors and recipients and of the necessity to promote a policy of optimal use of blood and blood products; Considering that appropriate serological techniques are available for the detection of latent malaria, CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a26 - Appendix VIII

Recommends to governments of member States that they introduce the following regulations and adopt the following measures for preventing the transmission of malaria by blood transfusion or, if appropriate, invite the relevant blood transfusion centres to do so: i. Individuals born or brought up in endemic malarious areas can be accepted as blood donors three years after their last visit to an endemic malarious area if the results of an approved immunological test are negative after cessation of the quarantine period. Individuals with a history of malaria can be accepted three years after becoming asymptomatic and cessation of antimalarial therapy if the result of an approved immunological test is negative after the quarantine period. ii. All other persons who have visited an area where malaria is endemic can be accepted as blood donors six months after returning, if they have had no febrile episodes during or after their stay in the malarious area. Individuals having had such febrile episodes can be accepted if the result of an approved immunological test is negative six months after becoming asymptomatic and cessation of therapy. iii. The quarantine periods and immunological tests mentioned above may be omitted for donors whose red cells are discarded and whose plasma is used exclusively for fractionation into blood products, thus rendering it safe from the transmission of malaria. It should be remembered that liquid or frozen untreated plasma and frozen cryoprecipitates cannot be regarded as wholly devoid of the cellular elements of blood and, therefore, of viable malarial parasites. iv. Since questioning of the donor as to the country(ies) in which he was born, brought up or has visited is essential for effective detection, every transfusion service should have a map of the endemic zones and an alphabetical list of the countries concerned. CONFIDENTIAL - a27 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

APPENDIX IX (item *25)

RECOMMENDATION NO. R(84)7 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON THE MAINTENANCE OF MIRGRANTS' CULTURAL LINKS WITH THEIR COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN AND LEISURE FACILITIES (1) (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 February 1984 at the 367th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15(b) of the Statute of the Council of Europe, 1. Aware that the cultures of countries of origin and receiving countries are a source of mutual enrichment to the extent that they contribute to the growth of interculturalism in society; 2. Emphasising the importance of maintaining cultural links with the countries of origin for the integration of migrants in receiving countries; 3. Convinced that the environment contributes to everyone's education and that the presence of migrants' culture in the various fields of social life (leisure, the media, community life, school, sport, religion) can be conducive to intercultural education; 4. Convinced that migrants will settle more easily in receiving countries if their own cultural values are appreciated by the local population; 5. Being of the opinion that migrants should be made conscious of the importance of learning the language of the receiving country and becoming familiar with its culture; 6. Convinced that it is mainly by improving migrants' economic and social status that it is possible to enhance the image of the cultures of their countries of origin and ensure that they are recognised by society;

(1) When this Recommendation was adopted, the Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, in application of Article 10.2.c of the Rules of Procedure for the meetings of the Ministers' Deputies, reserved the right of his Government to comply or not with paragraph 5.2 of the Recommendation. CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a28 - Appendix IX

7. Stressing the importance of maintaining migrants' links with the culture of their country of origin, not only to facilitate their resettlement in the event of their voluntary return, but above all to ensure the full development of their personalities; 8. Emphasising that close co-operation between receiving countries and countries of origin constitutes the most favorable basis for implementing the measures advocated in this Recommendation in the framework, amongst other things, of bilateral agreements; 9. Reaffirming the principles stated in its Resolution (70)35 on the school education of migrant workers' children, 10. Recommends, as regards the matters referred to below, that the governments of member States, bearing in mind their respective resources and circumstances, both legislative and educational or socio-cultural: 1. Education 1.1 promote for migrant children the presence of the languages and cultures of their countries of origin from the beginning of their school education onwards, while furthering the integration of these children into the educational system and society of the receiving country, incorporating as far as possible the teaching of the languages and cultures of countries of origin in the regular school timetable and encouraging the co-ordination of such instruction with ordinary education; 1.2 to this end, encourage the appropriate authorities of receiving countries to provide premises for such instruction on similar material conditions as for compulsory instruction at the same level and encourage the authorities of countries of origin to provide the appropriate teaching materials, in close co-operation with the receiving countries; 1.3 having regard to national conditions, give the children of migrants the opportunity at secondary school level of choosing their mother tongue instead of a foreign language; 1.4 encourage school authorities and those responsible for education in receiving countries to incorporate in their curricula some information about the history, geography, economy, literature and arts of pupils' countries of origin and promote the multicultural dimension in their various activities; 1.5 encourage as far as possible school exchanges between receiving countries and countries of origin, either for pupils or for teachers; CONFIDENTIAL - a29 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix IX

1.6 encourage the publication of books on the cultures of countries of origin for school-age children, written in the languages of emigration countries or in those of receiving countries, and promote the production of educational material with a multicultural dimension; 1.7 prepare teachers during their training for educating migrants' children and make all educational personnel aware of the pluricultural dimension of contemporary societies and its educational consequences, as well as of the causes and effects of international migration; 1.8 encourage the authorities concerned, acting in co-operation with those of the country of origin, to call upon the following for the purposes of teaching the languages and cultures of countries of origin: - teachers from the countries of origin possessing qualifications recognised as equivalent to those of teachers in receiving countries, or - migrants already settled in receiving countries who have a level of training equivalent to that of other teachers in those countries and a good knowledge of the languages and cultures of countries of origin; 1.9 encourage links between families and schools and a general awareness within the education service of the multicultural nature of present-day society; 2. Adult education in receiving countries 2.1 promote education for adult migrants, as far as possible, especially for female ones, so as to enable them to maintain their cultural links with their countries of origin; and to this purpose, organise suitable educational activities; 3. Migrants' participantion in associations 3.1 acknowledge migrants' associations as equally concerned by cultural and educational matters and allow them to promote cultural, educational and social activities; 3.2 further the development of migrants' associations by eliminating obstacles to the creation of such associations; 3.3 encourage migrants' associations to co-operate with the host society in creating a better understanding of their culture among the population of the receiving country; CONFIDENTIAL CM/Del/Concl(84)367 - a30 - Appendix IX

3.4 foster exchanges: - between migrants' associations and associations in migrants' countries of origin, - among migrants' associations (of the same or different nationalities); 4. Religion 4.1 help migrants to practise their religion in accordance with the requirements of freedom of conscience; 5. Media and information 5.1 facilitate the launching and publication of migrants' newspapers and periodicals and encourage radio and TV organisations to provide regular and fuller coverage of news in receiving countries and countries of origin; 5.2 facilitate the reception by migrants as well as by nationals of the radio and TV programmes of countries of origin by means, for example, of the latest communication systems, and encourage the broadcasting of programmes for migrants by the radio and TV companies of receiving countries, paying particular attention to the production of multicultural programmes; 5.3 facilitate the distribution of newspapers and periodicals from countries of origin; 5.4 provide vehicles of practical information about existing socio-cultural educational and sports facilities in receiving countries; 5.5 take the necessary steps to promote exchanges of information on the cultures of receiving and sending countries between migrants and nationals; 6. Cultural and leisure activities 6.1 promote the organisation in receiving countries of cultural events concerning countries of origin; 6.2 facilitate the distribution of books from countries of origin and promote the availability of material representative of the cultures of countries of origin in libraries and resource centres, including those in schools; CONFIDENTIAL - a31 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 Appendix IX

6.3 facilitate the creation of cultural centres promoted by the authorities of countries of origin in co-operation with the authorities of receiving countries, whose activities should be aimed not only at migrants but also at nationals, such centres being excellent places for the meeting of the various cultures; 6.4 encourage the participation of migrant children in leisure activities in their countries of origin; 6.5 encourage the practice of sport by migrants and draw the attention of education authorities and sports organisations to the need to treat the practice of sport as a potential source of mutual understanding; 7. Implementation of the Recommendation 7.1 develop co-operation and promote research between countries of origin and receiving countries in the fields covered by this Recommendation.

CONFIDENTIAL - a33 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367

APPENDIX X (item 29)

DECISION NO. CM/319/230284

Ad hoc terms of reference 1. Name of relevant committee: AD HOC COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON YOUTH QUESTIONS (CAHJE) 2. Source of terms of reference: Committee of Ministers 3. Completion date: 1985 4. Terms of reference: - to prepare the Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth (Strasbourg, second half of 1985); - to make proposals for the precise date for the holding of this Conference. 5. Other committee to be informed of terms of reference: -

CONFIDENTIAL - a35 - CM/Del/Concl(84)367 APPENDIX XI (item 34d)

Agenda for the first meeting of the Liaison Committee between the Council of Europe and management and labour (Strasbourg, 12-13 March 1984)

I. Opening of the meeting by the Chairman of the Liaison Committee II. Exchange of views on the terms of reference and the functioning of the Liaison Committee III. Discussions allowing management and labour to be informed of the intergovernmental activities of the Council of Europe, and to put forward their views on these activities (ETUC's letter of 13 February 1984) IV. Proposals of management and labour concerning future activities of the Council of Europe in fields defined by the terms of reference V. Preparation of the outline programme of hearings to be held in 1984 and discussions on the conduct of these hearings VI. Any other business.