Brussels, 5 April 2000
![[Start of Doc]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
![[Previous]](/icons/prevrtxt.gif){kind=icon}
![[Next]](/icons/nextrtxt.gif){kind=icon}
Mr WATSON himself presented a motion for a resolution asking the
Citizens' Rights Committee to draw up by the end of the year, in
conjunction with the committees for external economic relations and
the single market, a detailed report on data-protection and data-
interception issues. The resolution would also ask the Council and
Commission to make contacts at diplomatic level with the aim of
ending any form of espionage against EU Member States and to take
steps to have laws on privacy introduced via international
negotiations.
Christian BOETTICHER (EPP/ED, D), speaking on behalf of his
group, was opposed to any idea of setting up a committee of inquiry
into Echelon (under Rule 151 of Parliament's Rules of Procedure),
saying other options were available for looking into the issue, e.g. an
own-initiative report as proposed by Mr Watson or a temporary
committee under Rule 150(2). The latter would have a maximum
mandate of 12 months unless Parliament decided to extend it at the
end of the period. The powers, composition and term of office of such a committee would be
decided at the same time as it was set up.
Alima BOUMEDIENE-THIERY (Greens/EFA F) reminded the meeting of another draft
resolution, by her own group, calling for a committee of inquiry to be set up. She felt the issue
was one involving real infringements of the rights of individuals.
Martin SCHULZ (PES, D) firstly said that economic espionage was not practised just in the
US and the UK but also in other countries such as Belgium, the Netherlands and France. A
committee of inquiry was not the right choice because Echelon was not a Community activity,
he said. He was also sure that representatives of the British and American governments
would not come and testify before such a committee, and the committee itself could not play
the role of a James Bond. A temporary committee under Rule 150(2) was, he believed, the
most appropriate instrument for shedding light on the matter. The temporary committee could
adopt a report with recommendations to the Council as to the appropriate action needed.
Press enquiries: Yannis Darmis tel. +32.2.284 3816
e-mail: idarmis@europarl.europa.eu
This directive amends Directive 93/104/EC to include previously excluded sectors and
activities such as doctors in training, offshore workers and sea fishermen, and ensures that
they benefit from the same provisions on rest periods, breaks, working hours, paid holidays
and night work.
The agreement will now have to be confirmed by a majority of votes cast in Parliament and by
qualified majority in Council.
At this, the second conciliation meeting, the two sides reached agreement on the most difficult
issue, namely the working hours of doctors in training. The new provisions will guarantee junior
doctors an average 48-hour working week after a transition period of five years, following a
four-year implementation period for these provisions. All the other provisions of the directive
will become effective directly after an implementation period of three years.
During the first three years of the transition period for doctors in training, the number of weekly
working hours must not exceed 58 hours, and during the following two years the maximum
would be 56 hours.
The Conciliation Committee acknowledged that for some Member States, such a transition
period could be too short to permit the necessary adjustments to the training systems and
human resource management of their health care services. Therefore, in exceptional
circumstances, a Member State may, under a stringent procedure, obtain an extension of up
to two years. In the case of special difficulties and after going through the same procedure, a
Member State may have up to one year more before moving to the 48 working hour regime.
During such additional periods, the number of average weekly working hours may not exceed
52.
Originally, Parliament called for a solution to ensure that junior doctors could be brought within
the scope of the working time directive in four years. The Council had proposed a transition
period of 13 years.
In addition, the two sides found solutions to the other remaining issues, such as the definition
of mobile workers, the provisions concerning sea-fishermen, and the implementation period.
As stated above, the general implementation period of the directive will be three years with the
exception of the provisions relating to junior doctors, where four years will apply. The new
directive also gives the social partners an enhanced role in the organisation of working time.
Parliament's rapporteur, Miet SMET (EPP/ED, B), said after the meeting: "This result shows
that codecision works. Health and safety for seven million workers will now be guaranteed.
Transport workers, offshore workers, sea fishermen and doctors in training will finally get the
right to European working time provisions."
Press enquiries: Virpi Köykkä tel. +32.2.284 6222
e-mail: vkoykka@europarl.europa.eu
EPIINFO
Addressing a hearing of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee chaired by
Christa RANDZIO-PLATH (PES, D), he expressed sadness at "this horrible, horrible amount
of unemployment" and criticised the target of 10% unemployment for its lack of ambition. "Until
you have it down to 3% you should not rest", he said. In his opinion, the rate was so high
"because the ECB wants it there". The ECB "programmes unemployment", he added, and
suggested the committee should require the Central Bank to explain its employment strategy
and its "benign neglect" of unemployment. "They cannot tell you that they do not control
demand because to control inflation you need to control demand". Parliament's rapporteur on
the 2000 broad economic policy guidelines, Giorgos KATIFORIS (PES, GR), agreed and
called on the committee to send an official letter to the Bank with that request.
Professor Modigliani reminded MEPs that wages in Europe were extremely rigid. In these
circumstances it was necessary to draw on Keynesian thinking and the idea of boosting
effective demand to create jobs. "Unemployment exists in Europe because there are no jobs",
he insisted. Furthermore, he said, "employment is determined by investment" - and here the
role of the ECB was evident because it determines investment via the interest rate. "Maybe
the ECB does not know it but everybody else does", he added.
Professor Modigliani also acknowledged the existence of other rigidities in the European
labour market and referred to the "overprotection" of workers. He pointed out that
improvements were taking place and, while recognising the importance of supply-side
measures, he emphasised the complementarity between supply-side and demand-led policies.
Press enquiries: Paula Fernández Hervás tel. +32.2.284 2535
e-mail: pfernandez@europarl.europa.eu
EPIINFO
Commissioner Franz FISCHLER met the Fisheries Committee on 4 April to discuss various
topical issues including the question of fisheries under the IGC, the reform of the common
fisheries policy (CFP) in 2002 and negotiations with non-EU countries.
As regards the IGC, there were two issues. Firstly whether a new article specifically on
fisheries should be added to the Treaty (fisheries is currently dealt with in conjunction with
agriculture) and secondly whether the codecision procedure should be used for fisheries. On
the first point, Mr Fischler said that the objectives of the CFP could only be revised as part of
an overall reform. As regards codecision, he was in favour of it for all decisions which
required a qualified majority in Council.
On the reform of the CFP, the EU needed to respond to the wishes of the industry. This
meant avoiding taking contradictory decisions. At EU level, account must be taken not only of
discrepancies between fleet capacities and fishery resources but also of the findings of
studies and meetings with organisations. Here Mr Fischler touched on issues such as access
to national waters for vessels of other Member States, improved policy coordination and the
question of globalisation and arranging subsidies within the WTO. It was also important to
decide whether there should be a single reform with a "big bang" or a gradual reform, as he
himself would prefer. Decisions on new regulations should clearly be taken by 1 January 2003,
he believed, but the relevant proposals would have to be submitted by the end of 2001.
On the subject of negotiations with non-EU countries, Mr Fischler described in detail the
initiatives already taken by the Commission. On Morocco, numerous contacts had shown that
there was still much to be done if common ground was to be found on which to base
negotiations. The key issue seemed to be finding a balance between the need to conserve
resources and the development of the Moroccan fisheries industry. With the Moroccan Prime
Minister due to visit Brussels shortly, Mr Fischler hoped it would still be possible to launch the
process before Easter. He was well aware of the situation facing Spanish and Portuguese
fishermen. He envisaged starting negotiations with the Member States in order to establish the
conditions under which fishermen might receive aid after 1 June.
Mild criticism was voiced at delays in preparing for reform of the CFP and at the
Commission's outmoded approach towards the industry.
However, the biggest disappointment was the lack of a genuine Moroccan negotiating partner
or a timetable for the fishery negotiations with Morocco.
The question of the renewal of other fisheries agreements (with Angola, Côte d'Ivoire,
Equatorial Guinea and Cape Verde) was also mentioned. Mr Fischler said negotiations had
not yet started because the authorities of these countries had not wanted them to. However, it
was possible to envisage specific measures to enable EU vessels to continue to fish under
special licences.
Press enquiries: António Sobrinho tel. +32.2.284 3535
e-mail: jsobrinho@europarl.europa.eu
EPIINFO
In her introductory remarks, Parliament President Nicole FONTAINE stressed the importance
of defending the weakest members of society, while also underlining that Romania was fully
part of the enlargement process. Astrid THORS (ELDR, FIN), the joint chair of the meeting,
emphasised that the long-term objective must be to prevent institutionalisation of the children.
Her Romanian co-chair Marianne STOÏCA agreed that much remained to be done. However,
the Bucharest government aimed to create an adequate and properly funded institutional
framework for care. The allocation for childcare in the draft budget for 2000 represented an
increase of 26.1% in real terms over that of the previous year.
Vlad ROMANO, President of the National Agency for the Protection of Children's Rights,
stated that his Agency had only been in existence for three months, it had 70 staff and it
managed the work of 47 local agencies. Its guiding principles were the three "Ds":
decentralisation, de-institutionalisation and demedicalisation (ensuring that children receive
individual medical care). The Minister of Education Andrei MARGA stressed that his
government wanted to entrust children to families rather than institutions as far as possible.
Speakers from three NGOs - SERA, Save the Children and UNICEF - also stressed the
magnitude of the task. Until 1996 the bulk of the funds did not reach their goal, it was claimed,
because of the lack of will of the Romanian authorities. The EUR 10m available at the end of
1996 were not available until two years later. They also pointed to the lack of a single
legislative framework in Romania and the need to fully mobilise financial resources in order to
turn words into actions.
The meeting also heard that the EU had committed EUR 25m to support the Romanian
authorities in this area, and there were calls from the Commission for these authorities to
improve their management of the funding. Parliament's rapporteur on Romania, Emma
NICHOLSON (ELDR, UK), noted that in Romania 75% of families had no work and that the
welfare state was very fragile. She wanted in particular to encourage fostering. Marie-Thérèse
HERMANGE (EPP/ED, F) called for an audit of the situation and a timetable to tackle the
many problems. In her concluding comments Mrs Thors stressed that the Romanian
authorities had shown the will to change and that, although there were differences on details,
all sides agreed on the overall aim of overcoming the problem.
Press enquiries: Tim Boden tel. +32.2.284 3459
e-mail: tboden@europarl.europa.eu
At the same meeting Mr VARELA SUANZES-CARPEGNA's report on conservation
measures for juvenile marine organisms was adopted as amended. The only amendment is
one calling for the minimum permitted landing size for the deepwater rose shrimp to be
reduced from 24 to 22mm.
Both these reports are on the agenda for the Brussels part-session in May.
Press enquiries: António Sobrinho tel. +32.2.284 3535
e-mail: jsobrinho@europarl.europa.eu
